Connie White, Starr Roxanne Hiltz, & Murray Turoff. (2008). United we respond: One community, one voice. In B. V. de W. F. Fiedrich (Ed.), Proceedings of ISCRAM 2008 – 5th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 25–33). Washington, DC: Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM.
Abstract: When emergency situations cross borders, or when newly formed groups need to work together, decision making can suffer from threat rigidity and pertinent information can be bypassed. We describe a Dynamic Delphi system under development that can create and sustain a group “voice” for an emergency response Community of Practice (CoP). We further describe its intended use for a CoP consisting of local, state and federal government responders, civilian emergency response teams (CERT), and volunteers. Community members can brainstorm, explore ideas, debate and vote iteratively to best reflect the group's opinion at any moment in time. Ongoing studies demonstrate that an online system implementing Dynamic Delphi characteristics along with Thurstone's Law of Comparative Judgment will prove conducive for building a repertoire of ideas, rules, policies or any other aspect of the community's 'voice', in such a way that the individual voices are juxtaposed in harmony to create a single song.
|
Nan Zhang, Clare Bayley, & Simon French. (2008). Use of web-based group decision support for crisis management. In B. V. de W. F. Fiedrich (Ed.), Proceedings of ISCRAM 2008 – 5th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 55–58). Washington, DC: Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM.
Abstract: Web-based group decision support systems (wGDSS) are becoming more common in organizations. In this paper, we provide a review and critique of the literature on wGDSS, raising a number of issues that need addressing. Then we report on a small scale experiment using Groupsystems ThinkTank to manage an issue to do with food safety. We also describe how we propose to use ThinkTank in a crisis situation.
|
Philip Fei Wu, Yan Qu, Jennifer Preece, Kenneth R. Fleischmann, Jennifer Golbeck, Paul T. Jaeger, et al. (2008). Community response grid (CRG) for a university campus: Design requirements and implications. In B. V. de W. F. Fiedrich (Ed.), Proceedings of ISCRAM 2008 – 5th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 34–43). Washington, DC: Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM.
Abstract: This paper describes the initial stages of the participatory design of a community-oriented emergency response system for a university campus. After reviewing related work and the current University emergency response system, this paper describes our participatory design process, discusses initial findings from a design requirement survey and from our interactions with different stakeholders, and proposes a Web interface design for a community response grid system. The prototyping of the system demonstrates the possibility of fostering a social-network-based community participation in emergency response, and also identifies concerns raised by potential users and by the professional responder community.
|
Sara Vieweg, Leysia Palen, Sophia B. Liu, Amanda L. Hughes, & Jeannette N. Sutton. (2008). Collective intelligence in disaster: Examination of the phenomenon in the aftermath of the 2007 Virginia Tech Shooting. In B. V. de W. F. Fiedrich (Ed.), Proceedings of ISCRAM 2008 – 5th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 44–54). Washington, DC: Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM.
Abstract: We report on the results of an investigation about the “informal, ” public-side communications that occurred in the aftermath of the April 16, 2007 Virginia Tech (VT) Shooting. Our on-going research reveals several examples of on-line social interaction organized around the goal of collective problem-solving. In this paper, we focus on specific instances of this distributed problem-solving activity, and explain, using an ethnomethodological lens, how a loosely connected group of people can work together on a grave topic to provide accurate results.
|
