问题描述:
急!论文翻译(英译中)最高分,谢你们了,第一部分
Interaction and Outeraction:
Instant Messaging in Action
Preambles
The buddy list helped conversation initiators judge when
recipients were likely to be available and thus partially
addressed the problem of connection failure. A more
significant benefit of IM accrued to the recipient: IM
reduced interruptivity by allowing recipients to negotiate
availability. One user noted that with IM it is possible to
contact others in a way that “interrupt[s] them without
interrupting them too much” (see also [3]). And unlike the phone, instant messages were easily screened and
responded to, even when users were engaged in face to face
conversation with others in their offices. Initiators of
instant messages often checked to see whether recipients
were active before sending a message. If an initiating
message arrived at an inconvenient time, recipients would
often ignore it until they were ready to converse. Many IM
conversations therefore took the form of preambles where
initiators attempted to determine the preparedness of
recipients for IM interaction. Often people would send
simple instant messages like, “Suzi?” to see if someone was
available for an IM exchange. If the recipient responded,
an “attentional contract” was established in which both
parties explicitly agreed that the communication could
proceed.
The usefulness of IM as a technique for negotiating
availability is shown by the fact that instant messages were
often used to negotiate availability for conversations in
media other than IM. For example, many informants used
instant messages as preambles for phone conversations.
While in informants’ offices, we observed preambles such
as “Is this a good time to call?” and “Are you there?” Rick
of TelCo noted, “...a typical [IM] conversation would be
talking about ‘is X a good time [for a phone
conversation]’? [If yes,] we’ll upgrade to a phone
conversation.” Another TelCo informant noted that for him
IM was often “a preamble to a more formal conversation”
that took place on the phone. These transitions from IM to
the phone happened sufficiently frequently that at Insight
they were incorporated into the system: people edited their
buddy lists to include phone extensions.
IM was also used to negotiate when to have face to face
conversations. “Colocated” workers are often distributed on
large campuses across many buildings. IM made face to
face communication more efficient by allowing people to
quickly establish whether a face to face meeting was
feasible. IM was considered less intrusive than calling on
the phone or dropping by.
Negotiating availability may involve use of multiple media
in parallel. Instant messaging is often monitored while
other communications are taking place such as phone calls
or face to face conversations.
Interaction and Outeraction:
Instant Messaging in Action
Preambles
The buddy list helped conversation initiators judge when
recipients were likely to be available and thus partially
addressed the problem of connection failure. A more
significant benefit of IM accrued to the recipient: IM
reduced interruptivity by allowing recipients to negotiate
availability. One user noted that with IM it is possible to
contact others in a way that “interrupt[s] them without
interrupting them too much” (see also [3]). And unlike the phone, instant messages were easily screened and
responded to, even when users were engaged in face to face
conversation with others in their offices. Initiators of
instant messages often checked to see whether recipients
were active before sending a message. If an initiating
message arrived at an inconvenient time, recipients would
often ignore it until they were ready to converse. Many IM
conversations therefore took the form of preambles where
initiators attempted to determine the preparedness of
recipients for IM interaction. Often people would send
simple instant messages like, “Suzi?” to see if someone was
available for an IM exchange. If the recipient responded,
an “attentional contract” was established in which both
parties explicitly agreed that the communication could
proceed.
The usefulness of IM as a technique for negotiating
availability is shown by the fact that instant messages were
often used to negotiate availability for conversations in
media other than IM. For example, many informants used
instant messages as preambles for phone conversations.
While in informants’ offices, we observed preambles such
as “Is this a good time to call?” and “Are you there?” Rick
of TelCo noted, “...a typical [IM] conversation would be
talking about ‘is X a good time [for a phone
conversation]’? [If yes,] we’ll upgrade to a phone
conversation.” Another TelCo informant noted that for him
IM was often “a preamble to a more formal conversation”
that took place on the phone. These transitions from IM to
the phone happened sufficiently frequently that at Insight
they were incorporated into the system: people edited their
buddy lists to include phone extensions.
IM was also used to negotiate when to have face to face
conversations. “Colocated” workers are often distributed on
large campuses across many buildings. IM made face to
face communication more efficient by allowing people to
quickly establish whether a face to face meeting was
feasible. IM was considered less intrusive than calling on
the phone or dropping by.
Negotiating availability may involve use of multiple media
in parallel. Instant messaging is often monitored while
other communications are taking place such as phone calls
or face to face conversations.
问题解答:
我来补答展开全文阅读