Handout 7: 9/1/03

Computer-Human Interaction
CPSC 436-500

Assignment 4: Literature report

Due Monday, November 10, 2003

The goal of this project is to prepare a thoughtful and concise report, evaluation, and comparision of a paper taken from the research literature. This is an individual project.

Select one conference papers (full papers; not short papers, panel descriptions, etc.) from a recent annual CHI conferences (1995 or later), sponsored by ACM SIGCHI. Full papers in ACM conferences are 8 to 10 pages in length (i.e., do not select a paper that is shorter than this length).

These conference proceedings are available via site license from TAMU IP addresses. See http://www.acm.org/dl/ and then follow the links to proceedings and then to CHI. You also may select full papers from another of the related ACM conferences instead. Appropriate papers include all papers in UIST and IUI and many in CSCW, HT, DL, and JCDL. Ask if you are unsure.

Read the paper and prepare the report described below. It is appropriate that you should read some of the papers referenced by the one you select to get an idea of the context in which the research is being carried out. You should list these references in your report.

The report has four parts: First, a complete and accurate citation for the publication you have selected. Second, a brief summary describing the key points of the work, limited to 250 words. Third an evaluation and discussion of the work; aim for about 5 pages in length. Fourth, complete and accurate citations for other papers you've read.

The summary and evaluation should be clear, correct, and concise. They should show unity, coherence, and emphasis. The summary should be objective, yet comprehensive. It should tell the reader what problem the paper seeks to address and what results have been obtained. The evaluation should express your opinion of the work's value, supported by (and referencing) information that you have obtained in your background reading. Taken together, the two parts should provide at least the following insights:

As you can see, the review covers a lot of ground! Fitting a review of this complexity into the space limits given will take a lot of attention to organization of your thoughts and probably require a couple of drafts in order to express thoughts succinctly but convincingly.

Good academic practices are to be followed in preparing this report. External literature is to be consulted and properly acknowledged. The writing should be your own. For example, it is not acceptable academic practice to duplicate portions of others' writings in your own. Your writing should present a synthesis rather than a verbatim summary.

Include your name and email address on the review.