In this paper, we report on findings from an ethnographic study of how people use their calendars for personal information management (PIM). Our participants were faculty, staff and students who were not required to use or contribute to any specific calendaring solution, but chose to do so anyway. The study was conducted in three parts: first, an initial survey provided broad insights into how calendars were used; second, this was followed up with personal interviews of a few participants which were transcribed and content-analyzed; and third, examples of calendar artifacts were collected to inform our analysis. Findings from our study include the use of multiple reminder alarms, the reliance on paper calendars even among regular users of electronic calendars, and wide use of calendars for reporting and life-archival purposes. We conclude the paper with a discussion of what these imply for designers of interactive calendar systems and future work in PIM research.
Jones @cite_33 framed the problems in PIM in terms of the canonical tasks of , , and . Keeping any kind of information involves a tradeoff between the likelihood it will be recalled in the future, and the costs of capturing and retaining it. Organizing involves filing it away such that it can be retrieved easily in the future, and while keeping the cost of organizing less than the cost of finding. Re-finding is a different problem from finding, since there are aspects to encountered information that make it personal.
@cite_33
2065132166 2524023279 2403322466 2003482363
This paper reports a study of Personal Information Management (PIM), which advances research in two ways: (1) rather than focusing on one tool, we collected cross-tool data relating to file, email and web bookmark usage for each participant, and (2) we collected longitudinal data for a subset of the participants. We found that individuals employ a rich variety of strategies both within and across PIM tools, and we present new strategy classifications that reflect this behaviour. We discuss synergies and differences between tools that may be useful in guiding the design of tool integration. Our longitudinal data provides insight into how PIM behaviour evolves over time, and suggests how the supporting nature of PIM discourages reflection by users on their strategies. We discuss how the promotion of some reflection by tools and organizations may benefit users. We consider the problem of private information retrieval (PIR) over a distributed storage system. The storage system consists of @math non-colluding databases, each storing a coded version of @math messages. In the PIR problem, the user wishes to retrieve one of the available messages without revealing the message identity to any individual database. We derive the information-theoretic capacity of this problem, which is defined as the maximum number of bits of the desired message that can be privately retrieved per one bit of downloaded information. We show that the PIR capacity in this case is @math , where @math is the rate of the @math code used. The capacity is a function of the code rate and the number of messages only regardless of the explicit structure of the storage code. The result implies a fundamental tradeoff between the optimal retrieval cost and the storage cost. The result generalizes the achievability and converse results for the classical PIR with replicating databases to the case of coded databases. Persistent identification is necessary for recognition, dissemination and (external) cross-references to digital objects. Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) provide an established scheme for this task, but do not guarantee stable and persistent identification. In the context of (personal) archives, stability is needed when references are be stored on a medium where later changes to identifiers cannot be corrected at all or only with a very large overhead, such as WORM media or tape archives. Additionally, resources like contacts or appointments do not have a URI, while other URIs, such as file system paths or the IMAP URI, are unstable by design and cannot represent the dynamic aspects of Personal Information Management (PIM). This paper discusses problems of archiving that arise with entity identification in PIM, especially on the example of the personal file system. Traditionally users access their personal files mainly by usingfolder navigation. We evaluate whether recent improvements indesktop search have changed this fundamental aspect of PersonalInformation Management (PIM). We tested this in two studies usingthe same questionnaire: (a) The Windows Studya longitudinalcomparison of Google Desktop and Windows XP SearchCompanion, and (b) The Mac Studya large scale comparison of MacSpotlight and Sherlock. There were few effects forimproved search. First, regardless of search engine, there was astrong navigation preference: on average, users estimated that theyused navigation for 56-68 of file retrieval events but searchedfor only 4-15 of events. Second, the effect of improving thequality of the search engine on search usage was limited andinconsistent. Third, search was used mainly as a last resort whenusers could not remember file location. Finally, there was noevidence that using improved desktop search engines leads people tochange their filing habits to become less reliant on hierarchicalfile organization. We conclude by offering theoretical explanationsfor navigation preference, relating to differences between PIM andInternet retrieval, and suggest alternative design directions forPIM systems.