Social computing in terms of social metrics paramenters forms the mainstay work for the thesis. Second, computer ergonomics analysis has been presented from multifarious perspectives. This is another important contribution of the thesis.
2.Inordinate delay seems to have occured between the research scholar's thesis submission year 2019 and the incumbent university's submission, of late, to me for the adjudication. Considerable time has elapsed enough for the new developments in the field of cyberpsychology and social computing arena. Considering the field developments as in the year of thesis submission, the work quality is approximated for evaluation.
3.The thesis has presented recommendations in terms of computer ergonomics and factors.
4.Social metrics analysis is presented in terms of parameters such as betweenness, page rank, clustering coefficient, path length, ... ...
5. The thesis is more of theoretical exposition rather than on grounds of empirical practices followed for the research work.
6.Seemingly, six research paper publications based on which the thesis has been formulated are presented in the thesis.
7.It is not a good practice to have URLs in the references list because of the volatility of their existence in the WWW. This practice should better have been shunned. The incumbent university shall ensure that future Ph.D. theses will not have URLs in the references. This is my advisory note.
8.Chapter 3 onwards, the organization of the chapter should have been delineated in a paragraph in the first sections. This is a lacuna in the chapters documentation.
9.The thesis even did not detail the organization of the thesis contents in the introduction chapter.
10. Chapter 3 presents a survey of computer hardware ergonomics and computer software ergonomics. The comparison table 2(page 39) is of good observation and analysis basis w.r.t. the Microsoft O.S. features of ergonomics over its product line.
11.Chapter 4 presented browser ergonomic features from a comparison perspective, in Table 4. Table 5 is an account of the support or nonsupport of ergonomics features among 6 social websites.
12.Chap5 evaluated page ranking, clustering coefficient, vertex degree, and path length for social metrics evaluation by using the already available computational formulae on a case study basis and data.
13. There are typos in the thesis content. However, they are ignored in the backdrop of the considerable length and breadth of the research work and the publications and the seemingly Ph.D. program gaps in the incumbent university.
14.The presentation of sociogram schematics differences between popular person and powerful person are well brought out in Chap7. The field of social web and social metrics is delineated as the modern offshoot of FIRO-B evaluation from a cyberpsychological perspective. Social intelligence(SI), Web intelligence(WI), Collective intelligence(CI) based on cognition, cooperation and coordination are interrelated in the thesis with social networking sites.
15.As an important suggestion, the incumbent university for the thesis shall ensure that a page of list of research publications (of the incumbent research scholar) claimed for the thesis formulation is in the thesis together with the proofs of such publications.
16.In the overall sense, my adjudication of the thesis is that the research work and publications contribute to the body and frontiers of research in the field of cyberpsychology and social computing enough for the award of the Ph.D.