Darren Gergle
Robert E. Kraut
Susan R. Fussell
ABSTRACT
A shared visual workspace allows multiple people to see similar views of objects and environments. Prior empirical literature demonstrates that visual information helps collaborators understand the current state of their task and enables them to communicate and ground their conversations efficiently. We present an empirical study that demonstrates how action replaces explicit verbal instruction in a shared visual workspace. Pairs performed a referential communication task with and without a shared visual space. A detailed sequential analysis of the communicative content reveals that pairs with a shared workspace were less likely to explicitly verify their actions with speech. Rather, they relied on visual information to provide the necessary communicative and coordinative cues.
- Argyle, M., & Cook, M. (1976). Gaze and mutual gaze. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing Interaction: An Introduction to Sequential Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Bakeman, R., & Quera, V. (1995). Analyzing interaction: Sequential analysis with SDIS and GSEQ. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Barnard, P., May, J., & Salber, D. (1996). Deixis and points of view in media spaces: An empirical gesture. Behaviour and Information Technology, 15(1), 37--50.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bekker, M. M., Olson, J. S., & Olson, G. M. (1995). Analysis of gestures in face-to-face design teams provides guidance for how to use groupware in design. In Proceedings of DIS 95, 157--166. NY: ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Boyle, E. A., Anderson, A. H., & Newlands, A. (1994). The effects of visibility on dialogue and performance in a cooperative problem solving task. Language & Speech, 37(1), 1--20.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brennan, S.E. (2004). How conversation is shaped by visual and spoken evidence. In J. Trueswell & M. Tanenhaus (Eds.), World Situated Language Use: Psycholinguistic, Linguistic and Computational Perspectives on Bridging the Product and Action Traditions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Brennan, S. E. & Lockridge, C. B. (Under review). Monitoring an addressee's visual attention: Effects of visual co-presence on referring in conversation.Google Scholar
- Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Clark, H. H. & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, R. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.). Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127--149). Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar
- Clark, H. H., & Krych, M. A. (2004). Speaking while monitoring addressees for understanding. Journal of Memory & Language, 50(1), 62--81.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Clark, H. H., & Marshall, C. R. (1981). Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In B. L. W. A. K. Joshi, I. A. Sag (Ed.), Elements of discourse understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1--39.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors Special Issue: Situation Awareness, 37(1), 32--64.Google Scholar
- Fienberg, S. E. (1978). The analysis of cross-classified categorical data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Fussell, S. R., & Krauss, R. M. (1992). Coordination of knowledge in communication: Effects of speakers' assumptions about what others know. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 378--391.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fussell, S. R., Kraut, R. E., & Siegel, J. (2000). Coordination of communication: Effects of shared visual context on collaborative work. In Proceedings of CSCW 2000, 21--30. NY: ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fussell, S. R., Setlock, L. D., & Kraut, R. E. (2003). Effects of head-mounted and scene-oriented video systems on remote collaboration on physical tasks. In Proceedings of CHI 2003, 513--520. NY: ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fussell, S.R., Setlock, L.D., & Parker, E.M. (2003). Where do helpers look? Gaze targets during collaborative physical tasks. In Proceedings of CHI 2003 (Extended Abstracts), 768--769. NY: ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fussell, S. R., Setlock, L. D., Yang, J., Ou, J., Mauer, E. M., & Kramer, A. (in press). Gestures over video streams to support remote collaboration on physical tasks. Human-Computer Interaction. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gergle, D., Millen, D. E., Kraut, R. E., & Fussell, S. R. (2004). Persistence matters: Making the most of chat in tightly-coupled work. In Proceedings of CHI 2004. NY: ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Goodman, L. A. (1978). Analyzing qualitative/categorical data: Log-linear models and latent structure analysis. Cambridge, MA: Abt Books.Google Scholar
- Goodwin, C. (1996). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96, 606--633.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Greenberg, S., Gutwin, C., & Cockburn, A. (1996). Awareness through fisheye views in relaxed-WYSIWIS groupware. In Proceedings of Graphics Interface, 28--38. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gutwin, C. & Greenberg, S. (2001) A Descriptive Framework of Workspace Awareness for Real-Time Groupware. Journal of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 3-4, 411--446. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gutwin, C., & Penner, R. (2002). Improving interpretation of remote gestures with telepointer traces. In Proceedings of CSCW 2002, 49--57. NY: ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Isaacs, E. A., & Clark, H. H. (1987). References in conversation between experts and novices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 26--37.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kraut, R. E., Fussell, S. R., Brennan, S. E., & Siegel, J. (2002). Understanding effects of proximity on collaboration: Implications for technologies to support remote collaborative work. In P. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds.) Distributed work (pp. 137--162). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Kraut, R. E., Fussell, S. R., & Siegel, J. (2003). Visual information as a conversational resource in collaborative physical tasks. Human Computer Interaction, 18(1), 13--49. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kraut, R. E., Gergle, D., & Fussell, S. R. (2002). The use of visual information in shared visual spaces: Informing the development of virtual co-presence. In Proceedings of CSCW 2002, 31--40. NY: ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nardi, B. A., Schwarz, H., Kuchinsky, A., Leichner, R., Whittaker, S., & Sclabassi, R. (1993). Turning Away from Talking Heads: The Use of Video-as-Data in Neurosurgery. In Proceedings of ACM INTERCHI'93, 327--334. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Olson, G. M., Herbsleb, J. D., & Rueter, H. H. (1994). Characterizing the Sequential Structure of Interactive Behaviors Through Statistical and Grammatical Techniques. Human-Computer Interaction, 9(3,4), 427--472.Google Scholar
- Sanderson, P. M., & Fisher, C. (1993). Exploratory Sequential Data Analysis in Practice. In Proceedings of ACM INTERCHI'93--Adjunct Proceedings, p. 221.Google Scholar
- Schafer, W., & Bowman, D. (2003). A comparison of traditional and fisheye radar view techniques for spatial collaboration. In Proceedings of Graphics Interface, 23--46.Google Scholar
- Schober, M. F. (1993). Spatial perspective-taking in conversation. Cognition, 47, 1--24.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schober, M. F., & Clark, H. H. (1989). Understanding by addressees and overhearers. Cognitive Psychology, 21(2), 211--232.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tang, J. C. (1991). Findings from observational studies of collaborative work. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34, 143--160. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Weingart, L. (1997). How did they do that? The ways and means of studying group processes. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 40--89.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Action as language in a shared visual space
Recommendations
The use of visual information in shared visual spaces: informing the development of virtual co-presence
CSCW '02: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative workA shared visual workspace is one where multiple people can see the same objects at roughly the same time. We present findings from an experiment investigating the effects of shared visual space on a collaborative puzzle task. We show that having the ...
The value of shared visual space for collaborative physical tasks
CHI EA '05: CHI '05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing SystemsThe goal of this research is to elucidate the ways shared visual space supports group communication and performance. This work involves three stages: a series of empirical studies that decompose the features of shared visual space and task, a ...
The impact of delayed visual feedback on collaborative performance
CHI '06: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsWhen pairs work together on a physical task, seeing a common workspace benefits their performance and transforms their use of language. Previous results have demonstrated that visual information helps collaborative pairs to understand the current state ...
Comments