skip to main content
10.1145/2145204.2145387acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescscwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

ConvoCons: a tool for building affinity among distributed team members

Published:11 February 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper we present the result of a user interface designed to increase social affinity between two remote collaborators working on design tasks. The results suggest that the tool is successful in creating an overall affinity that is 14.6% higher than the control group without adding a significant difference in task completion time. Affinity is measured with a framework with demonstrated inter-rater reliability using codes assigned to specific conversational patterns and video recorded interactions. This research approach provides a platform for future work codifying affinity and trust among larger numbers of remote collaborators.

References

  1. Aragon, C. R., et al., A tale of two online communities: fostering collaboration and creativity in scientists and children, in Proceeding of the seventh ACM conference on Creativity and cognition, 2009, ACM: Berkeley, California, USA. p. 9--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Bäcksträm, M., F. Björklund, and M. R. Larsson, Five-factor inventories have a major general factor related to social desirability which can be reduced by framing items neutrally. Journal of Research in Personality, 2009. 43(3): p. 335--344.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Brewer, K. A., L. L. Avant, and W. F. Woodman, Addendum to Perception and Interpretation of Advance Warning Signs on County Roads, 1985, Iowa Department of Transportation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Collins, R., Sociological Insight, 1992, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Convertino, G., et al. A multipleview approach to support common ground in distributed and sychronous geo-collaboration. in CMV '05. 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Cutkosky, M., J. Tenenbaum, and J. Glicksman, Madefast: collaborative engineering over the Internet. Communications of the ACM, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Dubé, L. and G. Paré, Global Virtual Teams. Communications of the ACM, 2001. 44(12): p. 71--73.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Egido, C., Video conferencing as a technology to support group work: a review of its failures, in Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, 1988, ACM: Portland, Oregon, United States. p. 13--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Ekstrom, R. B., et al., Kit of Factor-Referenced Cognitive Tests, O. o. N. Research, Editor 1976, Educational Testing Service: Princeton, NJ. p. 281--285.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Erickson, T. and W. Kellogg, Social Translucence: Using Minimalist Visualizations of Social Activity to Support Collective... Designing Information Spaces: The Social Navigation Approach, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Esenther, A. and K. Ryall, RemoteDT: Support for Multi-Site Table Collaboration. Proc. Int. Conf. Collaboration Technologies (CollabTech), 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Fischer, G., et al., Creativity Support Tools: Report From a US National Science Foundation Sponsored Workshop. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Goffman, E., The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, 1959, Garden City, NJ: Doubleday.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Goffman, E., Role-Distance, in Life as Theater: A dramaturgical sourcebook, D. E. Brisset, C., Editor 1975, Aldine Publishing Company: Chicago, IL. p. 123--132.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldberg, L. R., et al., The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 2006. 40: p. 84--96.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Hofstee, W. K. B., B. de Read, and L. R. Goldberg, Integration of the Big-Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1992. 63: p. 146--163.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Kellogg, W. A. and R. T. Erickson, Social Translucence, Collective Awareness, and the Emergence of Place. Proceedings of CSCW2002, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Langheinrich, M., et al., Unintrusive customization techniques for Web advertising. Computer Networks, 1999. 31(11-16): p. 1259--1272. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Latour, B., Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts, in Shaping Technology, W. B. J. Law, Editor 1992, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. p. 225--258.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Lohtia, R., N. Donthu, and E. K. Hershberger, The Impact of Content and Design Elements on Banner Advertising Click-through Rates. Journal of Advertising Research, 2003. 43(04): p. 410--418.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Maher, M. and J. Rutherford, A model for synchronous collaborative design using CAD and database management. Research in Engineering Design, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Mizruchi, M. S. and C. Marquis, Egocentric, sociocentric, or dyadic? Identifying the appropriate level of analysis in the study of organizational networks. Social Networks, 2006. 28(3): p. 187--208.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Morris, M., et al., Beyond "social protocols": multi-user coordination policies for co-located groupware. Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported..., 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Nardi, B., Beyond Bandwidth: Dimensions of Connection in Interpersonal Communication. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Neff, G., B. Fiore-Silfvast, and C. S. Dossick, A CASE STUDY OF THE FAILURE OF DIGITAL COMMUNICATION TO CROSS KNOWLEDGE BOUNDARIES IN VIRTUAL CONSTRUCTION. Information, Communication & Society, 2010. 13(4): p. 556--573.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Oren, M. and S. Gilbert, ConvoCons: Encouraging Affinity on Multitouch Interfaces. Lecture notes in computer science, 2009. 5612: p. 651--659. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Oren, M. and S. Gilbert. Building Better Design Teams: Enhancing Group Affinity to Aid Collaborative Design. in Design, Computing, and Cognition. 2010. Stuttgart, Germany.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Oren, M. A. and S. B. Gilbert, Framework for measuring social affinity for CSCW software, in Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, 2011, ACM: Vancouver, BC, Canada. p. 1387--1392. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Riche, Y., et al. Hard-To-Use Interfaces Considered Beneficial (Some of the Time). in CHI. 2010. Atlanta, GA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Robertson, T., Cooperative work and lived cognition: A taxonomy of embodied actions... on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Schmid, A., Affinity as social capital: its role in development. Journal of Socio-Economics, 2000. 29(2): p. 159--171.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Scott, S., Territory-based interaction techniques for tabletop collaboration. UIST 2003 Conference Companion, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Scott, S. and S. Carpendale, Investigating Tabletop Territoriality in Digital Tabletop Workspaces. eng.uwaterloo.ca, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Scott, S., K. Grant, and R. Mandryk, System guidelines for co-located, collaborative work on a tabletop display. Proceedings of the eighth conference on European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 2003: p. 159--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Tuddenham, P. and P. Robinson, Distributed Tabletops: Supporting Remote and Mixed-Presence Tabletop Collaboration. Horizontal Interactive Human-Computer Systems, 2007. TABLETOP '07. Second Annual IEEE International Workshop on, 2007: p. 19--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Vetere, F., S. Howard, and M. Gibbs, Phatic Technologies: Sustaining Sociability through Ubiquitous Computing. First International Workshop on Social Implications of..., 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Warkentin, M. E., L. Sayeed, and R. Hightower, Virtual Teams versus Face-to-Face Teams: An Exploratory Study of a Web-based Conference System*. Decision Sciences, 1997. 28(4): p. 975--996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. ConvoCons: a tool for building affinity among distributed team members

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CSCW '12: Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work
      February 2012
      1460 pages
      ISBN:9781450310864
      DOI:10.1145/2145204

      Copyright © 2012 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 11 February 2012

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CSCW '12 Paper Acceptance Rate164of415submissions,40%Overall Acceptance Rate2,235of8,521submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

      CSCW '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader