skip to main content
10.1145/2856767.2856801acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Supporting Multitasking in Video Conferencing using Gaze Tracking and On-Screen Activity Detection

Published:07 March 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

The use of videoconferencing in the workplace has been steadily growing. While multitasking during video conferencing is often necessary, it is also viewed as impolite and sometimes unacceptable. One potential contributor to negative attitudes towards such multitasking is the disrupted sense of eye contact that occurs when an individual shifts their gaze away to another screen, for example, in a dual-monitor setup, common in office settings. We present an approach to improve a sense of eye contact over videoconferencing in dual-monitor setups. Our approach uses computer vision and desktop activity detection to dynamically choose the camera with the best view of a user's face. We describe two alternative implementations of our solution (RGB-only, and a combination of RGB and RGB-D cameras). We then describe results from an online experiment that shows the potential of our approach to significantly improve perceptions of a person's politeness and engagement in the meeting.

References

  1. Ernst Bekkering and J.P. Shim. 2006. Trust in Videoconferencing. Communications of the ACM 49, 7: 103--107. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Cisco Project Workplace: http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/assets/sol/tp/projectworkplaceGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Owen Daly-Jones, Andrew Monk, and Leon Watts. 1998. Some advantages of video conferencing over high-quality audio conferencing: fluency and awareness of attentional focus. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 49, 1: 21--58. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Wei Dong and Wai-Tat Fu. 2012. One piece at a time: why video-based communication is better for negotiation and conflict resolution. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, ACM, 167--176. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Jim Gemmell, Kentaro Toyama, C. Lawrence Zitnick, Thomas Kang, and Steven Seitz. 2000. Gaze awareness for video-conferencing: A software approach. IEEE Multimedia 7, 4: 26--35. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Dominik Giger, Jean-Charles Bazin, Claudia Kuster, Tiberiu Popa, and Markus Gross. 2014. Gaze correction with a single webcam. Multimedia and Expo (ICME), 2014 IEEE International Conference on, IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Jennifer Marlow, Eveline van Everdingen, and Daniel Avrahami. Taking Notes or Playing Games? Understanding Multitasking in Video Communication. Proceedings of CSCW 2016, ACM, to appear. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Yukiko I. Nakano and Ryo Ishii. 2010. Estimating user's engagement from eye-gaze behaviors in humanagent conversations. Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, ACM, 139--148. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Abhishek Ranjan, Rorik Henrikson, Jeremy Birnholtz, Ravin Balakrishnan, and Dana Lee. 2010. Automatic camera control using unobtrusive vision and audio tracking. Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2010, Canadian Information Processing Society, 47--54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Gianluca Schiavo, Alessandro Cappelletti, Eleonora Mencarini, Oliviero Stock, and Massimo Zancanaro. 2014. Overt or Subtle? Supporting Group Conversations with Automatically Targeted Directives. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, ACM, 225--234. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Fumiharu Tomiyasu and Kenji Mase. 2015. HumanMachine Cooperative Viewing System for Wide-angle Multi-view Videos. Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces Companion, ACM, 85--88. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Roel Vertegaal, Ivo Weevers, Changuk Sohn, and Chris Cheung. 2003. GAZE-2: conveying eye contact in group video conferencing using eye-controlled camera direction. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM, 521--528. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Jacob O. Wobbrock, Leah Findlater, Darren Gergle, and James J. Higgins. 2011. The aligned rank transform for nonparametric factorial analyses using only anova procedures. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 143--146. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Supporting Multitasking in Video Conferencing using Gaze Tracking and On-Screen Activity Detection

    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
      IUI '16: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces
      March 2016
      446 pages
      ISBN:9781450341370
      DOI:10.1145/2856767

      Copyright © 2016 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 the author(s) 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: 7 March 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • short-paper

      Acceptance Rates

      IUI '16 Paper Acceptance Rate49of194submissions,25%Overall Acceptance Rate746of2,811submissions,27%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader