skip to main content
10.1145/989863.989948acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaviConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Two methods for enhancing mutual awareness in a group recommender system

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 May 2004Publication History

ABSTRACT

We present a group recommender system for vacations that helps group members who are not able to communicate synchronously to specify their preferences collaboratively and to arrive at an agreement about an overall solution. The system's design includes two innovations in visual user interfaces: 1. An interface for collaborative preference specification offers various ways in which one group member can view and perhaps copy the previously specified preferences of other users. This interface has been found to further mutual understanding and agreement. The same interface is used by the system to display recommended solutions and to visualize the extent to which a solution satisfies the preferences of the various group members. 2. In a novel application of animated characters, each character serves as a representative of a group member who is not currently available for communication. By responding with speech, facial expressions, and gesture to proposed solutions, a representative conveys to the current real user some key aspects of the corresponding real group member's responses to a proposed solution. Taken together, these two aspects of the interface provide complementary and partly redundant means by which a group member can achieve awareness of the preferences and responses of other group members: an abstract, complete, graphical representation and a concrete, selective, human-like representation. By allowing users to choose flexibly which representation they will attend to under what circumstances, we aim to move beyond the usual debates about the relative merits of these two general types of representation.

References

  1. Anthony Jameson. More than the sum of its members: Challenges for group recommender systems. In Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, Gallipoli, Italy, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Thomas Rist, Elisabeth André, and Stephan Baldes. A flexible platform for building applications with life-like characters. In W. L. Johnson and Elisabeth André, editors, IUI 2003: International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, pages 158--165. ACM, New York, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Ben Shneiderman and Pattie Maes. Direct manipulation vs. interface agents. interactions, 4(6):42--61, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Two methods for enhancing mutual awareness in a group recommender system

              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
                AVI '04: Proceedings of the working conference on Advanced visual interfaces
                May 2004
                425 pages
                ISBN:1581138679
                DOI:10.1145/989863

                Copyright © 2004 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: 25 May 2004

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • Article

                Acceptance Rates

                Overall Acceptance Rate107of408submissions,26%

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader