# Presentation: 212687

## User Centered Researchand the Access Grid

- Requirements for Collaboration

## Overview

- my interest in the AG
- barriers to collaboration
- a few observations
- plans for the future

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

## Communication, not just Information

- “Remember, the old Bell System's most successful post-War advertising campaign wasn't ‘Reach out and Inform someone’ or ‘Reach Out and Exchange Data With Someone at 1.5 megabits per second;’ it was ‘Reach Out and Touch Someone.’”

*Michael Schrage, columnist and research**associate at the MIT Media Lab*

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**
My perspective:  It’s not about data, it’s about people. The technology is significant not in itself, but for the new ways of communicating (between people and organizations) that it enables. It has the potential to change how we communicate.

Most retreat attendees “early adopters” – willing to put up with a lot for the sake of new technology. But the AG *must* move past the state it is in today in order to be useful for the majority of users.

## Motorola Labs and the AG

- About me...
- The User Centered Research group
- The “Collaborative Spaces” project

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**
Background in psychology and Human-Computer Interaction

Part of the user-centered research group in Motorola labs – different from traditional Motorola approach of “if you invent it they will come”
We work on developing future applications based on user research and needs analysis

We do things like conduct observations in the users’ “natural environment”, we can learn details about the work by direct observation that we can’t get any other way -- even by asking them directly.

“collaborative spaces” project – research ways to improve support for distance collaboration, not package and ship the AG
Includes learning about VMC, and ways to make the AGN easier for an average person to use on their own

## Motorola’s AG Node

- Informal working space
- Comfortable for a small group of 6-8 people
- Intended to encourage relaxed, “hang-out” atmosphere

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**
A few details about the space we are building for our AG node

Touch on space facilities woes – the room is not done yet and this is why we have no results!! Just plans for next year

## A ‘Collaborative’ Space is...

- A** physical **location, supporting **collaboration **by:
**connecting** people in different locations
- communicating **awareness** of others’ activities
- conveying a sense of **presence ** or “being there”
- building relationships through **persistent** connection

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**
different people have different definitions of the term
our definition of collaborative spaces – centers on a physical space with a persistent connection to other remote physical spaces
Connection conveys awareness of others’ activities and a sense of presence or ‘shared space’

a study from Carnegie Mellon University of psych researchers, 2x more frequent communication with colleague in office next door than even others on the same floor

A LOT of literature out there on computer-supported collaborative work and video-mediated communication (ask me for references – epatrick@labs.mot.com)
I’ll touch briefly on 2 topics today

## Requirements for Collaboration

- Support for **Nonverbal Communication**
- Communication of a message whose meaning is not explicitly contained in spoken words
- Support for **Workspace Awareness**
- Knowledge about people, objects, and activities in a shared space, enabling conversation about the work, coordination of actions and plans, and anticipation of others’ needs

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**
Pulled two topics from the literature to touch on today – Both of these are very important to collaboration, and both have implications for future AG research into supporting collaboration

Nonverbal: everything you communicate that is not explicitly meant by the spoken word – a LOT of communication happens this way

WA: enables you to work effectively with others – how you know who is in the group, determine that you’re talking about the same thing, use shared artifacts, etc.

## Nonverbal Communication: the Basics (1)

- Human communication uses three channels:
*linguistic*: the explicit meaning of spoken words
*paralinguistic*: aspects of speech that modify the meaning of spoken words
*nonlinguistic*: non-spoken communication; for example gesture, eye gaze, posture, facial expression
- Example:  “You went to the concert with him”

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**
Kinesic: movement of the body. (head, arms, legs, etc)
Proxemics: Use of interpersonal space.
Chronemics: Timing of verbal exchanges during conversations (silence gap).
Oculesics: Eye contact or lack of same.
Haptics: Touching (tactile form of communication)

## Nonverbal Communication: the Basics (2)

- Nonverbal cues are learned, not innate; they vary across cultures
- We communicate this way unconsciously
- Eye gaze and head turning are the most important cues for signaling the end of a speaking turn

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**
Example: here eye contact is considered essential and has a positive connotation – trustworthy, honest – but in middle eastern cultures it is seen as a sign of aggression and mistrust

Don’t know we’re doing it, hence those infomercials trying to sell you a course on how to spot a liar

Speakers make short glances at regular intervals toward the faces of their listeners
listeners direct his or her gaze toward the face of a speaker for the entire duration of their utterance
As the speaker nears the completion of their statement, their gaze rests on the listener, signaling that they are finished speaking
Speakers use this gaze to direct their speech toward a particular person, and indicate that they want that person to speak next.

## Workspace Awareness

- Perspective-taking:
- Knowledge of the workspace from the perspective of others is important
- Grounding:
- Creation of a shared understanding about a specific item, idea or emotion

**WHO**
- Presence: is anybody there
- Identity: who is that
- Authorship: who’s doing that
**WHAT**
- Action: what are they doing
- Intention: what’s the end goal
- Artifact: what object are they working on
**WHERE**
- Location: where are they working
- Gaze: where are they looking
- View: where can they see
- Reach: where can they reach

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**

Workspace awareness information is required for the success of two processes essential for collaboration: grounding and perspective taking
(who / what / where)

Perspective-taking: shared context where “each participant is aware of the point-of-view of the others”

Grounding – making sure we both know what we’re talking about or referring to (“that one over there”) means the same thing to both of us

Nonverbal information helps to communicate meaning and facilitates these two processes

## Access Grid Observations (1)

- Eye contact asymmetry
- Looking at the display insteadof into the camera whentalking to a specific remoteparticipant
- Grounding
- Video quality and image display size can impede the grounding process
- Node operators, who may not be participating in the conversation, control the display

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**
Asymmetry is created when a speaker looks at the visual representation of a remote listener and not into the camera
AG workaround is to position video feeds for active participants above a camera – switching speakers involves changes in camera position and zoom – this necessitates extra coordination and delay in speaker transition
This problem is a product of the group-to-group nature of the AG – it is hard to cover everyone appropriately with only a few cameras and limited display area

in trying to capture an entire audience in one shot -- loss of important details for distinguishing nonlinguistic responses
Unlike face-to-face meetings, participants are not in control of what they see – this adds an extra layer of coordination

They can’t just turn around to speak directly to someone, they have to work with the node operator to see what they want to see

## Access Grid Observations (2)

- Perspective-taking
- It can be difficult to tell where a video stream originates
- Identities of remote participants may be unclear
- Potential for lurking: “If they can’t see you, you’re not there”

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**
Just knowing WHO the participants are and WHERE they’re located can be a problem 

Naming of video streams is cryptic to the novice user, and identities of the people in remote locations may be unclear
Lurkers are possible – and this prevents accurate perspective-taking (if you don’t know someone is there)
Potentially embarassing to say something you wouldn’t want them to hear

It is hard to get a shared visual frame of reference – can’t ever really tell what that place looks like on the other end of the camera until you see it in person
Then it changes your entire perception of that location, you’ll never think about it in 2D again

## Planned Research (1)

- Continued real-world data collection
- On-site observations
- AG observations
- Usage survey
- Automatic data logging
- Backchannel (MUD) usage and importance
- A way to understand ‘behind-the-scenes’ coordination required for an AG event
- Do relationships form without the MUD?

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**
Need to learn more about the strengths and weaknesses of the AG thru real-world data collection – help us concentrate our efforts

On-site: operators and presenters
AG: record and code interactive sessions
For type of communication
For problems observed
Survey/ logging: find out who is using the AG and for what
Record and Code conversations
Track meeting number/ duration/ participating locations

The MUD is important for understanding how the AG works in real practice
Running a node is very resource-intensive, understanding MUD use might give us an idea of how to make using an AG node easier for the average user

## Planned Research (2)

- Experimental studies: the ‘Focus’ issue
- in an interactive session it can be hard to follow the conversation
- experimental studies are being designed to identify factors that impact Focus

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG

**Notes:**
When speaking turns happen it can be disorienting to try and find the person talking
This may impede interactivity with novice users

Investigate factors that impact Focus, and how to aid coordination of speaking turns, under different circumstances
	number of participants
	pace of conversation
	image size/ placement
	video quality

## Conclusion

- Questions, comments, ideas? Let’s talk!
- Contact Information:
- Emilee Patrick
- epatrick@labs.mot.com

- Emilee Patrick: UCR and the AG