alt.chi: Augmentation

CHI 2015, Crossings, Seoul, Korea

ChameleonMask: Embodied
Physical and Social Telepresence
using human surrogates
Kana Misawa
Interfaculty Initiative inInformation Studies
The University of Tokyo
Daiwa Ubiquitous Computing
Research Building,
7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku,
Tokyo 113-8654, JAPANkana.misawa@gmail.com...
CDC
DENTSU INC.
1-8-1 Higashishimbashi
Minato-ku
Tokyo 105-7001, Japan

Jun Rekimoto
Interfaculty Initiative inInformation Studies
The University of Tokyo
Daiwa Ubiquitous Computing
Research Building,
7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku,
Tokyo 113-8654, JAPANrekimoto@acm.org...
Interaction Laboratory
Sony Computer Science
Laboratories,Inc.
3-14-3 Higashigotanda,
Shinagawa-ku
Tokyo 141-0022, Japan

Abstract
Chameleonmask is a telepresence system that shows aremote user’s face on the other user’s face. While most
telepresence systems have been designed to provide aremote user’s existence with a teleoperated robot, thesystem uses a real human as a surrogate for anotherremote user. To do this, a surrogate user wears amask-shaped display that shows a remote user’s live face,and a voice channel transmits a remote user’s voice. A
surrogate user mimics a remote user by following the
remote user’s directions. This design is based on our
hypothesis assuming physical and social telepresence canbe embodied by such a surrogate human who imitates the
remote user. It also eliminates many difficulties ofteleoperated robots wandering in the environment. Our
pilot study confirmed that people could regard the masked
person as a right person.

Author Keywords
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work forpersonal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are notmade or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear
this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for componentsof this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting withcredit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or toredistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request
permissions from Permissions@acm.org.
CHI’15 Extended Abstracts, April 18 - 23, 2015, Seoul, Republic of Korea
Copyright 2015 ACM 978-1-4503-3146-3/15/04...$15.00.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2702613.2732506

Telepresence, Embodiment, Presence, Augmented Human

ACM Classification Keywords
H.5.m [Information interfaces and presentation (e.g.,HCI)]: Miscellaneous. for help using the ACM
Classification system.

401

alt.chi: Augmentation

CHI 2015, Crossings, Seoul, Korea

Introduction
Since Marvin Minsky predicted telepresence[9], asignificant amount of research and resulting systems havebeen produced. To accomplish a sense of “being there”, aremote user and a removed environment are bothconnected to an objective place in order to communicate
with local members.

Figure 1: The remote user can
get his surrogate wearing
ChameleonMask.

Figure 2: This is a prototype
system of ChameleonMask. iPad
air is held on full face helmet.
Hacosco put in iPhone6 is set oneye part.

Autonomous robots[8] are telepresence systems that allow
remote users to freely travel around an objective place by
teleoperating the system. These systems display a humanface on their screens and replace wheels with legs, which
replicates the remote user’s presence and mobility in a
distant location. Autonomous robots have been
introduced in many situations. For example, somecompanies have introduced these systems to their offices1 ,and more researchers are using these systems at academic
conferences2 .
Igarashi, who uses an autonomous robot at the first timestated,“I had participated conferences using “Ustream”
streaming before. However, there was a ‘physicalexistence’ with autonomous robots. I felt like actually
being in the same space with the local participants. This
experience was very surprising and exciting.” 3 As can beseen, these systems produce satisfaction and a feeling ofphysical presence. In addition, local users also have amore realistic sensation of the remote user’s presence
when an autonomous robot is used [12].

However, these systems are still imperfect. Substituting
physical human existence in the real world is difficult, andmany issues that address this limitation have already been
revealed.
• A difference in appearance influences humancommunication [13], however the system’s andremote user’s physical appearances don’t
correspond. For example, although the system’sheight may be adjustable, in order to maintain its
stability, the machine is often smaller than the user.
• A mobile telepresence robot’s volume control system
must adjust to the environment [4]. For example,
when a remote user asked a presenter a question,
the robot’s voice was too quiet, requiring staff torepeat the remote user’s question instead. Anotheruser reported a volume level that was too loud due
to a lack of available volume adjustment.
• Even though a system is “autonomous”, it stillneeds human help every time a problem occurs.
Irene et al. [12] mentioned that tasks with highmobility requirements decreased the system’s
performance. In this case, special support isnecessary in order to increase task performance.
Furthermore, controlling these robots in a remoteplace is difficult. Autonomous robots frequently
leave obstacles on the floor or stairs. As a result, thesystem does not blend well into local atmospheres.
If multiple people simultaneously used autonomous
robots, even large spaces would be occupied.

1 Double, http://www.doublerobotics.com/business/
2 Should
I Attend a Conference Via a Telepresence
Robot?,
http://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/industrialrobots/attending-conference-via-telepresence-robot
3 The reason why I could attend in conference from 200km far
way with a child first 2weeks after delivery.(in Japanese), http://bylines.news.yahoo.co.jp/yukiigarashi/20141211-00041418/

In order to address these problems, we propose asurrogate human, which embodies the remote user’s
physical and social telepresence. Many telepresence
studies have used autonomous robots, or robots thatbehave like humans. However, we propose the use of an402

alt.chi: Augmentation

CHI 2015, Crossings, Seoul, Korea

actual human. Humans inherently have crisis-control
capacities and five highly developed senses. If the remoteuser can find a surrogate who looks like him or her, theimpression of his or her appearance can be maintained.
The surrogate can naturally adjust volume using his or herears in order to adapt to varying circumstances and does
not become a nuisance to local members.
In order to confirm this hypothesis, we developed aprototype system called ChameleonMask(Figure 1,Figure 2). ChameleonMask has two
communication functions. The first function is a public
communication line between the remote user and the local
audience. The second function establishes a private
communication line between the remote user and thesurrogate. The remote user provides directions that thesurrogate enacts with his or her body. Furthermore, we
conducted two pilot field tests in order to determine
people’s response to this system. Finally, we discussed thesurrogate’s motivation for helping the remote user.
Figure 3: Director sees the placeof surrogate and communicate
with a local member through hissurrogate. There are two
communication lines, (a)public
line and (b)private line.

ChameleonMask
ChameleonMask is a human-human communication mask
system in which a remote user possesses a surrogate.
Because of the surrogate’s physical reality, the remoteuser can demonstrate a physical and social presence in a
local place.

as though present in a local place, but the surrogate
operates within the location.
Local user as surrogate: We call the local user the“surrogate”. The surrogate is the user who receives
direction from the director and acts on behalf of thedirector. The surrogate works for the director as the
director’s remote body and shares the local environmentand situation through video and voice. The surrogate
does not talk with local party members but lends his or
her body to the director. Therefore, the surrogate must
abate his or her character and presence in every way
except bodily.
Local party members: These are the users who see thesurrogate. For example, these could include the director’scolleagues or other participants in a conference.
Physical Presence
Telecommunication must embody the remote user’s
existence. In our system, the remote director’s presence isproduced using the surrogate’s physical body. Therefore,
the surrogate should resemble the director as much as
possible. For example, the surrogate should dress in amanner similar to that of the director. Equivalent height,
body type, and gender are appropriate attributes for the
director’s surrogate.

Stakeholders:Three primary stakeholders exist in our concept: a remoteuser, a local user (the surrogate), and local party
members (Figure 3).
Remote user as director: We call the remote user the“director.” This is the person who wishes to participate ina remote place and gives his or her surrogate direction
concerning where to go and how to act. The director acts403

alt.chi: Augmentation

CHI 2015, Crossings, Seoul, Korea

Figure 4: (a)Public line is a channel between a director andlocal party members. Face Images and Voice are sent to public.

Figure 5: The remote user istalking to the local user throughthe surrogate.

Figure 6: This image shows the
director uses the system.

Social Presence
Facial recognition is the primary method humans use tovisually distinguish one another. Therefore, themask-shaped display must exhibit the director’s live face,and a voice channel transmits the director’s voice. Somemethods for meeting these system requirements include
the following. The first method incorporates face-mask
projection. LiveMask is a rear-projection system thatprojects an image onto a face-shaped screen [10].
Projecting enables a high level of expression, such as facial
details and motion [1]. However, these techniques do notsuitably apply to wearable systems due to their lack ofprojector placement. Willis et al. [16] introduced athree-dimensional (3D) printing custom optical element
technique. Here, a curved 3D optical display can beprojected onto an arbitrary place without interfering withthe surrogate’s face. However, a flexible display that canshape to the face, which is a topic for future research,would improve this method.
Before developing the mask, we constructed a prototype
system in order to experiment and ascertain people’s
feelings regarding these kinds of systems.
Two Communication Lines:
ChameleonMask has two communication lines. One is a
public line and the other is a private line. The director
switches between the public and private channels when
responding to conversation.
Public line: The remote director uses the public
communication line in order to communicate with local
party members using a live face image and voicecommunication (Figure 4,Figure 5,Figure 6 ). In our
prototype system, we used an iPad air to implement thesefunctions. The face size is aligned with that of the iPadair, which is 9.7 in tall. If the voice’s volume is too low,
the surrogate adjusts the volume on the iPad or uses theprivate line to tell the director to raise his or her voice.

Figure 7: (b)Private line is a channel between a surrogate anda director. Giving instruction from the director to thesurrogate directly. Sharing surround environment from thesurrogate to the director with eye sights and voices. Voicecommunication connected only between two.

Private line: The private line relays communication
between the surrogate and director (Figure 7 ). Video
images and a voice channel are sent from the surrogate.
The director must mute the public audio line before using
the private line. This channel is supported on Google
Hangouts4 . The surrogate wears an earphone with amicrophone in order to talk with the director. The
surrogate does not talk when the director is speaking witha local member. When the surrogate uses the private line,
he or she should speak at a lower volume. If the surrogate
quietly speaks under the mask, then local members areless likely to notice. In addition, when the surrogate wears
the mask, his or her vision is blocked. We used a Hacosco
4 Hangout,
outs/?hl=en.

http://www.google.com/+/learnmore/hang-404

alt.chi: Augmentation

CHI 2015, Crossings, Seoul, Korea

one-eyed model5 in order to acquire the surrogate’s vision
so that he or she can face a speech partner and safely
walk around.

Figure 8: Surrogate sees thelandscape in part of red square.
Wide lens is attached on outside
camera.

The Hacosco model is a cardboard virtual reality (VR)helmet-mounted display (HMD). Placing a smartphone in
the Hacosco helmet allows the surrogate to see andimmerse easily. We chose the iPhone6 for this system
considering its wide-screen capacity, weight, and built-in
camera (Figure 8). Our prototype system uses a full-facehelmet, which ensures unobstructed breathing. In order torender the mask comfortable, it was made to be adjustable
to the surrogate’s head, and nose space was createddirectly in the Hacosco. Additionally, in order to produce
a wider view, we attached a wide lens to the camera.
Consequently, the range of vision expanded twofold, andthe surrogate was able to walk straight using the sightprovided by the Hacosco. These images are shared withthe director in real-time, and the surrogate can see thedirector’s gestures in the lower right corner of the screen.

Pilot Field Test
In order to determine our system’s distinctive features, we
conducted two field tests. Scenario 1 included a surrogatethat traveled to the city government and received a public
document in place of the director. Scenario 2 involved asurrogate communicating with an old person in place ofher grandchild. Our goal was to assess people’s reactions
to and feelings about our prototype system.
Scenario1
A 28-year-old woman (director) needs a certificate ofresidence. She must visit the city center in order to receiveit, but she is unable to travel there for some reason.
Therefore, someone else must visit the office in her stead.
5 Hacosco, http://hacosco.com/en/.

Figure 9: Experiment1.

In this scenario, the surrogate wears ChameleonMask andasks a city officer to issue the certificate. Officially,
citizens can only acquire a certificate of residence with
their own identification (ID) at the city office. When acitizen appoints an agent, the agent must have an
authorization letter from the citizen. The purpose of thistest is to determine whether a city officer will publish thecertificate of residence for a masked surrogate and toascertain the reason he or she would or would not.
Therefore, the surrogate travels to the city office with thedirector’s ID card and request for a certificate of residence.
How the field tests was conducted
In order to conduct our test, our operator asked the
director to find a same-gender surrogate. The director
found a foreign 23-year-old female student, who wasintroduced by a mutual friend. The director and surrogate
met for the first time during our test. The operator then405

alt.chi: Augmentation

CHI 2015, Crossings, Seoul, Korea

asked the director to visit the city center in order tofamiliarize herself with the location and acquire a request
form for the certificate of residence. When the director
took this request form, the city officer talked with thedirector, providing help. After this, the director told her toreturn after filling out the request form. The operator
instructed both the director and surrogate to use oursystem. Before initiating the field test, the surrogate wore
ChameleonMask in order to acclimate herself to thesystem’s structure. After some trials, the surrogate and an
attendant, who aided during the acclimation process, leftthe experimentation room. The surrogate had not visitedthe city office before, so the director guided the surrogate
using the private communication line.
In the following transcript, ( ) denotes communication
limited to that between the director and surrogate. Here,D represents the director, P the surrogate, and O theofficer.
D: (The office counter is at the end of the hall. Go
straight forward and look right.)
P: (Okay. I walked into the building...and arrived at thecounter.)
When our masked woman visited the city office’s counter,all officers rose to their feet. The supervising officer
walked to the counter.
D : Excuse me, I need my certificate of residence. This is
my ID card and a request form.
The surrogate handed over the ID card and request form.
O : Ah...
The officer examined the face on the ID and that on themask.
D : It’s me.
O : Yes, we checked, and you are the right person. But
would you take off your mask, please?

D : Sorry, I can’t. This body isn’t mine. I can’t go there,
so I let my agent visit the city office.
O : Pardon? You are not the person on this ID?
The officer clearly assumed that the surrogate under themask was the director.
O : Okay. If you are her agent, you need an authorization
letter because...
After realizing the body belonged to an agent, the officer
politely explained the rules.
D : (Okay, we’ll stop requesting the document.)
D : Thank you very much for your kind explanation,
officer.
Observation and Findings
The city officer identified the ID card and the director’s
face, which was displayed on the iPad. However, he asked
the surrogate to remove the mask. When the director
explained that the body was not hers, the officer
recognized that the masked person was an “agent.” Afterthe field test, the director visited the city office andexplained the field test. The officer said, “I knew you
came here,” and talked with her while taking the request
form. The officer explained the reason they could not
publish the paper without an authorization letter.
According to her, they must treat personal information
with care, so if a person is not the “right one,” they do
not hand over certificates. However, before saying “thebody is an agent”, the officers seemed to recognize thatthe masked person was the right person. She said “Bylaw, we can’t give you the certificate right now, but wedon’t know if the rules will change in the future.”
Surrogate’s comment:
It was a very interesting experience to became anotherperson. I could see the city officer’s troubled face without
revealing my own face. The task in becoming the406

alt.chi: Augmentation

CHI 2015, Crossings, Seoul, Korea

director’s surrogate was not difficult. I just walked andstood as instructed. I may consider becoming someone’s
surrogate as a part-time job. I felt that my work helped
someone else.
Scenario2
A 28-year-old granddaughter (director) returns to herhometown in order to attend a New Year’s party with herfamily. She has not seen her 87-year-old grandmother forsome time. The grandmother is not technologicallyminded and suffers from mild senility. She loves her
granddaughter very much. The granddaughter arrives;
however, her identity masks that of her mother(surrogate), who wears the ChameleonMask. The purposeof this test is to determine the reaction of an elderly
person to her masked granddaughter. In particular, wewish to observe whether the grandmother believes her
granddaughter is present and whether or not she respondswith anger?

How the field tests was conducted
We recruited a family, which was comprised of a
grandmother, father, and mother, who all live in the
country, and their daughter, who resides in the capitalcity. The granddaughter rarely returned home, and her
grandmother was eager to see her. In this test, thegranddaughter was the director and her mother was thesurrogate. They look alike and have similar body types.
Because the mother regularly saw the grandmother, shedonned her daughter’s clothes. The test was conducted at
the grandmother’s home. The participating family
members, excluding the grandmother, first familiarized
themselves with the system. Afterward, the daughter
practiced giving directions from the living room, and thesurrogate mother imitated her daughter. The father
conversed with the grandmother until the surrogate
entered the room. After some practice, the mother(surrogate) approached the grandmother.
In the following transcript, ( ) indicates communication
between the director and surrogate, D represents the
director, P denotes the surrogate, and G symbolizes the
grandmother. Also, XX signifies the daughter’s name.
This was recorded after the surrogate opened the door.

Figure 10: Experiment2.

D: Hi,Grandma! Long time no see! How have you been?
G: Oh, XX! ...Are you XX? A little strange...I’m too old
to stay healthy.
When the grandmother first saw the surrogate, she wassurprised. However, the conversation between the director
and grandmother continued.
D : I came back from Tokyo today. It’s colder here.
G: Yes, it’s cold here. By the way, do you know the oldwoman living next door passed away...
Everyone listened to the grandmother talk for a while.
However, the director scratched her chin, and her fingers

407

alt.chi: Augmentation

CHI 2015, Crossings, Seoul, Korea

appeared on the iPad screen.
G: You have two hands here. Why do I see the other hand(on the iPad)?
The grandmother was confused. Then she begancommenting on her granddaughter’s appearance.
G : XX, you became pretty. Your skin is very beautiful,and your teeth are also nice.
D : They are? Thank you.
G : Hey XX, why do you wear this mask? Please let me
see your face, I want to see you directly.
D : (Can you hear me, Mom? Let’s take off the masknow.)
The surrogate removed her mask.
P : Sorry, Grandma. I am not XX. It’ me.
G : What?? Why are you XX’s mother?
The grandmother was very surprised.
D : Sorry, Grandma. I didn’t come back home.
The director lied to the grandmother, and the
grandmother was very disappointed.
G : I see... XX isn’t here.
Shortly thereafter, the director entered the grandmother’sroom.
D : Hey, Grandma. I’m sorry for telling a lie. I’ m back.
The grandmother’s surprise heightened in this moment.
Observation and Findings
The grandmother exhibited fear in response to theunfamiliar visual display at first, but she believed her
granddaughter had returned home. The grandmother had
the opportunity to realize that her granddaughter was not
the masked person when the granddaughter scratched herchin. However, the grandmother did not understand what
she was seeing on the iPad’s screen. When the
grandmother understood that the surrogate was themother, she was discouraged and looked down at thetable. She thought her grandchild had not returned. We

asked her how she felt about this system after the test.
She said, “It’s too difficult for me to understand.” Sherepeated this sentence many times. The grandmother was
unable to comprehend the framework, but she had trusted
that her granddaughter “was there.”
Surrogate’s comment:
Grandmother really believed her granddaughter came backhome. I felt that she talked to me as if I was her
granddaughter. I’m glad to see her smile. I think thissystem could be used in nursing homes. There are manyelderly people who want to talk with their family. Whenthe family can’t visit, this system could connect the familywith their elderly relation.

Discussion
Physical and Social Telepresence
In this paper, we conducted two pilot field tests. We
hypothesized that people would be skeptical of the mask,
look at it in disbelief, and immediately request thesurrogate to remove it. However, we did not observe thisreaction by either the city officer or the grandmother.
They were both polite and kind. We suggest that this isdue to the facial images displayed on the top of thesurrogate’s body. Local participants acknowledged thesurrogate’s humanity and thought they confirmed her
identity. Therefore, they did not ignore the surrogate but
treated her like a human being. One of the surrogates
also said that she felt participants turned and talked toher as if she were the director. They seemed to believethat the remote user was in front of them. Thus, thesurrogate was not only physically present but also createda sense that the director “was there.”408

alt.chi: Augmentation

CHI 2015, Crossings, Seoul, Korea

Methods for directing a surrogate
In this prototype system, the director and surrogate
communicated audibly. However, alternative methods ofproviding direction exist. Also, deciding which informationneeds to be conveyed is significant for both members. For
example, when the director uses the private line, his or her
lips move. The voice is muted for local members, but thelips could still be read.
Reliability
Questions arise concerning the reliability of the proposedsystem. For example, will local members trust thesurrogate as they would the director? Can directors haveconfidential conversations with local members when using
a surrogate? Must the surrogate trust or comply with thedirector when in trouble?

Related Work
Many research projects concern telepresence, especially as
it relates to the study of autonomous robots because
mobility enhances a remote user’s presence [12]. Thesesystems are composed of a tablet, speaker, andmicrophone. Geminoid[14] is an android system that has ahuman-like avatar. Its appearance is substantially real,
but its mechanical structure is complex. This system’s
motion is limited by the remote user’s movement.
Although there are telepresence systems that convey thehaptic senses, in addition to vision and audio [15], andenable a full existence experience, they require an
inordinate amount of resources. Our approach uses innate
human abilities in order to achieve telepresence. Haptic
Turk is another approach that allows the motion
experience by leveraging humans [2]. Furthermore,
whereas Amazon Mechanical Turk6 is a brain marketplace,
ChameleonMask can be a physical one.
6 Amazon Mechanical Turk, https://www.mturk.com/

Some studies have also investigated remote user controls
in order to share experiences with local users. For
example, Tele-Actor [3] is a system that is worn in order
to communicate a remote environment. ChameleonMask
conveys not only the remote environment but also theremote user’s presence on mask. Omnipresenz7 offers thesocial service concept of visual sharing. Additionally,
Teroos is a wearable system, placed on the shoulders, inwhich a remote user communicates with a local user
through a small robot [7]. Because face-shaped screens
aid in effective communication using eye contact [11],some researchers have focused on visual sharing. Kori etal. [5] proposed the video communication system design
for sharing experiences, and Jackin [6] is a system inwhich the local user transmits 360-degree vision with theremote user using a headset equipped with cameras. In
this system, the remote user’s presence relies on the local
user. The ChameleonMask system also relies on thesurrogate to relay the remote user’s presence. However, in
this system, the local user is a surrogate for the remoteuser and acts in response to the director’s requests.

Conclusion and Future Plans
We proposed a telepresence system called
ChameleonMask in which human-human communication
includes a remote user (director) and a local user
(surrogate). We hypothesized that physical and social
telepresence can be embodied by the surrogate, who
imitates the remote user. We developed a prototype
system in order to investigate this concept and conducted
two field tests. Our results suggest that local listeners
tend to believe that the masked surrogate is the director,
which induces a “being there” experience. We also
discussed multiple potential applications for this system.
7 Omnipresenz, http://www.omnipresenz.com/409

alt.chi: Augmentation

CHI 2015, Crossings, Seoul, Korea

A potential limitation of the proposed system is its
requirement of a surrogate’s cooperation. Therefore, thedesign must include a means of motivating potential
participants, ensuring they would like to be surrogates. In
our field tests, the surrogates indicated that theyexperienced a sense of satisfaction, which resulted from
helping others. Our future plans involve conducting
further field tests in order to acquire more knowledge anda deeper understanding of our system’s attributes because
we believe that appropriate telepresence systems shouldreflect both human relationships and diverse situations.

References[1] Bermano, A., Brüschweiler, P., Grundhöfer, A., Iwai,
D., Bickel, B., and Gross, M. Augmenting physicalavatars using projector-based illumination. ACM
Trans. Graph. 32, 6 (Nov. 2013), 189:1–189:10.
[2] Cheng, L.-P., Lühne, P., Lopes, P., Sterz, C., andBaudisch, P. Haptic turk: A motion platform basedon people. Proc. CHI ’14, 3463–3472.
[3] Goldberg, K., Song, D., Khor, Y., Pescovitz, D.,
Levandowski, A., Himmelstein, J., Shih, J., Ho, A.,
Paulos, E., Donath, J., Berkeley, U., and Mit, J. D.
Collaborative online teleoperation with spatial
dynamic voting and a human ”tele-actor”.
Proc.ICRA ’02, 1179–1184.
[4] Hayamizu, A., Imai, M., Nakamura, K., and Nakadai,
K. Volume adaptation and visualization by modelingthe volume level in noisy environments fortelepresence system. Proc. HAI ’14, 67–74.
[5] Inkpen, K., Taylor, B., Junuzovic, S., Tang, J., andVenolia, G. Experiences2go: Sharing kids’ activities
outside the home with remote family members. Proc.
CSCW ’13, 1329–1340.
[6] Kasahara, S., and Rekimoto, J. Jackin: Integrating
first-person view with out-of-body vision generation

for human-human augmentation. Proc. AH ’14,
46:1–46:8.
[7] Kashiwabara, T., Osawa, H., Shinozawa, K., andImai, M. Teroos: A wearable avatar to enhance joint
activities. Proc. CHI ’12, 2001–2004.
[8] Lee, M. K., and Takayama, L. ”now, i have a body”:
Uses and social norms for mobile remote presence inthe workplace. Proc. CHI ’11, 33–42.
[9] Minsky, M. Telepresence. Omni (1980), 45–51.
[10] Misawa, K., Ishiguro, Y., and Rekimoto, J.
Livemask: A telepresence surrogate system with aface-shaped screen for supporting nonverbal
communication. Proc. AVI ’12, 394–397.
[11] Misawa, K., Ishiguro, Y., and Rekimoto, J. Ma petitecherie: What are you looking at?: A small
telepresence system to support remote collaborative
work for intimate communication. Proc. AH ’12,
17:1–17:5.
[12] Rae, I., Mutlu, B., and Takayama, L. Bodies inmotion: Mobility, presence, and task awareness intelepresence. Proc. CHI ’14, 2153–2162.
[13] Rae, I., Takayama, L., and Mutlu, B. The influenceof height in robot-mediated communication. Proc.
HRI ’13, IEEE Press, 1–8.
[14] Sakamoto, D., Kanda, T., Ono, T., Ishiguro, H., andHagita, N. Android as a telecommunication medium
with a human-like presence. Proc. HRI ’07, 193–200.
[15] Tadakuma, R., Asahara, Y., Kajimoto, H.,
Kawakami, N., and Tachi, S. Development ofanthropomorphic multi-d.o.f. master-slave arm for
mutual telexistence. IEEE TVCG ’11 (2005),
626–636.
[16] Willis, K., Brockmeyer, E., Hudson, S., andPoupyrev, I. Printed optics: 3d printing of embedded
optical elements for interactive devices. Proc. UIST
’12, 589–598.

410alt.chi: Augmentation

Commentary
For alt.chi paper

ChamelonMask: Embodied
physical and social telepresence
using human surrogatesJohn Rooksby
University of Glasgow
www.johnrooksby.org
John.rooksby@glasgow.ac.uk

CHI 2015, Crossings, Seoul, Korea

At an event called Stupid Hackathon, held in New
York in early 2015, one creation was called iPad on aFace. It was “a telepresence robot, except on ahuman” (www.stupidhackathon.com).
Enabling a remote person to use a human surrogate
in a mobile telepresence system is an idea I findtroubling. What would it be like to interact withsomeone via a human surrogate? What would it belike to be that surrogate? These questions are
provoked by systems such as ipad on a face, but toanswer them requires real world user trials.
A decade ago Sheridan et al. (Understanding
Interaction in Ubiquitous Guerrilla Performances in
Playful Arenas, Proc. British HCI, 2004) went some
way towards answering such questions. The
Schizophrenic Cyborg was a wearable system thatenabled someone to interact with a remote person
via a display attached to a third person’s chest. The
system was trialled in nightclubs. Sheridan found thatthe remote person would engage in playfully
awkward interactions, such as asking people to give
the wearer a hug. The experience for the wearer was,understandably, disconcerting.
More recently, Reeves et al. (I’d Hide You, Performing
Live Broadcasting in Public, Proc. CHI 2015) have
explored a mixed reality game I’d Hide You in which
runners broadcast video, enabling remote players to
direct them around a city in an attempt to capture
other runners. The runner is not a surrogate in quite
the same way as the other systems, but a similar
dynamic occurs with the runner working with and forco-present and remote others.

Misawa and Rekimoto’s ChameleonMask has
similarities with these other systems. However,
ChameleonMask has not been trialled in the playfulcontext of a game or nightclub, but in ordinary
situations. Moreover, the situations in the trial areones in which identify and presence are topical andpractical matters for those present. Firstly, agovernment official, when presented with an identify
document by someone wearing the ChameleonMask,
is put in a situation where he must decide whether itis the surrogate or the remote user who is is actuallypresenting the document. Secondly an elderly
woman, when visited by a family member via asurrogate wearing the ChameleonMask, has to decide
whether to orient to this visit as one by a family
member or by a stranger. As such the two studies areakin to the breaching experiments discussed by
Crabtree (Design in the Absence of Practice:
Breaching Experiments, DIS 2004). The trials address
the interactional troubles provoked by the system by
its breaching of the norms of identify and presence.
Conducting studies such as these, particularly whenoutside of the context of games and playful arenas,
does pose ethnical challenges. How far can or should
we go when breaching social norms? The visit to anelderly woman is a challenging example. Clearly
connecting grandmothers and granddaughters is an
important area of research for HCI, but we do need
to be careful and respectful when creating
uncomfortable and disconcerting experiences. As thisstudy affirms, it is not just the surrogate that has apotentially uncomfortable experience, but also thosethey interact with.

411