## 6 Discussion
### Preference on Position Arrangements  
Whether they shared control or not, 60% of these paired participants ranked S-S as the most preferred arrangement, followed by C-C. Participants spent significantly more time in S-S than C-C in both collaborative modes. This observation is aligned with the data from the user preference questionnaire (60% for S-S). Moreover, for both collaborative modes, S-S received significantly higher scores than C-C among all the categories of the collaboration experience questionnaire, which partially contradicts H3. These results seem to align with findings in [15], where it was claimed that S-S affords the greatest collaboration experience. Another study also stated that S-S is the most favorable and can improve task efficiency [53]. However, it is inconsistent with what [PERSON] et al. [15] have suggested, in that C-Cpromotes further communication. This may be because, in the VR environment, they preferred to communicate in a way that they could easily see their partner's avatars, and their interaction results with less body rotation (e.g., to minimize the effect of motion sickness). Our participants favored the S-S position because they felt that it was easier for them to cooperate when solving the tasks as a team and facilitated communication in the VR environment. When asked why, the participants gave comments like: \"I can easily see what my partner was doing without large body movements\", \"I was close enough so I can easily communicate with my partner and show something [to him]\", and \"I was so close to my partner that we could easily communicate and divide up the tasks\". However, one other participant who ranked it lower had a different point of view: \"I was too close to my partner, so it was sometimes messy... I wish to have more private space\". It is also noteworthy that B-B was ranked the least preferred by 90% of the participants. This was somewhat unexpected, as we had thought that with shared view, where the interaction of one participant was reflected on the other participant's workspace, there would no longer be a need for participants to directly see what the partner is doing in real-time (like looking at his or her side). One of them stated, \"I can barely see what my partner was doing when I was interacting with my own visualizations\", and another commented that \"It was just hard to share information between us, I always had to turn around\". Our video records also show that, although they had a shared view, when they needed to discuss with each other, these participants still wished to have a clear sense of the physical movements of their partner's avatar in the virtual environment. Therefore, having each user's avatars, movements, and manipulations continuously visible to one another could enhance their awareness of each other, which seemed to improve their collaboration experience. Incidentally, the participants in the non-shared condition shared the same feelings about the B-B position. In addition, we observed that participants in the non-shared condition preferred to be positioned physically and perceptually closer to their partner in the virtual environment. This would allow them to see what their partner was doing and to exchange ideas together when needed (and, as stated earlier, mostly when they wanted to check if their answers matched). In the B-B position, they had to turn their heads to look at what their partner was doing. Therefore, they rated this position the lowest. At the same time, when they stayed in the B-B position (even if they spent the least amount of time on this position), we observed that they had very little communication with each other because of the greater physical exertion needed to talk with each other. In the S-S and C-C positions, they would discuss more. For the shared condition, it is interesting to note that these participants spent the longest time staying in the single public workspace setting, but only 30% of them rated it as their most favorite arrangement.