## 5 Results
### Collaboration Patterns
#### 5.4.2 Position Arrangements  
For the two collaborative groups, we incorporated different possible position arrangements within the VR environment. These participants could choose these three arrangements: S-S, C-C, and B-B (see Figure 5).  
Non-Shared group. In general, these participants spent most of their time on S-S position (M = 1357.62s, SD = 546.04), about twice as much than C-C (M = 727.54s, SD = 616.59) and four times more than B-B (M = 305.34s, SD = 135.20). Due to the nonhomogeneity of variance, the [PERSON]'s T3 post-hoc test was used to find out if there were significant differences in their means. The results indicated that participants spent significantly more time in the S-S position than the C-C (\(p\) = 0.005**) and B-B (\(p\) < 0.001***) positions. When asked about their preference for these positions, S-S was ranked the first choice by 60% of the participants.  
Figure 10 shows the results of the collaboration questions for position arrangement in the Non-Shared version. We can observe that these participants had the best collaboration experience in S-S and the worst experience in B-B. The scores of the S-S position for the four categories were all higher than the Corner position. Likewise, C-C received higher scores in all categories other than Back. The Mann-Whitney tests showed that S-S was significantly more favored than B-B in terms of communication and collaboration. C-C also contributed to better communication than B-B. Independent \(t\)-tests with bootstrap showed that S-S was rated significantly higher on comfort and satisfaction than B-B. Participants may have thought the B-B position prevented them from communicating and collaborating, which had led to a less comfortable and satisfactory experience.  
Shared group. As stated earlier, in the shared mode, participants had four available positions to choose from: S-S, C-C, B-B, and Single public workspace. Table 6 shows the descriptive data of how much time they spent on each of the four positions. Results showed that they spent a longer time in the S-S position and the public workspace than C-C and B-B. Due to the nonhomogeneity of variance of the data, we used the [PERSON]'s T3 post-hoc test to determine if there were significant differences. It showed that participants spent significantly more time in S-S than C-C (\(p\) < 0.001). Like the Non-Shared group results, 80% of participants rated B-B as the least preferred one, while 60% of participants rated S-S as the most preferred position. In the case of the single public workspace, only 30% rated it as their most favorite position, although they actually spent the longest time using this single  
Figure 10: Mean ratings with significant results (*: statistically significant) on communication, collaboration, comfort, and satisfaction categories depending on three position arrangements for the Non-Shared group. Error bar indicates \(\pm\)2 standard errors.  
workspace setting. It was interesting that participants had different opinions of the public workspace. One participant favored it, while one other participant ranked it lower.  
Similar to the non-shared mode, S-S got the highest scores in all categories (see Figure 11). The S-S was rated significantly higher in all four categories than C-C and B-B. The single public workspace was rated significantly higher than C-C on communication and significantly higher than B-B on communication and collaboration. It is interesting that S-S was rated significantly higher than the public workspace on satisfaction. We could see that while collaborating in the public workspace, users felt less satisfied than having a separate workspace of their own.