Mirror, Mirror, On The Wall: Collaborative Screen-Mirroring for Small Groups

Screen mirroring has been available to consumers for some time, however if every mobile device in the room supports screen mirroring to the main display (e.g. a shared TV), this necessitates a mechanism for managing its use. As such, this paper investigates allowing users in small intimacy groups (friends, family etc.) to self-manage mirrored use of the display, through passing/taking/requesting the display from whomever is currently mirroring to it. We examine the collaborative benefits this scheme could provide for the home, compared to existing multi-device use and existing screen mirroring implementations. Results indicate shared screen mirroring improves perceived collaboration, decreases dominance, preserves independence and has a positive effect on a group's activity awareness

Effects of Input Device Familiarity on Content Creation and Sharing in Meetings

In co-located meetings, content creation is often distributed among the group members and sharing requires transfer of content artifacts, which impedes collaboration. In this paper, we present the design of a collaborative environment to support this activity in meetings for small groups. The system consists of a shared wall-mounted workspace where users can interact using either mouse and keyboard or digital pen and paper. We also present a user study comparing the two input configurations and its preliminary results

Space for Two to Think: Large, High-Resolution Displays for Co-located Collaborative Sensemaking

Large, high-resolution displays carry the potential to enhance single display groupware collaborative sensemaking for intelligence analysis tasks by providing space for common ground to develop, but it is up to the visual analytics tools to utilize this space effectively. In an exploratory study, we compared two tools (Jigsaw and a document viewer), which were adapted to support multiple input devices, to observe how the large display space was used in establishing and maintaining common ground during an intelligence analysis scenario using 50 textual documents. We discuss the spatial strategies employed by the pairs of participants, which were largely dependent on tool type (data-centric or function-centric), as well as how different visual analytics tools used collaboratively on large, high-resolution displays impact common ground in both process and solution. Using these findings, we suggest design considerations to enable future co-located collaborative sensemaking tools to take advantage of the benefits of collaborating on large, high-resolution displays

Group vs Individual: Impact of TOUCH and TILT Cross-Device Interactions on Mixed-Focus Collaboration

Cross-device environments (XDEs) have been devel-oped to support a multitude of collaborative activities. Yet, little is known about how different cross-device in-teraction techniques impact group collaboration; in-cluding their impact on independent and joint work that often occur during group work. In this work, we explore the impact of two XDE data browsing tech-niques: TOUCH and TILT. Through a mixed-methods study of a collaborative sensemaking task, we show that TOUCH and TILT have distinct impacts on how groups accomplish, and shift between, independent and joint work. Finally, we reflect on these findings and how they can more generally inform the design of XDEs.NSER

Comparing Horizontal and Vertical Surfaces for a Collaborative Design Task

We investigate the use of different surface orientations for collaborative design tasks. Specifically, we compare horizontal and vertical surface orientations used by dyads performing a collaborative design task while standing. We investigate how the display orientation influences group participation including face-to-face contact, total discussion, and equality of physical and verbal participation among participants. Our results suggest that vertical displays better support face-to-face contact whereas side-by-side arrangements encourage more discussion. However, display orientation has little impact on equality of verbal and physical participation, and users do not consistently prefer one orientation over the other. Based on our findings, we suggest that further investigation into the differences between horizontal and vertical orientations is warranted

Handoff and Deposit: Designing Temporal Coordination in Cross-Device Transfer Techniques for Mixed-Focus Collaboration

When working together, people frequently share information with each other to enable division of labour, assistance, and delegation of responsibility. The literature has explored both synchronous and asynchronous transfer techniques, known as Handoff and Deposit, respectively. However, current cross-device environments tend to only provide a single mechanism. Moreover, we have little understanding of the impact of different techniques on collaborative process. To understand how Handoff and Deposit may be designed to support complex sensemaking tasks, we followed a Research through Design process to iteratively design Handoff and Deposit techniques using paper and digital sketches and high-fidelity prototypes. We consulted the HCI literature to corroborate our findings with studies and descriptions of existing cross-device transfer designs and to understand the potential impact of those designs on mixed-focus collaboration. We learned that as we move away from a restricted physical workspace and leverage the flexibility of digital personal devices, there is a large design space for realizing cross-device transfer. To inform these designs, we provide five design considerations for cross-device transfer techniques: Transfer Acceptance, Action Dependencies, Immediate Usability, Interruption Potential, and Connection Actions

Collocated Collaboration Analytics: Principles and Dilemmas for Mining Multimodal Interaction Data

© 2019, Copyright © 2017 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. Learning to collaborate effectively requires practice, awareness of group dynamics, and reflection; often it benefits from coaching by an expert facilitator. However, in physical spaces it is not always easy to provide teams with evidence to support collaboration. Emerging technology provides a promising opportunity to make collocated collaboration visible by harnessing data about interactions and then mining and visualizing it. These collocated collaboration analytics can help researchers, designers, and users to understand the complexity of collaboration and to find ways they can support collaboration. This article introduces and motivates a set of principles for mining collocated collaboration data and draws attention to trade-offs that may need to be negotiated en route. We integrate Data Science principles and techniques with the advances in interactive surface devices and sensing technologies. We draw on a 7-year research program that has involved the analysis of six group situations in collocated settings with more than 500 users and a variety of surface technologies, tasks, grouping structures, and domains. The contribution of the article includes the key insights and themes that we have identified and summarized in a set of principles and dilemmas that can inform design of future collocated collaboration analytics innovations

The Impact of Shared and Personal Devices on Collaborative Process and Performance

On a daily basis humans interact with an increasing variety of personal electronic devices, ranging from laptops, tablets, smartphones, and e-readers to shared devices such as projected displays and interactive, digital tabletops. An emerging area of study focuses on understanding how these devices can be used together to support collaborative work. Where prior research has shown benefits of devices used individually, there is currently a lack of understanding of how devices should be used in conjunction to optimize a group's performance. In particular, the research presented in this dissertation combines qualitative and quantitative analyses of group work in three empirical studies to link the use of shared and personal devices to changes in group performance and process. In the first study, participants performed an optimization task with either a single, shared projected display or with the shared, projected display and personal laptops. Analyses of study data indicated that when personal displays were present, group performance was improved for the optimization task ($p = 0.025$). However, personal devices also reduced a group's ability to coordinate ($p = 0.016$). Additionally, when personal devices were present, individuals primarily used those devices instead of dividing time between their laptops and the shared display. To further investigate the support that shared displays provide groups, and in particular, how shared displays might support group work in multi-display settings, a follow-up study was conducted. The second study investigated how two different types of shared displays supported group work. In particular, shared workspaces, which allowed multiple users to simultaneously interact with shared content, and status displays, which provided awareness of the overall problem state to groups, were investigated. While no significant impact on group performance was observed between the two shared display types, qualitative analysis of groups working in these conditions provided insight into how the displays supported collaborative activities. Shared workspace displays provided a visual reference that aided individuals in grounding communication with their collaborators. On the other hand, status displays enabled the monitoring of a group's overall task progress. Regardless of which display was present, an individual's gaze and body position relative to the shared display supported the synchronization of group activities. Finally, where the previous two studies identified collaborative activities that were supported by the use of shared and personal displays, the experimental task performed by participants did not explore the transfer of task materials between shared and personal devices or alternative personal and shared devices. The third study addressed these limitations through the adoption of a new experimental task that enabled the exploration of how the manipulation of task artefacts supported collaborative activities, and alternative shared and personal devices in the form of interactive digital tabletops and tablet computers. In particular, the third study compared how personal and shared displays supported sensemaking groups working under three conditions: with shared, digital tables, with shared digital tables plus personal tablets, and with only personal tablets. Quantitative analyses revealed that the presence of the shared, digital tabletop significantly improved a group's ability to perform the sensemaking task ($p = 0.019$). Further, qualitative analyses revealed that the table supported key sensemaking activities: the prioritization of task materials, the ability to compare data, and the formation of group hypotheses. This dissertation makes four primary contributions to the field of Computer Supported Cooperative Work. First, it identifies cases where the presence of shared and personal displays provide performance benefits to groups, and through qualitative analyses links these performance benefits to group processes. Second, observed uses are grounded in an established process model, and used to identify collaborative activities that are supported by personal and shared devices. Third, equity of participation on shared displays is found to positively correlate ($p = 0.028$), and equity of participation on personal displays is found to negatively correlate ($p = 0.01$) with group performance for sensemaking tasks. Fourth, the method for studying group process and performance based on teamwork and taskwork provides a useful foundation for future studies of collaborative work

Communication and Trust in Virtual and Face-to-Face Teams

Virtual teams (VTs) accomplish shared goals by relying on technology-mediated communication to counteract geographic disparities. Rapid advances in technology have led to the near-ubiquity of VTs within modern organizations, but gaps in existing research designs afflict extant empirical VT research. This experiment evaluates the constructs of trust, communication, and effectiveness in VTs. Two-hundred six participants (103 teams) completed an interdependent task either face-to-face, mediated by a videoconferencing telepresence robot, or mediated by a voice call. I collected measures of cognitive trust, trust propensity, communication quality, and team effectiveness, and conducted in-depth communication analyses. Results suggest that while virtual teamwork does not result in effectiveness decrements, it does result in team trust decrements, but video teams demonstrated smaller trust decrements than voice-only teams. The expansive communication analyses utilized in the study produced inconclusive findings. Given the large sample size used and the breadth of constructs assessed, this experiment sets a milestone in empirical virtual teamwork research for future work to build upon

Investigating teamwork and taskwork in single- and multi-display groupware systems

Multi-display groupware (MDG) systems, which typically comprise both public and personal displays, promise to enhance collaboration, yet little is understood about how they differ in use from single-display groupware (SDG) systems. While research has established the technical feasibility of MDG systems, evaluations have not addressed the question of how users’ behave in such environments, how their interface design can impact group behavior, or what advantages they offer for collaboration. This paper presents a user study that investigates the impact of display configuration and software interface design on taskwork and teamwork. Groups of three completed a collaborative optimization task in single- and multi-display environments, under different task interface constraints. Our results suggest that MDG configurations offer advantages for performing individual task duties, whereas SDG conditions offer advantages for coordinating access to shared resources. The results also reveal the importance of ergonomic design considerations when designing co-located groupware systems.Ye