This study explores how the number of laptops within a team working around a team influences their collaborative processes. Complementary quantitative and qualitative analyses have been performed with eight groups of four participants who had to carry out a travel planning task with two, three or four laptops. The quantitative analysis of subjects’ gaze locations for each dialogue utterance shows that laptop owners look at their display for 65% of coded events. This ratio is quite independent of the number of laptops in the group. Consequently, the higher the number of participants with laptops, the less attention is available for dealing with coordination. The qualitative analysis of the interaction between participants showed that if more laptops foster parallel individual searches, they are “cognitive attractors”. Participants indeed have difficulty getting away from their laptops. More specifically, their verbal communication often takes place while keeping an eye on their screen, i.e., with only partial attention. The lack of full attention hampers the production of critical thinking about strategic issues, which appears detrimental not only for performance but also for learning. These findings seem to indicate that collaborative learning could be more effective with an asymmetrical layout, i.e. with fewer laptops than team members. This might scaffold the emergence of roles and foster social interaction: team members with no personal displays tend to regulate the activities of others or at least pay more attention to group interaction. Due to our qualitative methodology, we present these as provisional results.
Keywords
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
1A cognitive attractor is defined as a set of material and immaterial elements that potentially participates in a given activity and which are simultaneous present from participant’s point of view. It is assumed that, when choosing an activity, a human actor will engage himself in the stronger perceived attractor, according to its pregnancy, the estimated cost and value of the anticipated activity.
References
Argyle, M., & Cook, M. (1976). Gaze and Mutual Gaze. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge:
Argyle, M., & Graham, J. (1977). The Central Europe Experiment – Looking at Persons and Looking at Things. Journal of Environmental Psychology and Nonverbal Behaviour,1,6–16.
Baker, M. J. (1999). Argumentation and Constructive Interaction. InRijlaarsdamG. EspéretE. CoirierP. Andriessen :J. Foundations of Argumentative Text Processing, Vol. 5. University of Amsterdam Press. Amsterdam: 179–202. (Vol. Eds.), (Series Eds.) & Studies in Writing
Blaye, A. (1988). Confrontation socio-cognitive et résolution de problèmes. Doctoral dissertation, Centre de Recherche en Psychologie Cognitive, Université de Provence, France.
Bly, S. A. (1988). A Use of Drawing Surfaces in Different Collaborative Settings. In Proceedings of CSCW’88, pp. 250–256.
Buxton, W., Fitzmaurice, G. W., Balakrishnan, R., & Kurtenbach, G.. (2000) Large Displays in Automotive Design. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications,20,(4)68–75.
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using Language. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, England:
Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a Collaborative Process. Cognition,22,1–39.
Dietz, P. H., & Leigh, D. L. (2001). DiamondTouch: A Multi-User Touch Technology. In ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST), November 2001, pp. 219–226.
Dillenbourg, P., & Traum, D. (2006). Sharing Solutions: Persistence and Grounding in Multi-modal Collaborative Problem Solving. Journal of the Learning Sciences,15,(1)121–151.
Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1996). The Evolution of Research on Collaborative Learning. InSpada, E. Reiman, P. Learning in Humans and Machine: Towards an Interdisciplinary Learning Science, Elsevier. Oxford: 189–221.
Doise, M., Mugny, G., & Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (1975). Social Interactions and the Development of Cognitive Operations. European Journal of Social Psychology,5,367–383.
Fussell, S. R., Setlock, L. D., Yang, J., Ou, J., Mauer, E. M., & Kramer, A. (2004). Gestures Over Video Streams to Support Remote Collaboration on Physical Tasks. Human-Computer Interaction,19,273–309.
Gubman, J., Oehlberg, L., & Yen, C. (2004). The Mapnews Table: Group Collaboration at an Interactive Horizontal Interface. Available online at: http://ix.stanford.edu/downloads/iXCHI04.pdf
Gutwin, C. & Greenberg, S. (1999). The Effects of Workspace Awareness Support on the Usability of Real-Time Distributed Groupware. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction,6,(3)243–281.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA:
Isaacs, E., & Tang, J. (1993). What Video can and can’t do for Collaboration: A Case Study. In Proceedings of Multimedia, pp. ACM Press. Anaheim, CA: 199–205.
Joiner, R., Scanlon, E., OShea, T., Smith, R. B., & Blake, C. (2002). Synchronous Collaboration Support for Adults Evidence from a Series of Experiments on Videomediated Collaboration: Does Eye Contact Matter? InStahl, G. Computer Support for Collaborative Learning: Foundations for a CSCL Community, Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Boulder, CO., 371–378. Proceedings of CSCL’ 2002
Kendon, A. (1967). Some Functions of Gaze Direction in Social Interaction. Acta Psychologica,32,1–25.
Lahlou, S. (2000). Attracteurs cognitifs et travail de bureau. Intellectica,3075–113.
Patten, J., Ishii, H., Hines, J., & Pangaro, G. (2001). A Wireless Object Tracking Platform for Tangible User Interfaces. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) 2001, pp. 253–260.
Prante, T., Streitz, N., & Tandler, P. (2004). Roomware: Computers Disappear and Interation Evolves. IEEE Computer, December, pp. 47–54.
Rekimoto, J., & Saitoh, M. (1999). Augmented Surfaces: A Spatially Continuous Workspace for Hybrid Computing Environments. In Procceedings of CHI’99, 1999.
Ryall, K., Morris, R. M., Everitt, K., Forlines, C., & Shen, C. (2006). Experiences with and Observations of Direct-Touch Tabletops. In Tabletop 2006, Adelaide, Australia.
Scott, S., Grant, K., Carpendale, S., Inkpen, K., Mandryk, R., & Winograd, T. (2002). Co-located Tabletop Collaboration: Technologies and Directions. Workshop at CSCW2002. In Extended Abstracts of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)’02, p. 21.
Scott, S. D., Grant, K. D., & Mandryk, R. L. (2003). System Guidelines for Co-located, Collaborative Work on a Tabletop Display. In Proceedings of ECSCW’03, European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, September 2003, pp. Finland. Helsinki, 14–18.
Scott, S. D., Sheelagh, M., Carpendale, T., & Inkpen, K. M. (2004). Territoriality in Collaborative Tabletop Workspaces. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work Table of Contents, pp. 294–303. Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Shen, C., Everitt, K. M., & Ryall, K. (2003). UbiTable: Impromptu Face-to-Face Collaboration on Horizontal Interactive Surfaces. In Proceedings of UbiComp’03, pp. 281–288.
Shen, C., Lesh, N., Vernier, F., Forlines, C., & Frost, J. (2002). Sharing and Building Digital Group Histories. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 2002, pp. 324–333.
Shen, C., Vernier, F. D., Forlines, C., & Ringel, M. (2004). DiamondSpin: An Extensible Toolkit for Around-the-Table Interaction, In ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), pp. 167–174.
Stewart, J., Bederson, B. B., & Druin, A. (1999). Single Display Groupware: A Model for Copresent Collaboration. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) ‘99, pp. 286–293.
Sundholm, H., Artman, H., & Ramberg, R. (2004). Backdoor Creativity: Collaborative Creativity in Technology Supported Teams. In COOP 2004, pp. 99–114.
Tang, J. C. (1991). Findings from Observational Studies of Collaborative Work. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies,34,143–160.
Theureau, J. (2003). Course of Action Analysis & Course of Action Centered Design. In Erik Hollnagel (Ed.), “Handbook of Cognitive Task Design.” Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Underkoffler, J., & Ishii, H. (1999). Urp: A Luminous-Tangible Workbench for Urban Planning and Design. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) 99, pp. 386–393.
Vertegaal, R. (1999). The GAZE Groupware System: Mediating Joint Attention in Multiparty Communication and Collaboration. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: The CHI is the Limit (Pittsburgh, May 1999), CHI ’99, ACM Press New York: 294–301.
Vertegaal, R., & Ding, Y. (2002). Explaining Effects of Eye Gaze on Mediated Group Conversations: Amount or synchronization? In CSCW 2002, pp. 41–48.
Webb, N. M. (1991). Task Related Verbal Interaction and Mathematical Learning in Small Groups. Research in Mathematics Education,22,(5)366–389.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Guillaume Raymondon and Michael Ruffin who worked on this tabletop projects as well as to Nicolas Nova and the EPFL students in CSCW who conducted the experiments. This project was funded by the EPFL Fund for Innovation in Training.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Haué, JB., Dillenbourg, P. (2009). Do Fewer Laptops Make a Better Team?. In: Dillenbourg, P., Huang, J., Cherubini, M. (eds) Interactive Artifacts and Furniture Supporting Collaborative Work and Learning. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series, vol 10. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77234-9_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77234-9_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-77233-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-77234-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)