Investigating the Role of a Large, Shared Display in Multi-Display Environments

  • James R. Wallace
  • Stacey D. Scott
  • Eugene Lai
  • Deon Jajalla
Article

Abstract

We conducted an empirical study to investigate the use of personal and shared displays during group work. The collaborative environments under study consisted of personal workspaces, in the form of laptops, and a shared virtual workspace displayed on a nearby wall. Our study compared the use of the large shared display under two different interface content conditions; a status display that provided an overview of the group’s current task performance, and a replicated view of the shared workspace that allowed task work to occur on the shared display. The study results suggest that while participants used their personal displays primarily to perform the task, the shared display facilitated several key teamwork mechanisms. In particular, the provided status display best facilitated monitoring of group progress, whereas the replicated content display best facilitated conversational grounding. Regardless of the shared display content, having a shared, physical reference point also appeared to support synchronization of the group activity via body language and gaze.

Key words

multi-display environments evaluation design display configuration input redirection personalized views content replication job shop scheduling task 

References

  1. Argyle, M., & Cook, M. (1976). Gaze and mutual gaze. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, K., Greenberg, S., & Gutwin, C. (2002). Empirical development of a heuristic evaluation methodology for shared workspace groupware. Proceedings of the ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), New Orleans, Louisiana, USA: pp. 96–105.Google Scholar
  3. Berry, L., Bartram, L., & Booth, K. S. (2005). Role-based control of shared application views. Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST 2004), Seattle, WA, USA: ACM, pp. 23–32.Google Scholar
  4. Biehl, J. T., & Bailey, B. P. (2004). ARIS: An interface for application relocation in an interactive space. Proceedings of Graphics Interface (GI 2004), London, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Human-Computer Communications Society, pp. 107–116.Google Scholar
  5. Biehl, J. T., Czerwinski, M., Smith, G., & Robertson, G. G. (2007). FASTDash: A visual dashboard for fostering awareness in software teams. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), San Jose, California, USA: ACM, pp. 1313–1322.Google Scholar
  6. Birnholtz, J. P., Grossman, T., Mak, C., & Balakrishnan, R. (2007). An exploratory study of input configuration and group process in a negotiation task using a large display. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), San Jose, California, USA: ACM, pp. 91–100.Google Scholar
  7. Boyle, E. A., Anderson, A. H., & Newlands, A. (1994). The effects of visibility on dialogue and performance in a cooperative problem solving task. Language and Speech, 37(1), 1–20.Google Scholar
  8. Carroll, J. M., Neale, D. C., Isenhour, P. L., Rosson, M. B., & McCrickard, D. S. (2003). Notification and awareness: synchronizing task-oriented collaborative activity. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 58(5), 605–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Psychological Association: Washington.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Collins, A., Apted, T., & Kay, J. (2007). Tabletop file system access: Associative and hierarchical approaches. Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal Interactive Human-Computer Systems (TABLETOP 2007), Newport, RI, USA: IEEE, pp. 113–120.Google Scholar
  11. Cook, M., & Lalljee, M. G. (2009). Verbal substitutes for visual signals in interaction. Semiotica, 6(3), 212–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DeSanctis, G., & Gallupe, R. B. (1987). A foundation for the study of group decision support systems. Management Science, 33(5), 589–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. DiMicco, J. M., Pandolfo, A., & Bender, W. (2004). Influencing group participation with a shared display. ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Chicago, Illinois, USA: ACM, pp. 614–623.Google Scholar
  14. Elwart-Keys, M., Halonen, D., Horton, M., Kass, R., & Scott, P. (1990). User interface requirements for face to face groupware. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), Seattle, Washington, United States: ACM, pp. 295–301.Google Scholar
  15. Fjermestad, J., & Hiltz, S. R. (1997). Experimental studies of group decision support systems: An assessment of variables studied and methodology. Proceedings of the International Conference on System Sciences, Wailea, HI, USA: IEEE Computer Society, pp. 45–65.Google Scholar
  16. Forlines, C., Shen, C., Wigdor, D., & Balakrishnan, R. (2006). Exploring the effects of group size and display configuration on visual search. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Banff, Alberta, Canada: ACM Press, pp. 11–20.Google Scholar
  17. Fussell, S. R., Setlock, L. D., & Parker, E. M. (2003). Where do helpers look?: Gaze targets during collaborative physical tasks. In Extended Abstracts of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA), Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA: ACM Press, pp. 768–769.Google Scholar
  18. Gergle, D. R. (2006). The value of shared visual information for task-oriented collaboration. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University.Google Scholar
  19. Gergle, D., Kraut, R. E., & Fussell, S. R. (2006). The impact of delayed visual feedback on collaborative performance. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI): ACM Press, pp. 1303–1312.Google Scholar
  20. Greenberg, S. (1991). Personalizable groupware: Accommodating individual roles and group differences. Proceedings of the ECSCW ‘91 European Conference of Computer Supported Cooperative Work Amsterdam, NL: Kluwer Academic Press, pp. 17–32.Google Scholar
  21. Greenberg, S., & Rounding, M. (2001). The notification collage: Posting information to public and personal displays. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), Seattle, Washington, United States: ACM Press, pp. 514–521.Google Scholar
  22. Greenberg, S., Boyle, M., & Laberge, J. (1999). PDAs and shared public displays: making personal information public, and public information personal. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 3(1), 54–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Grudin, J. (2001). Partitioning digital worlds: Focal and peripheral awareness in multiple monitor use. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), Seattle, Washington, United States: ACM Press, pp. 458–465.Google Scholar
  24. Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (1998). Design for individuals, design for groups: Tradeoffs between power and workspace awareness. Proceedings of the 1998 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Seattle, Washington, United States: ACM, pp. 207–216.Google Scholar
  25. Gutwin, C., Greenberg, S., & Roseman, M. (1996). Workspace awareness in real-time distributed groupware: framework, widgets, and evaluation. In A. Sasse, J. Cunningham, & R. L. Winder (Eds.), Proceedings of HCI on people and computers XI (pp. 281–298). London: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Hackman, J. R. (1969). Toward understanding the role of tasks in behavioral research. Acta Psychologica, 31, 97–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hailpern, J., Hinterbichler, E., Leppert, C., Cook, D., & Bailey, B. P. (2007). TEAM STORM: demonstrating an interaction model for working with multiple ideas during creative group work. Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Creativity & Cognition (C&C ‘07), Washington, DC, USA: ACM Press, pp. 193–202.Google Scholar
  28. Hart, S. G., & Stateland, L. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research. Human Mental Workload, 139–183.Google Scholar
  29. Hawkey, K., Kellar, M., Reilley, D., Whalen, T., & Inkpen, K. M. (2005). The proximity factor: Impact of distance on co-located collaboration. Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP 2005), Sanibel Island, Florida, USA: ACM Press, pp. 31–40.Google Scholar
  30. Huang, E., Mynatt, E., & Trimble, J. (2006). Displays in the wild: Understanding the dynamics and evolution of a display ecology. In: Lecture notes in computer science: Pervasive computing (pp. 321–336). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Hutchins, E. (1990). The technology of team navigation. In J. Galegher, R. E. Kraut, & C. Egido (Eds.), Intellectual teamwork: social and technological foundations of cooperative work (pp. 191–220). Hillsdale: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  32. Ishii, H., & Kobayashi, M. (1992). ClearBoard: A seamless medium for shared drawing and conversation with eye contact. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Monterey, California, United States: ACM Press, pp. 525–532.Google Scholar
  33. Johanson, B., Hutchins, G., Winograd, T., & Stone, M. (2002). PointRight: Experience with flexible input redirection in interactive workspaces. Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST 2002), Paris, France: ACM, pp. 227–234.Google Scholar
  34. Kendon, A. (1990). Conducting interaction: Patterns of behavior in focused encounters. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Lanir, J., Booth, K. S., & Tang, A. (2008). MultiPresenter: A presentation system for (very) large display surfaces. Proceedings of the 16th ACM international conference on Multimedia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: ACM, pp. 519–528.Google Scholar
  36. McGrath, J. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  37. McKay, P. (2009). Design of collaborative systems for modern cockpits. Waterloo: University of Waterloo.Google Scholar
  38. Moore, G. E. (1965). Cramming more components onto integrated circuits. Electronics, 38(8).Google Scholar
  39. Moore, G. (2005). Excerpts from a conversation with Gordon Moore: Moore’s Law. Video Transcript. Intel Corporation. ftp://download.intel.com/museum/Moores_Law/Video-transcripts/Excepts_A_Conversation_with_Gordon_Moore.pdf. Retrieved Oct 29th, 2010.
  40. Morris, M. R., Paepcke, A., Winograd, T., & Stamberger, J. (2006). TeamTag: Exploring centralized versus replicated controls for co-located tabletop groupware. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montréal, Québec, Canada: ACM, pp. 1273–1282.Google Scholar
  41. Myers, B. A. (2000). The pebbles project: Using PCs and hand-held computers together. Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA), The Hague, The Netherlands: ACM, pp. 14–15.Google Scholar
  42. Nacenta, M. A., Aliakseyeu, D., Subramanian, S., & Gutwin, C. (2005). A comparison of techniques for multi-display reaching. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), Portland, Oregon, USA: ACM, pp. 371–380.Google Scholar
  43. Nunamaker, J. F., Briggs, R. O., Mittleman, D. D., Vogel, D. R., & Balthazard, P. A. (1996). Lessons from a dozen years of group support systems research: a discussion of lab and field findings. Journal of Management Information Systems Special issue: Information technology and its organizational impact, 13(3), 163–207.Google Scholar
  44. Pinelle, D., Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (2003). Task analysis for groupware usability evaluation: Modeling shared-workspace tasks with the mechanics of collaboration. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 10(4), 281–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Plaue, C., & Stasko, J. (2009). Presence & plancement: Exploring the benefits of multiple shared displays on an interactive sensemaking task. Proceedings of the ACM 2009 International Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP ‘09), Sanibel Island, FL, USA: ACM Press, pp. 179–188.Google Scholar
  46. Plaue, C., Stasko, J., & Baloga, M. (2009). The conference room as a toolbox: Technological and social routines in corporate meeting spaces. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Communities and Technologies (C&T ‘09).Google Scholar
  47. Ryall, K., Forlines, C., Shen, C., & Morris, M. R. (2004). Exploring the effects of group size and table size on interactions with tabletop shared-display groupware. Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Chicago, Illinois, USA: ACM, pp. 284–293.Google Scholar
  48. Scott, S. D., Grant, K. D., & Mandryk, R. L. (2003). System Guidelines for Co-located, Collaborative Work on a Tabletop Display. European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW), 1418 September 2003, Helsinki, Finland: Springer, pp. 159–178.Google Scholar
  49. Seifried, T., Haller, M., Scott, S. D., Perteneder, F., Rendl, C., Sakamoto, D., et al. (2009). CRISTAL: a collaborative home media and device controller based on a multi-touch display. Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces (TABLETOP 2009), Banff, Alberta, Canada: ACM, pp. 33–40.Google Scholar
  50. Shen, C., Everitt, K. M., & Ryall, K. (2003). UbiTable: Impromptu face-to-face collaboration on horizontal interactive surfaces. Proceedings of UbiComp’03: 5th Int’l Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, October 12–15, 2003, Seattle, WA: pp. 281–288.Google Scholar
  51. Shoemaker, G. B. D., & Inkpen, K. M. (2001). Single display privacyware: augmenting public displays with private information. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), Seattle, Washington, United States: ACM, pp. 522–529.Google Scholar
  52. Sommer, R. (1969). Personal space: The behavior basis of design. Cliff: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  53. Stewart, J. E. (1999). Single display groupware: a model for co-present collaboration. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States: ACM, pp. 286–293.Google Scholar
  54. Su, R. E., & Bailey, B. P. (2005). Put them where? Towards guidelines for positioning large displays in interactive workspaces. In M. F. Costabile & F. Paternò (Eds.), Human-computer interaction—INTERACT 2005 (pp. 337–349). Heidelberg: Springer Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sugimoto, M., Hosoi, K., & Hashizume, H. (2004). Caretta: a system for supporting face-to-face collaboration by integrating personal and shared spaces. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 04), Vienna, Austria: ACM, pp. 41–48.Google Scholar
  56. Tan, D. S., Gergle, D., & Czerwinski, M. (2005). A job-shop scheduling task for evaluating coordination during computer supported collaboration. Redmond: Microsoft Research.Google Scholar
  57. Tan, D. S., Gergle, D., Mandryk, R., Inkpen, K., Kellar, M., Hawkey, K., et al. (2008). Using job-shop scheduling tasks for evaluating collocated collaboration. Personal Ubiquitous Computing, 12(3), 255–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wallace, J. R., & Scott, S. D. (2008). Contextual design considerations for co-located, collaborative tables. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Tabletops and Interactive Surfaces (TABLETOP 2008), 13 Oct. 2008, Amsterdam, Netherlands: IEEE, pp. 57–64.Google Scholar
  59. Wallace, J., Ziola, R., Ha, V., & Inkpen, K. (2006). Swordfish: user tailored workspaces in multi-display environments. Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA), Montréal, Québec, Canada: ACM, pp. 1487–1492.Google Scholar
  60. Wallace, J. R., Scott, S. D., Stutz, T., Enns, T., & Inkpen, K. (2009). Investigating teamwork and taskwork in single- and multi-display groupware systems. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 18(8), 569–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wigdor, D., Jiang, H., Forlines, C., Borkin, M., & Shen, C. (2009). WeSpace: The design development and deployment of a walk-up and share multi-surface visual collaboration system. Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), Boston, MA, USA: ACM, pp. 1237–1246.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • James R. Wallace
    • 1
  • Stacey D. Scott
    • 1
  • Eugene Lai
    • 1
  • Deon Jajalla
    • 1
  1. 1.Systems Design EngineeringUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations