, Volume 62, Issue 4, pp 403–411 | Cite as

Embracing Collaboration and Social Perspective Taking Using Interactive Tabletops

  • Andri Ioannou
  • Vaso Constantinou
Original Paper


In a contemporary multicultural classroom in which students from diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds learn together, it becomes necessary to embrace collaboration, social perspective-taking, and understanding of the other to help students comprehend classmates’ values and perspectives. Based on the already researched affordances of interactive tabletops in education, as well as promising empirical results from their limited application in multicultural settings, the authors present a case of practical and impactful technology research in a culturally diverse classroom. The study was conducted with 44 students as part of their formal, socio-emotional education course in a public school in Cyprus. The study presents evidence of perceived collaborative learning around the tabletop, as well as gains in social perspective-taking propensity from pre- to post-test, demonstrating a promising use of interactive tabletops and related technologies in the field of education.


Technology-enhanced learning Interactive tabletops Shareable surfaces Social perspective taking Collaboration Multicultural classroom Peace education 



Authors acknowledge funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Framework Programme through the NOTRE project (H2020-TWINN-2015, Grant Agreement Number: 692058) as well as funding from project (ΥΕ/ΥΑ/ΤΑΜΕ/02.2015-2016) awarded to the Limassol municipality and other local authorities in Cyprus.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.


  1. Basheri, M., Burd, L., Munro, M., & Baghaei, N. (2013). Collaborative learning skills in multi-touch tables for UML software esign. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 4(3), 60–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. In Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 17–66). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. Scholar
  3. Bruun, A., Jensen, K. E., Kristensen, D. H., & Kjeldskov, J. (2017). Escaping the trough: Towards real-world impact of tabletop research. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 33(2), 77–93. Scholar
  4. Buisine, S., Besacier, G., Aoussat, A., & Vernier, F. (2012). How do interactive tabletop systems influence collaboration? Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 49–59. Scholar
  5. Carano, K. T., & Berson, M. J. (2007). Breaking stereotypes: Constructing geographic literacy and cultural awareness through technology. The Social Studies, 98(2), 65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29. Scholar
  7. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc..Google Scholar
  8. Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85.Google Scholar
  9. Davis, P., Horn, M., Block, F., Phillips, B., Evans, E. M., Diamond, J., & Shen, C. (2015). “Whoa! We’re going deep in the trees!”: Patterns of collaboration around an interactive information visualization exhibit. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(1), 53–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Derry, S. J., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Nagarajan, A., Chernobilsky, E., & Beitzel, B. (2006). Cognitive transfer revisited: Can we exploit new media to solve old problems on a large scale? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(2), 145–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dillenbourg, P., & Evans, M. (2011). Interactive tabletops in education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(4), 491–514. Scholar
  12. Doering, A., & Veletsianos, G. (2008). An investigation of the use of real-time, authentic geospatial data in the K-12 classroom. Journal of Geography, 106(6), 217–225. Scholar
  13. Dottin, E., & Weiner, M. (2001). Enhancing effective thinking and problem solving for preservice teacher education candidates and inservice professionals. London: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  14. Eggum, N. D., Eisenberg, N., Kao, K., Spinrad, T. L., Bolnick, R., Hofer, C., Kupfer, A. S., & Fabricius, W. V. (2011). Emotion understanding, theory of mind, and prosocial orientation: Relations over time in early childhood. Journal of Positive Psychology, 6(1), 4–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Evans, M. A., & Rick, J. (2014). Supporting learning with interactive surfaces and spaces. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 689–701). New York: Springer New York. Scholar
  16. Flannery, K. M., & Smith, R. L. (2017). The effects of age, gender, and gender role ideology on adolescents’ social perspective-taking ability and tendency in friendships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 34(5), 617–635. Scholar
  17. Gehlbach, H. (2011). A Closer Look at Social Perspective Taking. Retrieved August 2017, from
  18. Gehlbach, H. (2017). Learning to walk in another’s shoes. Phi Delta Kappan, 98(6), 8–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gehlbach, H., Brown, S. W., Ioannou, A., Boyer, M. A., Hudson, N., Niv-Solomon, A., & Janik, L. (2008). Increasing interest in social studies: Social perspective taking and self-efficacy in stimulating simulations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 894–914. Scholar
  20. Higgins, S. E., Mercier, E., Burd, E., & Hatch, A. (2011). Multi-touch tables and the relationship with collaborative classroom pedagogies: A synthetic review. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(4), 515–538. Scholar
  21. Hollan, J., & Hutchins, E. (2009). Opportunities and challenges for augmented environments: A distributed cognition perspective. Designing User Friendly Augmented Work Environments (pp. 237–259). London: Springer. Retrieved from
  22. Hughes, C., & Leekam, S. (2004). What are the links between theory of mind and social relations? Review, reflections and new directions for studies of typical and atypical development. Social Development, 13, 590–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ioannou, A., & Antoniou, C. (2016). Tabletops for peace: technology enhanced peacemaking in school contexts. Educational Technology and Society, 19(2), 164–176.Google Scholar
  24. Ioannou A., & Antoniou C. (2017). Peacemaking affordances of shareable interfaces: A provocative essay on using technology for cocial change. Proceedings of HCII 2017.Google Scholar
  25. Ioannou, A., Zaphiris, P., Loizides, F., & Vasiliou, C. (2013). Let’s talk about technology for peace: A systematic assessment of problem-based group collaboration around an interactive tabletop. Interacting with Computers, 27(2), 120–132. Scholar
  26. Ioannou, A., Brown, S. W., & Artino, A. R. (2015a). Wikis and forums for collaborative problem-based activity: a systematic comparison of learners’ interactions. The Internet and Higher Education, 24, 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ioannou, A., Loizides, F., Vasiliou, C., Zaphiris, P., & Parmaxi, A. (2015b). Tabletop support for collaborative design: an initial evaluation of IdeaSpace. Educational Media International, 52(4), 296–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jabali, E. H. (2015). The effects of perspective-taking on perceptual learning. International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences, 48, 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7–19. Scholar
  30. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 335–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. LeCroy, C. W., & Krysik, J. (2007). Understanding and interpreting effect size measures. Social Work Research, 31(4), 243–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee, V. (Ed.). (2014). Learning technologies and the body: Integration and implementation in formal and informal learning environments (Vol. 135). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Lee, J. J., & Hoadley, C. M. (2006). Ugly in a world where you can choose to be beautiful: Teaching and learning about diversity via virtual worlds. Proceedings of the 7th international conference on learning sciences, 383–389.Google Scholar
  34. Lee, J. J., & Hoadley, C. M. (2007). Leveraging identity to make learning fun: Possible selves and experiential learning in massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs). Innovate Journal of Online Education, 3(6), 5.Google Scholar
  35. Linda, R., Strong, B., Foss, P., Yager, M., Gehlbach, H., & Metcal, K. (2009). Social Perspective Taking (technical report 1259). Arlington: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.Google Scholar
  36. Marshall, P., Hornecker, E., Morris, R., Dalton, N. S., & Rogers, Y. (2008). When the fingers do the talking: A study of group participation with varying constraints to a tabletop interface. In: 2008 3rd IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal Interactive Human Computer Systems (pp. 33–40). IEEE.
  37. Nardi, B. A., & Whittaker, S. (2002). The place of face-to-face communication in distributed work. In J. P. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds.), Distributed work (pp. 83–110). London: MIT Press Cambridge.Google Scholar
  38. Piper, A. M., O’Brien, E., Morris, M. R., & Winograd, T. (2006). SIDES. In: Proceedings of the 2006 20th anniversary conference on Computer supported cooperative work - CSCW ‘06 (p. 1). New York: ACM Press.
  39. Rector-Aranda, A., & Raider-Roth, M. (2015). “I finally felt like I had power”: Student agency and voice in an online and classroom-based role-play simulation. Research in Learning Technology, 23.Google Scholar
  40. Rogers, Y., & Lindley, S. (2004). Collaborating around vertical and horizontal displays: Witch way is best. Interacting with Computers, 16, 33–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Saleh, A., Danish, J., Enyedy, N., & Lee, C. (2015). Assessing young Children’s cognition through multi-modal interviews. In: Lindwall, O., Häkkinen, P., Koschmann, T., Tchounikine, P., Ludvigsen, S. (Eds.), Exploring the material conditions of learning: The computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) conference 2015, volume 2. Gothenburg, Sweden: The International Society of the Learning Sciences. Retrieved from
  42. Soland, J., Hamilton, L. S., & Stecher, B. M. (2013). Measuring 21st-century competencies: Guidance for educators. Los Angeles: RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
  43. Stock, O., Zancanaro, M., Koren, C., Rocchi, C., Eisikovits, Z., Goren-bar, D., Tomasinin, D., & Weiss, P. T. (2008). A co-located interface for narration to support reconciliation in a conflict. In: Chi ‘08, proceedings of the SIGGHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1583–1592). New York, New York: ACM Press.
  44. Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., & Liu, X. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tomasello, M., Kruger, A. C., & Ratner, H. H. (1993). Cultural learning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16(03), 495–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Boven, L., Loewenstein, G., Dunning, D., & Nordgren, L. F. (2013). Changing places: A dual judgment model of empathy gaps in emotional perspective taking. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 117–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Veletsianos, G., & Eliadou, A. (2009). Conceptualizing the use of technology to foster peace via adventure learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(2), 63–70. Scholar
  48. Winner, M. G., & Crooke, P. J. (2009). Social thinking: A training paradigm for professionals and treatment approach for individuals with social learning/social pragmatic challenges. Perspectives on Language Learning and Education, 16(2), 62–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yeo, S., Taylor, P., & Kulski, M. (2006). Internationalising a learning environment instru-ment for evaluating transnational online university courses. Learning Environments Research, 9, 179–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zancanaro, M., Stock, O., Eisikovits, Z., Koren, C., & Weiss, P. L. (2012). Co-narrating a conflict. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 19(3), 1–30. Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications & Technology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Multimedia and Graphic ArtsCyprus University of TechnologyLemesosCyprus

Personalised recommendations