Gilly Leshed
Dan Cosley
ABSTRACT
While most collaboration technologies are concerned with supporting particular tasks such as workflows or meetings, many work groups do not have the teamwork skills essential to effective collaboration. One way to improve teamwork is to provide dynamic feedback generated by automated analyses of behavior, such as language use. Such feedback can lead members to reflect on and subsequently improve their collaborative behavior, but might also distract from the task at hand. We have experimented with GroupMeter - a chat-based system that presents visual feedback on team members' language use. Feedback on proportion of agreement words and overall word count was presented using two different designs. When receiving feedback, teams in our study expressed more agreement in their conversations and reported greater focus on language use as compared to when not receiving feedback. This suggests that automated, real-time linguistic feedback can elicit behavioral changes, offering opportunities for future research.
- Bales, R.F.,&Cohen, S.P. (1979). SYMLOG: A system for the multiple level observation of groups. NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
- Biehl, J.T., Baker, W.T., Bailey, B.P., Tan, D.S., Inkpen, K.M.,&Czerwinski, M. (2008). Impromptu: a new interaction framework for supporting collaboration in multiple display environments and its field evaluation for co-located software development. Proc. of CHI'08, 939--948. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bergstrom, T.,&Karahalios, K. (2007). Seeing More: Visualizing Audio Cues. Proc. of INTERACT'07, 29--42. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bosworth, K. (1994). Developing collaborative skills in college students. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 59, 25--31.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bransford, J. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington: Nat'l Academy Press.Google Scholar
- Cadiz, J.J., Venolia, G., Jancke, G.,&Gupta, A. (2002). Designing and deploying an information awareness interface. Proc. of CSCW'02, 314--323. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cassell, J.,&Tversky, D. (2005). The language of online intercultural community formation. JCMC, 10(2).Google Scholar
- Cho, K., Chung, T.R., King, W.R.,&Schunn, C.D. (2008). Peer-based computer-supported knowledge refinement: An empirical investigation. Comm. of the ACM, 51(3), 83--88. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chung, C.K.,&Pennebaker, J.W. (2007). The psychological function of function words. In K. Fiedler (Ed.), Social communication: Frontiers of social psychology (343--359). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- Cummings J., Finholt, T., Foster, I.,&Kesselman, C. (2008). Beyond being there: A blueprint for advancing the design, development, and evaluation of virtual organizations. Building Effective Virtual Organizations workshop.Google Scholar
- DiMicco, J.M., Pandolfo, A.,&Bender, W. (2004). Influencing group participation with a shared display. Proc. of CSCW'04, 614--623. Google ScholarDigital Library
- DiMicco, J.M, Hollenbach, K.J., Pandolfo, A.,&Bender, W. (2007). The impact of increased awareness while face-to-face. Human-Computer Interaction, 22(1), 47--96. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Duval, S.,&Wicklund, R.A. (1972). A theory of objective self-awareness. New York Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Erickson, T.,&Kellogg, W.A. (2000). Social translucence: An approach to designing systems that support social processes. ACM ToCHI, 7(1), 59--83. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Erickson, T., Smith, D.N., Kellogg, W.A., Laff, M., Richards, J.T.,&Bradner, E. (1999). Socially translucent systems: Social proxies, persistent conversation, and the design of "babble. Proc. of CHI'99, 72--79. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117--140.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Foltz, P.W.,&Martin, M.J. (2004). Automated team discourse annotation and performance prediction using LSA. Proceedings of HLT/NAACL'04, 97--100. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gaver, W.W., Beaver, J.,&Benford, S. (2003). Ambiguity as a resource for design. Proc. of CHI'03, 233--240. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gorman, J.C., Foltz, P.W., Kiekel, P.A., Martin, M.J.,&Cooke, N.J. (2003). Evaluation of latent semantic analysis-based measures of team communications content. Proc. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 424--428.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hackman, J.R. (1990). Groups that work (and those that don't): Creating conditions for effective teamwork. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Janssen, J., Erkens, G.,&Kanselaar, G. (2007). Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1105--1125. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G.,&Jaspers, J. (2007). Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning? Computers&Education, 49, 1037--1065. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Joshi, M.,&Roséé, C.P. (2007). Using transactivity in conversation summarization in educational dialog. Proc. SLaTE'07, 53--56.Google Scholar
- Karahalios, K.G.,&Bergstrom, T.(2006).Visualizing audio in group table conversation. Proc. TableTop'06, 131--134. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kayan, S., Fussell, S.R.,&Setlock, L.D. (2006). Cultural differences in the use of instant messaging in Asia and North America. Proc. CSCW'06, 525--528. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kulyk, O., Wang, J.,&Terken, J. (2006). Real-time feedback on nonverbal behaviour to enhance social dynamics in small group meetings. Proc. MLMI'05, 150--161. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leshed, G., Hancock, J.T., Cosley, D., McLeod, P.L.,&Gay, G. (2007). Feedback for guiding reflection on teamwork practices. Proc. Group'07, 217--220. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Levelt, W.J.M. (1989). Speaking: from intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Losada, M., Sanchez, P.,&Noble, E.E. (1990). Collaborative technology and group process feedback: Their impact on interactive sequences in meetings. Proc. CSCW'90, 53--64. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Maglio, P.P.,&Campbell, C.S. (2000). Tradeoffs in displaying peripheral information. Proc. CHI'00, 241--248. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Matthews, T. (2006). Designing and evaluating glanceable peripheral displays. Proc. DIS'06, 343--345. Google ScholarDigital Library
- McCarthy, J., Wright, P., Wallace, J.,&Dearden, A. (2006). The experience of enchantment in human-computer interaction. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 10(6), 369--378. Google ScholarDigital Library
- McGrath, J.E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- McLeod, P.L., Liker, J.K.,&Lobel, S.A. (1992). Process feedback in task groups: An application of goal setting. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 28, 15--41.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Oakley, B., Felder, R.M., Brent, R.,&Elhajj, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of Student Centered Learning, 2(1), 9--34.Google Scholar
- Olson, G.,&Olson, J. (2000). Distance Matters. Human-Computer Interaction, 15(2-3), 107--137. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pennebaker, J.W. (2002). What our words can say about us: Toward a broader language psychology. Psychological Science Agenda, 15, 8--9.Google Scholar
- Pennebaker, J.W., Francis, M.E.,&Booth, R.J. (2001). Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count LIWC 2001. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Pennebaker, J.W.,&King, L.A. (1999). Linguistic styles: Language use as an individual difference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1296--1312.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Plaue, C.M., Miller, T.,&Stasko, J.T. (2004). Is a picture worth a thousand words? An evaluation of information awareness displays. Proc. Graphics Interface'04, 117--126. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Roberts, T.S. (2005). Computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education. Hershey, PA: Idea Group.Google Scholar
- Rummel, N.,&Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting collaborative problem solving in computer-mediated settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 201--241.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: computer support for collaborative knowledge building. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tee, K., Greenberg, S.,&Gutwin, C. (2006). Providing artifact awareness to a distributed group through screen sharing. Proc. CSCW'06, 99--108. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tufte, E.R., (1983). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Turner, B.,&Schober, M.F. (2007).Feedback on collaborative skills in remote studio design. Proc. HICSS'07, 44--53. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Viégas, F.B.,&Donath, J.S. (1999). Chat circles. Proc. CHI'99, 9--16. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Weng, C.&Gennari, J.H. (2004). Asynchronous collaborative writing through annotations. Proc.CSCW'04, 578--581. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Visualizing real-time language-based feedback on teamwork behavior in computer-mediated groups
Recommendations
Feedback for guiding reflection on teamwork practices
GROUP '07: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group WorkEffective communication in project teams is important, but not often taught. We explore how feedback might improve teamwork in a controlled experiment where groups interact through chat rooms. Collaborators who receive high feedback ratings use ...
Improving teamwork using real-time language feedback
CHI '13: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsWe develop and evaluate a real-time language feedback system that monitors the communication patterns among students in a discussion group and provides real-time instructions to shape the way the group works together. As an initial step, we determine ...
Understanding coordination in computer-mediated versus face-to-face groups
Groups performed intellective and judgmental tasks in face-to-face (FTF) or computer-mediated communication (CMC) settings after coordination training or no training to determine the impact of CMC, training, and task type on group performance and ...
Comments