skip to main content
research-article

Blended interaction spaces for distributed team collaboration

Published:02 May 2011Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

In recent years there has been an introduction of sophisticated new video conferencing technologies (e.g., HP Halo, Cisco Telepresence) that have led to enhancements in the collaborative user experience over traditional video conferencing technologies. Traditional video conferencing set-ups often distort the shared spatial properties of action and communication due to screen and camera orientation disparities and other asymmetries. These distortions affect access to the common resources used to mutually organize action and communication. By contrast, new systems, such as Halo, are physically configured to reduce these asymmetries and orientation disparities, thereby minimizing these spatial distortions. By creating appropriate shared spatial geometries, the distributed spaces become “blended” where the spatial geometries of the local space continue coherently across the distributed boundary into the remote site, providing the illusion of a single unified space. Drawing on theories of embodied action and workplace design we discuss the importance of this geometric “blending” of space for distributed collaboration and how this is achieved in systems such as Halo. We then extend these arguments to explore the concept of Blended Interaction Spaces: blended spaces in which interactive groupware is incorporated in ways spatially consistent with the physical geometries of the video-mediated set-up. We illustrate this discussion through a system called BISi that introduces interactive horizontal and vertical multipoint surfaces into a blended video-mediated collaboration space. In presenting this system, we highlight some of the particular challenges of creating these systems arising from the spatial consequences of different interaction mechanisms (e.g., direct touch or remote control) and how they affect movement and spatial configuration of people in these spaces.

References

  1. Becker, F. and Steele, F. 1995. Workplace by Design: Mapping the High Performance Workscape. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Bly, S. 1988. A use of drawing surfaces in different collaborative settings. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'88). 250--256. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Bly, S. and Minneman, S. 1990. Commune: A shared drawing surface. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Office Information Systems. 184--192. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Broughton, B., Paay, J., Kjeldskov, J., O'Hara, K., Li, J., Phillips, M., and Rittenbruch, M. 2009. Being here: Designing for distributed hands-on collaboration in blended interaction spaces. In Proceedings of the Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction (OzCHI'09). 73--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Buxton, W., Sellen, A., and Sheasby, M. 1997. Interfaces for multiparty videoconferencing. In Video Mediated Communication, K. Finn et al. Eds., Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 385--400. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Buxton, W. 2009. Mediaspace—Meaningspace—Meetingspace. In Media Space: 20+ Years of Mediated Life, S. Harrison Ed., Springer, London, 217--231.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Covi, L. M., Olson, J. S., and Rocco, E. 1998. A room of your own: What do we learn about support of teamwork from assessing teams in dedicated project rooms? In Cooperative Buildings, N. Streitz et al. Eds., Springer, Amsterdam, 53--65. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Dourish, P. 2001. Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Dourish, P. 2006. Re-Space-ing place: Place and space ten years on. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'06). 299--308. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Dourish, P., Adler, A., Bellotti, V., and Henderson, A. 1996. Your place or mine? Learning from long-term use of audio-video communication. Comput.-Support. Coop. Work 5, 1, 33--62. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Duffy, F. 1997. The New Office, Conran Octopus, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Finn, K., Sellen, A., and Wilbur, S. 1997. Video-Mediated Communication. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Fitzpatrick, G. 2003. The Locales Framework: Understanding and Designing for Wicked Problems. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Gaver, W., Sellen, A., Heath, C., and Luff, P. 1993. One is not enough: Multiple views in a media space. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (INTERCHI'93). 335--341. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Goldstein, E. B. 1987. Spatial layout, orientation relative to the observer, and perceived projection in pictures viewed at an angle. J. Experiment. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 13, 2, 256--266.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Gorzynski, M., Derocher, M., and Slayden Mitchell, A. 2009. The Halo B2B studio. In Media Space 20+ Years of Mediated Life, S. Harrison Ed., Springer, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Hall, E. T. 1966. The Hidden Dimension. Doubleday, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Harper, R. H. R. 1998. Inside the IMF: An Ethnography of Documents, Technology and Organizational Action. Academic Press, London. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Harrison, S. 2009. Media Space: 20+ Years of Mediated Life. Springer, London. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Harrison, S. and Dourish, P. 1996. Re-Place-ing space: The roles of place and space in collaborative systems. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'96). ACM Press, New York, 67--76. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Healey, P. H. and Battersby, S. A. 2009. The interactional geometry of a three-way conversation. Inroceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. 785--790.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Heath, C. and Luff, P. 1991. Disembodied conduct: Communication through video in a multi-media environment. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '91). 99--103. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Heath, C. and Luff, P. 1992. Media space and communicative asymmetries: Preliminary observations of video-mediated interaction. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 7, 315--346. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Heath, C. and Luff, P. 2000. Technology in Action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Hirsh, S., Sellen, A., and Brokopp, N. 2005. Why HP people do and don't use videoconferencing systems. HP Tech. rep. HPL-2004-140(R.1).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Hornecker, E. and Buur, J. 2006. Getting a grip on tangible interaction: A framework on physical space and social interaction. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'06). ACM Press, New York, 437--446. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Hornecker, E., Marshall, P., Dalton, N. S., and Rogers, Y. 2008. Collaboration and interference: Awareness with mice or touch input. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'08). ACM Press, New York, 167--176. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Huang, E. M., Mynatt, E. D., and Trimble, J. P. 2006. Displays in the wild: Understanding the dynamics and evolution of a display ecology. In Proceedings of the Pervasive'06 Conference. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Hutchins, E. 1995. Cognition in the Wild. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Ishii, H. and Kobayashi, M. 1992. ClearBoard: A seamless medium for shared drawing and conversation with eye contact. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'92). ACM Press, New York, 525--532. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Jiang, H., Wigdor, D., Forlines, C., and Shen, C. 2008. System design for the WeSpace: Linking personal devices to a table-centered multi-user, multi-surface environment. In Proceedings of the Tabletop'08 Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Jiang, L., Krumm-Heller, A., and Mueller-Tomfelde, C. 2007. The virtual terminal a cross platform and high performance remote desktop sharing program. In Proceedings of the 4th CSIRO ICT Centre Conference'07.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Johanson, B., Fox, A., and Winograd, T. 2002. The Stanford iroom and interactive workspaces project. In Proceedings of the IEEE Pervasive Computing Conference. 67--75.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Kendon, A. 1990. Spatial organization in social encounters: The F-formation system. In Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters, A. Kendon Ed., Cambridge University Press, 209--237.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Kirsh, D. 1995. The intelligent use of space. Artif. Intell. 73, 1-2, 31--68. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Kruger, R., Carpendale, S., Scott, S. D., and Greenberg, S. 2003. How people use orientation on tables: Comprehension, coordination and communication. In Proceedings of the GROUP'03 Conference. ACM Press, New York, 369--378. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Laing, A., Duffy, F., Jaunzens, D., and Willis, S. 1998. New Environments for Working: The Re-Design of Offices and Environmental Systems for New Ways of Working. Construction Research Communications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Larkin, J. H. 1989. Display-Based problem solving. In Complex Information Processing: The Impact of Herbert A. Simon, D. Klahr and K. Kotovsky, Eds., Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Mantei, M., Baecker, R., Sellen, A., Buxton, W., Milligan, T., and Wellman, B. 1991. Experiences in the use of a media space. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Software (CHI'91). 203--208. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Merleau-Ponty, M 1962. Phenomenology of Perception. Routledge, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Merleau-Ponty, M. 1968. The intertwining—The chiasm. In The Visible and the Invisible. Northwestern University Press, Chicago, Illinios, ILL.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Moran, T., Saund, E., Van Melle, W., Gujar A., Fishkin, K., and Harrison, B. 1999. Design and technology for Collaborage: Collaborative collages of information on physical walls. In Proceedings of the 12th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 197--206. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Nacenta, M. A., Gutwin, C., Aliakseyeu, D., and Subramanian, S. 2009. There and back again: Cross-Display object movement in multi-display environments. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 24, 1, 170--229.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Nacenta, M. A., Pinelle, D., Stuckel, D., and Gutwin, C. 2007. the effects of interaction technique on coordination in tabletop groupware. In Proceedings of the Graphics Interface Conference (GI'07). ACM Press, New York, 191--198. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Nguyen, D. and Canny, J. 2005. MultiView: Spatially faithful group video conferencing. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'05). ACM Press, New York, 799--808. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Nguyen, D. and Canny, J. 2009. More than face-to-face: Empathy effects of video framing. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'09). ACM Press, New York, 423--432. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Noll, A. 1992. Anatomy of a failure: Picturephone revisited. Telecomm. Policy 16, 307--316.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Norman, D. 1998. The Invisible Computer: Why Good Products Can Fail, The Personal Computer Is So Complex, and Information Appliances Are the Solution. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. O'Connaill, B., Whittaker, S., and Wilbur, S. 1993. Conversations over video conferences: An evaluation of video mediated interaction. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 8, 389--428. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Olson, G. M. and Olson, J. S. 2000. Distance matters. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 15, 2-3, 139--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Olson, J. S., Olson, G. M., and Meader, D. 1997. Face-to-Face group work compared to remote group work with and without video. In Video Mediated Communication, K. Finn et al. Eds., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Okada, K., Maeda, F., Ichikawaa, Y., and Matsushita, Y. 1994. Multiparty videoconferencing at virtual social distance: MAJIC design. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'94). 385--393. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Ozyurek, A. 2000. The in?uence of addressee location on spatial language and representational gestures of direction. In Language and Gesture, D. McNeil Ed., Cambridge University Press, 64--83.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Ozyurek, A. 2002. Do speakers design their co-speech gestures for their addresees? The effects of addressee location on representational gestures. J. Memory Lang. 46, 688--704.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Phillips, M. 2008. Livespaces technical overview. Tech. rep. DSTO-TR-2188, Defence Science and Technology Organisation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Robertson, T. 1997. Cooperative work and lived cognition: A taxonomy of embodied actions. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW'97). 205--220. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Rogers, Y. and Bellotti, V. 1997. From Web press to Web pressure: Multimedia representations and multimedia publishing. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'97). ACM Press, New York, 279--286. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Rogers, Y. and Lindley, S. 2004. Collaborating around vertical and horizontal displays: Which way is best? Interact. Comput.16, 1133--1152.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Rogers, Y., Lim, Y.-K., Hazlewood, W., and Marshall, P. 2009. Equal opportunities: Do shareable interfaces promote more group participation than single user displays? Hum.-Comput. Interact. 24, 2, 79--116.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Russell, D. and Sue, A. 2003. Large interactive public displays: Use patterns, support patterns, community patterns. In Public and Situated Displays: Social and Interactional Aspects of Shared Display Technologies, K. O'Hara et al. Eds., Kluwer Academic Publishers, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Schmidt, K. 2009. Divided by a common acronym: On the fragmentation of CSCW. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW'09).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  62. Sellen, A. J. 1992. Speech patterns in video mediated conversations. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'92). ACM Press, New York, 49--59. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Sellen, A. J. 1995. Remote conversations: The effects of mediating talk with technology. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 10, 4, 401--444. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  64. Sellen, A. J., Buxton, W., and Arnott, J. 1992. Using spatial cues to improve videoconferencing. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'92). 651--652. (Videotape in CHI'92 Video Proceedings.) Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Sellen, A. J. and Harper, R. H. R. 1997. Video in support of organisational talk. In Video-Mediated Communication, K. Finn et al. Eds., Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 225--243. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. Sellen A. J. and Harper, R. H. R. 2000. The Myth of the Paperless Office. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. Short, J., Williams, E., and Christie, B. 1976. The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. Wiley, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Sommer, R. 1969. Personal Space. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Sommer, R. and Ross, H. 1958. Social interaction on a geriatric ward. Int. J. Social Psychol. 4, 123--133.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  70. Spinelli, G. 2003. Socially distributed cognition: Computational space and collaborative artefacts for the workspace. Ph.D. thesis, Brunel University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Spinelli, G. and O'Hara, K. 2001. Observing high performance team work: How space and information artefacts structure team problem solving, communication and fluid movement from individual to collaborative work. Tech. rep., Appliance Studio, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Spinelli, G., Perry, M., and O'Hara, K. 2005. Understanding complex cognitive systems: The role of space in the organisation of collaborative work. Cogn. Technol. Work 7, 2, 111--118.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  73. Steelcase360. 2007. Working in four-part harmony. http://content.ll-0.com/360steelcase/June2007-ReadingLayout.pdf?i=060607172333.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Steinzor, R., B. 1950. The spatial factor in face to face discussion groups. J. Abnorm. Social Psychol. 45, 552--555.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  75. Streitz, N. A., Geissler, J., Holmer, T., Konomi, S., Müller-Tomfelde, C., Reischl, W., Rexroth, P., Seitz, P., and Steinmetz, R. 1999. i-LAND: An interactive landscape for creativity and innovation. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'99). ACM Press, New York, 120--127. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  76. Streitz, N. A., Rexroth, P., and Holmer, T. 1997. Does roomware matter? Investigating the role of personal and public information devices and their combination in meeting room collaboration. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW'97). 297--312. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  77. Tang, J. and Isaacs, E. 1993. Why do users like video? Studies of multimedia-supported collaboration. Comput. Support. Coop. Work 1, 3, 163--196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  78. Trimble, J., Wales, R., and Gossweiler, R. 2003. NASA's MERBoard. In Public and Situated Displays: Social and Interactional Aspects of Shared Display Technologies, K. O'Hara et al. Eds., Kluwer Academic Publishers, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Whittaker, S. 2003. Things to talk about when talking about things. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 18, 149--170. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  80. Whittaker, S. and Schwartz, H. 1995. Back to the future: Pen and paper technology supports complex group coordination. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'95). ACM Press, New York, 495--502. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  81. Weinstein, I. M. 2005. HP Halo -- Performance assessment: Analysis and opinions on capabilities, features, usability, performance, and business model. Res. rep., Wainhouse.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. Wigor, D., Jiang, H., Forlines, C., Borkin, M., and Shen, C. 2009. WeSpace: The design development and deployment of a walk-up and share multi-surface visual collaboration system. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'09). ACM Press, New York, 1237--1246. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  83. Yamashita, N., Hirata, K., Aoyagi, S., Kuzuoka, H., and Yasunori Harada, Y. 2008. Impact of seating positions on group video communication. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'08). 177--186. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  84. Zhang, J. and Norman, D. A. 1994. Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cogn. Sci. 18, 87--122.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Blended interaction spaces for distributed team collaboration

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
        ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction  Volume 18, Issue 1
        April 2011
        124 pages
        ISSN:1073-0516
        EISSN:1557-7325
        DOI:10.1145/1959022
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2011 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 2 May 2011
        • Accepted: 1 October 2010
        • Revised: 1 September 2010
        • Received: 1 December 2009
        Published in tochi Volume 18, Issue 1

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader