Kathy Ryall
Chia Shen
Meredith Ringel Morris
ABSTRACT
Interactive tabletops have been previously proposed and studied in the domain of co-located group applications. However, little fundamental research has been done to explore the issue of size. In this paper we identify a number of size considerations for tabletop design, and present an experiment to explore some of these issues, in particular the effects of group size and table size on the speed at which the task was performed, the distribution of work among group members, issues of shared resources, and user preference for table size. Our findings shed light on (1) how work strategies are affected by group size, (2) how social interaction varies with respect to table size, and (3) how the speed of task performance is influenced by group size but not by table size. In addition, our experiments revealed that for larger groups, designers might need to add additional vertical displays for shared information. This finding opens the door for extending single-display groupware to shared-display groupware settings that involve multiple, shared displays.
- Bly, S.A., A Use of Drawing Surfaces in Different Collaborative Settings. Proc. Of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 1988, 250--256. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Bowman, D., and Hodges, L. An Evaluation of Techniques for Grabbing and Manipulating Remote Objects in Immersive Virtual Environments. 1997 Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics, pages 35--38. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Darley, J.M., and Latane, B., Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377--383. 1968.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dietz, P. and Leigh, D. DiamondTouch: A Multi-User Touch Technology. Proc. UIST 2001, 219--226. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Grudin, J. Partitioning Digital Worlds: Focal and Peripheral Awareness in Multiple Monitor Use. Proc. CHI 2001, 458--465. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Elliott, A., and Hearst, M. A Comparison of the affordances of a digital desk and tablet for architectural image tasks. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 56(2), 173--197. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hall, E.T. Distances in Man: The Hidden Dimension. Double Day, Garden City, NY.Google Scholar
- Izadi, S. et al. Dynamo: A Public Interactive Surface Supporting the Cooperative Sharing and Exchange of Media. Proc. UIST 2003, 159--168. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Johanson, B., A. Fox, and T. Winograd. Experiences with Ubiquitous Computing Rooms. IEEE Pervasive Computing Magazine, 1 (2002): 67--74. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kerr, N., Group Performance and Decision Making, Annual Review of Psychology, January 2004, Vol. 55, pp. 623--655.Google Scholar
- Pierce, J., Stearns, B., and Pausch, R. Voodoo Dolls: Seamless Interaction at Multiple Scales in Virtual Environments. Proceedings of the 1999 Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics, pages 141--145. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Poupyrev, I., Billinghurst, M., Weghorst, S., and Ichikawa, T. Go-Go Interaction Technique: Non-Linear Mapping for Direct Manipulation in VR. Proceedings of UIST 1996, pages 79--80. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rekimoto, J. SmartSkin: An Infrastructure for Freehand Manipulation on Interactive Surfaces. Proc. CHI 2001, 113--120. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rekimoto, J., and Saitoh, M. Augmented surfaces: a spatially continuous work space for hybrid computing environments. Proceedings of CHI 1999, ACM Press, 378--385. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rogers, Y., Hazlewood, W., Blevis, E., and Lim, Y-K. Finger Talk: Collaborative Decision-Making Using Talk and Fingertip Interaction Around a Tabletop Display. Proc. CHI 2004 Extended Abstracts, 1271--1274. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Russell, D.M., Drew, C., and Sue, A. Social Aspects of Using Large Public Interactive Displays for Collaboration,{8} UbiComp 2002. LNCS 2498. 229--236. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Scott, S.D., Grant, K.D., and Mandryk, R.L. System Guidelines for Co-located Collaborative Work on a Tabletop Display. Proc. ECSCW 2003, 159--178. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Scott, S.D., Carpendale, M.S.T, and Inkpen, K.M. (2004). Territoriality in Collaborative Tabletop Workspaces. Proc. CSCW 2004. To appear. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shen, C., Everitt, K., and Ryall, K. UbiTable: Impromptu Face-to-Face Collaboration on Horizontal Interactive Surfaces. Proc. UbiComp 2003, 218--288.Google Scholar
- Shen. C., Vernier, F., Forlines, C., and Ringel, M. DiamondSpin: An Extensible Toolkit for Around-the-Table Interaction. Proc. CHI 2004, 167--174. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shoemaker, G. and Inkpen, K. Single Display Privacyware: Augmenting Public Displays with Private Information. Proceedings of CHI 2001, 522--529. Google ScholarDigital Library
- SMART Technologies. "Digital Vision Touch Technology." White Paper, February 2003. http://www.smarttech.com/dvit/DViT_white_paper.pdf.Google Scholar
- Sommer, R. Personal Space: The Behaviour Basis of Design. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 1969.Google Scholar
- Steiner, I. (1972). Group Process and Productivity, New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Stewart, J., Bederson, B., and Druin, A. Single Display Groupware: A Model for Co-present Collaboration. Proc. CHI 1999, 286--293. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Streitz, N.A., Tandler, P., Müller-Tomfelde, C., and Konomi, S. Roomware. Towards the Next Generation of Human-Computer Interaction based on an Integrated Design of Real and Virtual Worlds. In: J. A. Carroll (Ed.): Human-Computer Interaction in the New Millennium, Addison Wesley (2001), 553--578.Google Scholar
- Tandler, P., Prante., T., Müller-Tomfelde, C., Streitz, N., Steinmetz, R. ConnecTables: Dynamic Coupling of Displays for the Flexible Creation of Shared Workspaces. Proc. of ACM UIST 2001, 11--20. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tang, J. (1991) Findings from Observational Studies of Collaborative Work. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34, 143--160. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Exploring the effects of group size and table size on interactions with tabletop shared-display groupware
Recommendations
Gesture-based interactions on multiple large displays with a tabletop interface
UAHCI'07: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Universal access in human-computer interaction: ambient interactionWe like large displays. Also, we love to equip with multiple displays for exercising multiple tasks in parallel. It is not unusual to have multiple large displays in our offices. Therefore, we can see many widgets on multiple large displays and would ...
Exploring the effect of display size on pointing performance
ITS '13: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM international conference on Interactive tabletops and surfacesIn this paper, we studied how display size affects human pointing performance given the same display field of view when using a mouse device. In total, four display sizes (10.6, 27, 46, 55 inches) and three display field of views (20°, 34° and 45°) were ...
Fluid DTMouse: better mouse support for touch-based interactions
AVI '06: Proceedings of the working conference on Advanced visual interfacesAlthough computer mice have evolved physically (i.e., new form factors, multiple buttons, scroll-wheels), their basic metaphor remains the same: a single-point of interaction, with modifiers used to control the interaction. Many of today's novel input ...
Comments