Introduction
Background and related work
Co-located collaborative visualizations
Shared vs Non-Shared view and control
Position arrangement during collaboration
Solid visualization tool
Visualization application overview
Solid visualizations
Morphing of the solids
Dynamic-linking of multiple visualizations
Shared interaction and view between multiple tablets
Experiment design
Participants
Version | Position | Users | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Total | Males | Females | ||
Shared | C-C | 10 (5 pairs) | 9 | 1 |
F-F | 10 (5 pairs) | 5 | 5 | |
S-S | 10 (5 pairs) | 5 | 5 | |
Non-Shared | C-C | 10 (5 pairs) | 3 | 7 |
F-F | 10 (5 pairs) | 3 | 7 | |
S-S | 10 (5 pairs) | 3 | 7 |
Apparatus
Tasks and procedure
Pre- and post-test tasks
Collaborative tasks
Procedure
Hypotheses
Results
Test score and completion time
Test improvement score
Time and score on the collaborative tasks
Position | N | Subset for \(\alpha = 0.05\) | |
---|---|---|---|
Time | Score | ||
S-S | 10 | 30.2000 | 10.1000 |
F-F | 10 | 30.6000 | 9.5000 |
C-C | 10 | 33.7000 | 8.8000 |
Perceived engagement levels during collaboration
Overall engagement ratings
Ratings on the engagement categories
Subjective feedback
Position preference
Collaboration experience
Discussion
Shared and Non-Shared control and view
Position arrangements
Collaboration patterns and behaviors
Implications of our findings
-
If the goal is to maximize learning within a limited time, shared interaction/view and both C-C and S-S positions could be chosen.
-
If the goal is to maximize task efficiency in completing a set of tasks cooperatively, S-S position with shared view/control could be considered.
-
If there are multiple dynamically linked visualizations, it is useful to provide a function for users to switch between the shared and non-shared modes.