Skip to main content
Erschienen in: International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 1/2018

19.02.2018

Using technological functions on a multi-touch table and their affordances to counteract biases and foster collaborative problem solving

verfasst von: Inga M. Bause, Irina R. Brich, Ann-Katrin Wesslein, Friedrich W. Hesse

Erschienen in: International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning | Ausgabe 1/2018

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Touch technologies have become ubiquitous, motivating researchers to explore their potential - especially in collaborative scenarios. Studies on collaboration using joint visual spaces like multi-touch tables have demonstrated positive effects on performance. Yet, factors like prior knowledge and preferences, resulting in cognitive biases, were neglected although they are likely to put additional demands on collaboration. Whether touch technology can support its users in mastering the resulting challenges remains an open issue. To address this issue, we employed a hidden-profile paradigm (e.g., Schulz-Hardt and Mojzisch 2012) to investigate whether the affordances of specific support functions realized in a collaboration support kit on a multi-touch table help to overcome established pitfalls of collaboration (prior preferences and discussion biases). The collaboration support kit comprised a joint space and private spaces. It allowed participants to push information from the private into the joint space, to jointly sort information within the joint space, and it provided automatic functions like merging information. To replicate traditional hidden-profile studies, triads in a standard hidden-profile condition (n = 25) exchanged information in a discussion; triads in the condition with collaboration support kit (n = 29) were additionally provided with the aforementioned functions. Our results revealed that groups with collaboration support kit available showed greater discussion intensity, more balanced discussions, more indicators of mutual understanding, and better decision performance than standard hidden-profile groups. This is original evidence that affordances of a multi-touch table with interactive support functions can be used to overcome biases from prior preferences and to enhance collaboration.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) recognized the need to understand collaboration skills by including CPS in their latest Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2015 (OECD 2017). In PISA 2015, CPS was assessed by implementing a standardized computer supported human-agent interaction, where a student was to solve the curriculum-independent tasks in collaboration with one or more computer-simulated agents using pre-defined messages (OECD 2017). In general, at each step, the student could choose the most adequate messages out of two to seven alternatives. When a message was sent, the computerized agent replied accordingly and a new set of messages to choose from was presented to the student. This circle repeated itself until the student came to the solution. It is important to note that students received guidance from one of the agents if their choice was not conducive to reach the solution. Therefore, every student ended up solving the task, only the paths to the solution differed. Summing up, in order to measure collaborative skills, PISA developed a scripted, highly standardized paradigm, yielding a reliable assessment approach. Still, this procedure comes with issues of reduced external validity because this kind of collaboration with computer agents does not directly compare to collaboration with actual persons (Greiff et al. 2013).
 
2
For the discussion bias measure according to Stasser, Vaughan, and Stewart (2000) the introduction/repetition rate for shared information was divided by the sum of the rate of introduced/repeated shared and unshared information. For this measure a value of .5 (range 0 to 1) indicates an unbiased discussion, larger values indicate a stronger bias towards shared information.
 
3
When comparing the decision quality in the CSK condition to that of the standard HP condition after participants saw the merged information, adding the condition predictor (AIC: 70.83) to the intercept model (AIC: 69.27) did not improve goodness-of-fit, χ2(1) = 0.44, p = .507. That is, having been presented with the merged information, the groups in the standard HP condition were as likely to decide for the best candidate as groups in the CSK condition. Specifically, the chance to make the right decision was nearly identical (OR = 1.48) in this analysis.
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephin, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills: Sage Publishing Company. Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephin, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills: Sage Publishing Company.
Zurück zum Zitat Bronckart, J. P. (1995). Theories of action, speech, natural language, and discourse. In Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 75–91). Cambridge: CUP.CrossRef Bronckart, J. P. (1995). Theories of action, speech, natural language, and discourse. In Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 75–91). Cambridge: CUP.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dervin, B. (2003). Chaos, order, and sense-making: A proposed theory for information design. In B. Dervin, L. Foreman-Wernet, & E. Lauterbach (Eds.), Sense-making methodology reader selected writings of Brenda Dervin (pp. 325–340). Cresskill: Hampton. Dervin, B. (2003). Chaos, order, and sense-making: A proposed theory for information design. In B. Dervin, L. Foreman-Wernet, & E. Lauterbach (Eds.), Sense-making methodology reader selected writings of Brenda Dervin (pp. 325–340). Cresskill: Hampton.
Zurück zum Zitat Fiore, S. M., & Schooler, J. W. (2004). Process mapping and shared cognition: Teamwork and the development of shared problem models. In E. E. Salas & S. M. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp. 133–152). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10690-007.CrossRef Fiore, S. M., & Schooler, J. W. (2004). Process mapping and shared cognition: Teamwork and the development of shared problem models. In E. E. Salas & S. M. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp. 133–152). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​10690-007.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gweon, Kane, & Rosé. (2011). Facilitating knowledge transfer between groups through idea co-construction processes. In INGroup (pp. 1–4). Gweon, Kane, & Rosé. (2011). Facilitating knowledge transfer between groups through idea co-construction processes. In INGroup (pp. 1–4).
Zurück zum Zitat Harris, A., Rick, J., Bonnett, V., Yuill, N., Fleck, R., Marshall, P., & Rogers, Y. (2009). Around the table: Are multiple-touch surfaces better than single-touch for children’s collaborative interactions? In CSCL 2009 Proceedings (pp. 335–344). doi:https://doi.org/10.3115/1600053.1600104. Harris, A., Rick, J., Bonnett, V., Yuill, N., Fleck, R., Marshall, P., & Rogers, Y. (2009). Around the table: Are multiple-touch surfaces better than single-touch for children’s collaborative interactions? In CSCL 2009 Proceedings (pp. 335–344). doi:https://​doi.​org/​10.​3115/​1600053.​1600104.
Zurück zum Zitat Kaplan, F., DoLenh, S., Bachour, K., Kao, G. Y. I., Gault, C., & Dillenbourg, P. (2009). Interpersonal computers for higher education. In P. Dillenbourg, J. Huang, & M. Cherubini (Eds.), Collaborative artefacts and interactive furniture (pp. 1–17). Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series, Springer US. Kaplan, F., DoLenh, S., Bachour, K., Kao, G. Y. I., Gault, C., & Dillenbourg, P. (2009). Interpersonal computers for higher education. In P. Dillenbourg, J. Huang, & M. Cherubini (Eds.), Collaborative artefacts and interactive furniture (pp. 1–17). Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series, Springer US.
Zurück zum Zitat Kharrufa, A. S., Olivier, P., & Leat, D. (2009). Digital mysteries: Designing for learning at the tabletop digital mysteries. In Computing Science. Newcastle upon Tyne: University of Newcastle upon Tyne. Kharrufa, A. S., Olivier, P., & Leat, D. (2009). Digital mysteries: Designing for learning at the tabletop digital mysteries. In Computing Science. Newcastle upon Tyne: University of Newcastle upon Tyne.
Zurück zum Zitat Kirschner, P. A., & Kreijns, K. (2005). Enhancing sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication (pp. 169–191). US: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-24319-4_8.CrossRef Kirschner, P. A., & Kreijns, K. (2005). Enhancing sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication (pp. 169–191). US: Springer. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​0-387-24319-4_​8.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kolbe, M. (2007). Explizite Prozesskoordination von Entscheidungsfindungsgruppen. Georg-August-Universität Göttingen. Kolbe, M. (2007). Explizite Prozesskoordination von Entscheidungsfindungsgruppen. Georg-August-Universität Göttingen.
Zurück zum Zitat Maquil, V., Tobias, E., Anastasiou, D., Mayer, H., & Latour, T. (2017). COPSE : Rapidly instantiating problem solving activities based on tangible tabletop interfaces. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3095808.CrossRef Maquil, V., Tobias, E., Anastasiou, D., Mayer, H., & Latour, T. (2017). COPSE : Rapidly instantiating problem solving activities based on tangible tabletop interfaces. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(1), 1–16. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1145/​3095808.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Mayer, R. E., & Wittrock, M. C. (2006). Problem solving. In P. A. Alexaner & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 287–303). New York: Routledge. Mayer, R. E., & Wittrock, M. C. (2006). Problem solving. In P. A. Alexaner & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 287–303). New York: Routledge.
Zurück zum Zitat McGrath, J. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. McGrath, J. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Zurück zum Zitat Piper, A. M., & Hollan, J. D. (2009). Tabletop displays for small group study: Affordances of paper and digital materials. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1227–1236). ACM. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518885. Piper, A. M., & Hollan, J. D. (2009). Tabletop displays for small group study: Affordances of paper and digital materials. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1227–1236). ACM. doi:https://​doi.​org/​10.​1145/​1518701.​1518885.
Zurück zum Zitat Ras, E., Krkovic, K., Greiff, S., Tobias, E., & Maquil, V. (2014). Moving towards the assessment of collaborative problem solving skills with a tangible user interface. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(4), 95–104. Ras, E., Krkovic, K., Greiff, S., Tobias, E., & Maquil, V. (2014). Moving towards the assessment of collaborative problem solving skills with a tangible user interface. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(4), 95–104.
Zurück zum Zitat Rick, J., & Keynes, M. (2009). Towards a classroom ecology of devices: Interfaces for collaborative scripts. In Workshop Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL2009): “Scripted vs. Free CS Collaboration: Alternatives and Paths for Adaptable and Flexible CS Scripted Collaboration” (p. 9). Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/19511/1/dt-cscl2009.pdf. Rick, J., & Keynes, M. (2009). Towards a classroom ecology of devices: Interfaces for collaborative scripts. In Workshop Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL2009): “Scripted vs. Free CS Collaboration: Alternatives and Paths for Adaptable and Flexible CS Scripted Collaboration” (p. 9). Retrieved from http://​oro.​open.​ac.​uk/​19511/​1/​dt-cscl2009.​pdf.
Zurück zum Zitat Rick, J., Marshall, P., & Yuill, N. (2011). Beyond one-size-fits-all:How interactive tabletops support collaborative learning. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children - IDC ’11 (pp. 109–117). New York: ACM Press. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/1999030.1999043. Rick, J., Marshall, P., & Yuill, N. (2011). Beyond one-size-fits-all:How interactive tabletops support collaborative learning. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children - IDC ’11 (pp. 109–117). New York: ACM Press. doi:https://​doi.​org/​10.​1145/​1999030.​1999043.
Zurück zum Zitat Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Instructional support for collaboration in desktop videoconference settings. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication, and how they may be overcome (pp. 59–84). New York: Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-24319-4_4.CrossRef Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Instructional support for collaboration in desktop videoconference settings. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication, and how they may be overcome (pp. 59–84). New York: Springer US. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​0-387-24319-4_​4.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Shen, C., Ryall, K., Forlines, C., Esenther, A., Vernier, F. D., Everitt, K., et al. (2009). Collaborative tabletop research and evaluation. In P. Dillenbourg, J. Huang, & M. Cherubini (Eds.), Interactive Artifacts and Furniture Supporting Collaborative Work and Learning (pp. 1–17). US: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77234-9_7. Shen, C., Ryall, K., Forlines, C., Esenther, A., Vernier, F. D., Everitt, K., et al. (2009). Collaborative tabletop research and evaluation. In P. Dillenbourg, J. Huang, & M. Cherubini (Eds.), Interactive Artifacts and Furniture Supporting Collaborative Work and Learning (pp. 1–17). US: Springer. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-0-387-77234-9_​7.
Zurück zum Zitat Slavin, R. E. (2011). Instruction based on cooperative learning. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 344–360). New York: Taylor & Francis. Slavin, R. E. (2011). Instruction based on cooperative learning. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 344–360). New York: Taylor & Francis.
Zurück zum Zitat Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–426). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–426). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Stasser, G., & Birchmeier, Z. (2003). Group creativity and collective choice. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 85–109). New York: Oxford University Press. Stasser, G., & Birchmeier, Z. (2003). Group creativity and collective choice. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 85–109). New York: Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Swaab, R. I., Galinsky, A. D., Medvec, V., & Diermeier, D. A. (2012). The communication orientation model: Explaining the diverse effects of sight, sound, and synchronicity on negotiation and group decision-making outcomes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(1), 25–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311417186.CrossRef Swaab, R. I., Galinsky, A. D., Medvec, V., & Diermeier, D. A. (2012). The communication orientation model: Explaining the diverse effects of sight, sound, and synchronicity on negotiation and group decision-making outcomes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(1), 25–53. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​1088868311417186​.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Teasley. (1997). Talking about reasoning: How important is the peer in peer collaboration? In Discourse, tools and reasoning (pp. 361–384). Berlin: Springer.CrossRef Teasley. (1997). Talking about reasoning: How important is the peer in peer collaboration? In Discourse, tools and reasoning (pp. 361–384). Berlin: Springer.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131.CrossRef Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Using technological functions on a multi-touch table and their affordances to counteract biases and foster collaborative problem solving
verfasst von
Inga M. Bause
Irina R. Brich
Ann-Katrin Wesslein
Friedrich W. Hesse
Publikationsdatum
19.02.2018
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning / Ausgabe 1/2018
Print ISSN: 1556-1607
Elektronische ISSN: 1556-1615
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9271-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2018

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 1/2018 Zur Ausgabe