Comparing Horizontal and Vertical Surfaces for a Collaborative Design Task

We investigate the use of different surface orientations for collaborative design tasks. Specifically, we compare horizontal and vertical surface orientations used by dyads performing a collaborative design task while standing. We investigate how the display orientation influences group participation including face-to-face contact, total discussion, and equality of physical and verbal participation among participants. Our results suggest that vertical displays better support face-to-face contact whereas side-byside arrangements encourage more discussion. However, display orientation has little impact on equality of verbal and physical participation, and users do not consistently prefer one orientation over the other. Based on our findings, we suggest that further investigation into the differences between horizontal and vertical orientations is warranted.

[1]  Ian Taylor,et al.  Designing novel interactional workspaces to support face to face consultations , 2003, CHI '03.

[2]  John C. Tang.  Findings from Observational Studies of Collaborative Work , 1991, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[3]  T. C. Nicholas Graham,et al.  The Software Design Board: A Tool Supporting Workstyle Transitions in Collaborative Software Design , 2004, EHCI/DS-VIS.

[4]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  When the fingers do the talking: A study of group participation with varying constraints to a tabletop interface , 2008, 2008 3rd IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal Interactive Human Computer Systems.

[5]  John C. Grundy,et al.  An e-whiteboard application to support early design-stage sketching of UML diagrams , 2003, IEEE Symposium on Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments, 2003. Proceedings. 2003.

[6]  Gerrit C. van der Veer,et al.  Situational awareness support to enhance teamwork in collaborative environments , 2008, ECCE '08.

[7]  Andrew F. Monk,et al.  Social enjoyment with electronic photograph displays: Awareness and control , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[8]  Regan L. Mandryk,et al.  Exploring display factors that influence co-located collaboration: angle, size, number, and user arrangement , 2005 .

[9]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Equal Opportunities: Do Shareable Interfaces Promote More Group Participation Than Single User Displays? , 2009, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[10]  Christian Müller-Tomfelde,et al.  Tilted tabletops: In between horizontal and vertical workspaces , 2008, 2008 3rd IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal Interactive Human Computer Systems.

[11]  Kori Inkpen Quinn,et al.  The proximity factor: impact of distance on co-located collaboration , 2005, GROUP.

[12]  Regan L. Mandryk,et al.  System Guidelines for Co-located, Collaborative Work on a Tabletop Display , 2003, ECSCW.

[13]  Stacey D. Scott,et al.  The NiCE Discussion Room: Integrating Paper and Digital Media to Support Co-Located Group Meetings , 2010, CHI.

[14]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Are Tangible Interfaces Really Any Better Than Other Kinds of Interfaces , 2007 .

[15]  M. Sheelagh T. Carpendale,et al.  Visual Thinking In Action: Visualizations As Used On Whiteboards , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[16]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Is the Writing on the Wall for Tabletops? , 2009, INTERACT.

[17]  M. Sheelagh T. Carpendale,et al.  Territoriality in collaborative tabletop workspaces , 2004, CSCW.

[18]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Collaborating around vertical and horizontal large interactive displays: which way is best? , 2004, Interact. Comput..

[19]  Saul Greenberg,et al.  Supporting transitions in work: informing large display application design by understanding whiteboard use , 2009, GROUP.

[20]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Notation and representation in collaborative object-oriented design: an observational study , 2007, OOPSLA.

[21]  Meredith Ringel Morris,et al.  A field study of knowledge workers’ use of interactive horizontal displays , 2008, 2008 3rd IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal Interactive Human Computer Systems.

[22]  Kori Inkpen Quinn,et al.  Investigating teamwork and taskwork in single- and multi-display groupware systems , 2009, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[23]  Andriy Pavlovych,et al.  Effect of screen configuration and interaction devices in shared display groupware , 2008, HCC '08.

[24]  Christian Heide Damm,et al.  Tool support for cooperative object-oriented design: gesture based modelling on an electronic whiteboard , 2000, CHI.

[25]  Thomas Grechenig,et al.  The Effects of Personal Displays and Transfer Techniques on Collaboration Strategies in Multi-touch Based Multi-Display Environments , 2011, INTERACT.

[26]  M. Sheelagh T. Carpendale,et al.  Collaborative coupling over tabletop displays , 2006, CHI.

[27]  Hareesha Mk,et al.  "Environmentalism and Forest Rights of Tribals in Dakshina Kannada, Udupi and Uttara Kannada Districts of Karnataka " , 2009 .

[28]  Meredith Ringel Morris,et al.  Reading Revisited: Evaluating the Usability of Digital Display Surfaces for Active Reading Tasks , 2007, Second Annual IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal Interactive Human-Computer Systems (TABLETOP'07).

[29]  G. Simmel.  The Number of Members as Determining the Sociological Form of the Group. I , 1902, American Journal of Sociology.