Do tablets really support discussion?: comparison between paper, tablet, and laptop PC used as discussion tools

Touch-based tablet devices are starting to be used frequently in meetings and places of discussion. However, are tablets really ideal as discussion tools? Or do they actually obstruct communication? To answer these questions, this paper quantitatively compares discussion processes involving paper, an iPad2, and a laptop PC. We performed an experiment where 12 groups of two participants each (24 participants in total) worked collaboratively by referring to documents and using paper, an iPad2, or a laptop PC as presentation media. We observed verbal and non-verbal interaction between participants. First, we investigated the total amount of speech between two participants and found they spoke more when using paper than when using the electronic media. Next, we observed that participants used more demonstrative pronouns when using paper than when using the iPad2 but used more demonstrative pronouns when using the iPad2 than when using the laptop PC. Also, they made more eye contact when using paper than when using the other media. These results suggest that tablets may not currently be the best media to use when ideas should be actively exchanged, sensitivity is required toward other participants in the discussion, or work progress needs to be shared.

[1]  Haruo Isono,et al.  Measurement of Visual Fatigue from Reading on Electronic Paper , 2004 .

[2]  Kenton O'Hara,et al.  A diary study of work-related reading: design implications for digital reading devices , 1998, CHI.

[3]  A. Kendon.  Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction. , 1967, Acta psychologica.

[4]  Nicholas Chen,et al.  Navigation techniques for dual-display e-book readers , 2008, CHI.

[5]  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).

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

[7]  Ravin Balakrishnan,et al.  Codex: a dual screen tablet computer , 2009, CHI.

[8]  Shun'ichi Tano,et al.  Effectiveness of annotating by hand for non-alphabetical languages , 2006, CHI.

[9]  Andrew Dillon,et al.  Reading from paper versus screens: a critical review of the empirical literature , 1992 .

[10]  V Barnes,et al.  Reading Is Slower from CRT Displays than from Paper: Attempts to Isolate a Single-Variable Explanation , 1987, Human factors.

[11]  Abigail Sellen,et al.  The myth of the paperless office , 2001 .

[12]  John D. Gould,et al.  Reading from CRT Displays Can Be as Fast as Reading from Paper , 1987 .

[13]  Carol Bergfeld,et al.  Reading text from computer screens , 1987, CSUR.

[14]  Hirohito Shibata,et al.  Evaluation of electronic reading devices focusing on turning pages , 2012 .

[15]  Hirohito Shibata,et al.  Effects of Paper on Page Turning: Comparison of Paper and Electronic Media in Reading Documents with Endnotes , 2011, HCI.

[16]  Toshiaki Muramoto,et al.  [Factors related to members' satisfactions with collaborative problem solving]. , 2009, Shinrigaku kenkyu : The Japanese journal of psychology.

[17]  Christian Heath,et al.  Mobility in collaboration , 1998, CSCW '98.

[18]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  The mechanics of collaboration: developing low cost usability evaluation methods for shared workspaces , 2000, Proceedings IEEE 9th International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WET ICE 2000).

[19]  M. Cook.  Experiments on Orientation and Proxemics , 1970 .

[20]  Paul Muter,et al.  Reading and skimming from computer screens and books: the paperless office revisited? , 1991 .

[21]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Visual Information as a Conversational Resource in Collaborative Physical Tasks , 2003, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[22]  Victoria Bellotti,et al.  Walking away from the desktop computer: distributed collaboration and mobility in a product design team , 1996, CSCW '96.

[23]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Collaboration and interference: awareness with mice or touch input , 2008, CSCW.