Strategic Tabletop Negotiations

Strategic negotiations in digital tabletop displays have not been well understood. There is little reported in the literature on how users strategize when group priorities and individual priorities conflict and need to be balanced for a successful collaboration. We conducted an observational study on three digital tabletop systems and a real-world setup to investigate similarities and differences in real-world and digital tabletop strategic collaborations. Our results show that in the real world, strategic negotiation involves three phases: identifying the right timing, using epistemic actions to consider a task plan and evaluating the value of the negotiation. We repeated the real-world experiments with different digital tabletops and found several differences in the way users initiate and perform strategic negotiations.

[1]  Brian Dietmeyer,et al.  Strategic Negotiation: A Breakthrough 4-Step Process for Effective Business Negotiation , 2004 .

[2]  Yoshifumi Kitamura,et al.  A Display Table for Strategic Collaboration Preserving Private and Public Information , 2005, ICEC.

[3]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  The metaDESK: models and prototypes for tangible user interfaces , 1997, UIST '97.

[4]  Takeshi Naemura,et al.  Lumisight table: a face-to-face collaboration support system that optimizes direction of projected information to each stakeholder , 2004, CSCW.

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

[6]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Sensetable: a wireless object tracking platform for tangible user interfaces , 2001, CHI.

[7]  Tom R. Tyler,et al.  Cooperation in Groups: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Behavioral Engagement , 2000 .

[8]  M. Sheelagh T. Carpendale,et al.  Roles of Orientation in Tabletop Collaboration: Comprehension, Coordination and Communication , 2004, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[9]  Meredith Ringel Morris,et al.  Exploring the effects of group size and table size on interactions with tabletop shared-display groupware , 2004, CSCW.

[10]  Kathy Ryall,et al.  UbiTable: Impromptu Face-to-Face Collaboration on Horizontal Interactive Surfaces , 2003, UbiComp.

[11]  Paul Scott,et al.  User interface requirements for face to face groupware , 1990, CHI '90.

[12]  Mike Wu,et al.  Multi-finger and whole hand gestural interaction techniques for multi-user tabletop displays , 2003, UIST '03.

[13]  Norbert A. Streitz,et al.  An interactive Landscape for Creativity and Innovation , 1999 .

[14]  Norbert A. Streitz,et al.  Connectables: dynamic coupling of displays for the flexible creation of shared workspaces , 2001, UIST '01.

[15]  Darren Leigh,et al.  DiamondTouch: a multi-user touch technology , 2001, UIST '01.

[16]  Paul P. Maglio,et al.  On Distinguishing Epistemic from Pragmatic Action , 1994, Cogn. Sci..

[17]  Jun Rekimoto,et al.  Augmented surfaces: a spatially continuous work space for hybrid computing environments , 1999, CHI '99.

[18]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  Task analysis for groupware usability evaluation: Modeling shared-workspace tasks with the mechanics of collaboration , 2003, TCHI.

[19]  Anind K. Dey,et al.  UbiComp 2003: Ubiquitous Computing , 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[20]  Tung X. Bui,et al.  Introduction to the negotiation support system minitrack , 2000, Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[21]  M. Sheelagh T. Carpendale,et al.  Storage bins: mobile storage for collaborative tabletop displays , 2005, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[22]  Jonathan Histon,et al.  Avoiding interference: how people use spatial separation and partitioning in SDG workspaces , 2004, CSCW.

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

[24]  Norbert A. Streitz,et al.  i-LAND: an interactive landscape for creativity and innovation , 1999, CHI '99.

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