Situated Public News and Reminder Displays

In this paper we present concepts for and experiences with a Situated Public Display system deployed in a university setting. We identify the rate with which information is updated as an important property to distinguish different kinds of information. With a first slideshow based prototype it was very difficult for users to predict whether information was updated since they last looked. To solve this problem, we took a broader view and conducted a contextual inquiry to investigate how people deal with paper based posters. We deduced an information flow diagram that identifies roles of people and categories of posters and noticeboards. We identified actionables, that is, posters that offer people to take a specific action, as a special type of information to support. We identified two strategies, planning and opportunism, to deal with actionable information. We present a system using two kinds of displays, News Displays and Reminder Displays, to support both strategies. We show how auctions can be used for Reminder Displays to select those information chunks that are most important in a particular context. Finally, we present an evaluation and lessons from the deployment.

[1]  Saul Greenberg,et al.  The notification collage: posting information to public and personal displays , 2001, CHI.

[2]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Auction Mechanisms for Efficient Advertisement Selection on Public Displays , 2006, EUMAS.

[3]  Antonio Krüger,et al.  How much to bid in Digital Signage Advertising Auctions , 2007 .

[4]  Karen Holtzblatt,et al.  Contextual design , 1997, INTR.

[5]  Adam M. Fass,et al.  MessyDesk and MessyBoard: two designs inspired by the goal of improving human memory , 2002, DIS '02.

[6]  R. Sharp,et al.  The 2005 UbiApp Workshop: What Makes Good Application-Led Research? , 2005, IEEE Pervasive Comput..

[7]  Jennifer G. Sheridan,et al.  Public Ubiquitous Computing Systems: Lessons from the e-Campus Display Deployments , 2006, IEEE Pervasive Computing.

[8]  Elizabeth D. Mynatt,et al.  Semi-public displays for small, co-located groups , 2003, CHI '03.

[9]  Daniel Fitton,et al.  Exploring the Evolution of Office Door Displays , 2003 .

[10]  Andreas Beu,et al.  Engineering Joy , 2001, IEEE Softw..

[11]  Jonathan Grudin,et al.  Why CSCW Applications Fail: Problems in the Design and Evaluation of Organization of Organizational Interfaces. , 1988 .

[12]  D. Allen.  Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity , 2001 .

[13]  Joseph F. McCarthy,et al.  UniCast, OutCast & GroupCast: Three Steps Toward Ubiquitous, Peripheral Displays , 2001, UbiComp.

[14]  Roxana Wales,et al.  NASA's MERBoard: An Interactive Collaborative Workspace Platform. Chapter 4 , 2003 .

[15]  Martin R. Gibbs,et al.  Mediating intimacy: designing technologies to support strong-tie relationships , 2005, CHI.

[16]  Antonietta Grasso,et al.  Supporting Communities of Practice with Large Screen Displays , 2003 .

[17]  T. J. Reynolds,et al.  Laddering theory, method, analysis, and interpretation. , 2001 .

[18]  Elizabeth F. Churchill,et al.  The Plasma Poster Network: Posting Multimedia Content in Public Places , 2003, INTERACT.

[19]  Daniel M. Russell,et al.  Large Interactive Public Displays: Use Patterns, Support Patterns, Community Patterns , 2003 .

[20]  Jay Trimble,et al.  NASA’s MERBoard , 2003 .

[21]  Jonathan Grudin,et al.  Why CSCW applications fail: problems in the design and evaluationof organizational interfaces , 1988, CSCW '88.

[22]  R. Sharp.  Deploy or Die : A Choice for Application-Led Ubiquitous Computing Research , 2005 .

[23]  Kenton P. O'Hara,et al.  Public and Situated Displays , 2003, The Kluwer International series on Computer Supported Cooperative Work.

[24]  Elizabeth D. Mynatt,et al.  Secrets to success and fatal flaws: the design of large-display groupware , 2006, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.