An exploratory study of input configuration and group process in a negotiation task using a large display

This paper reports on an exploratory study of the effects of input configuration on group behavior and performance in a collaborative task performed by a collocated group using a large display. Twelve groups completed a mixed-motive negotiation task under two conditions: a single, shared mouse and one mouse per person. Results suggest that the multiple mouse condition allowed for more parallel work, but the quality of discussion was higher in the single mouse condition. Moreover, participants were more likely to act in their own best interest in the multiple mouse condition.

[1]  Abhishek Ranjan,et al.  Interacting with large displays from a distance with vision-tracked multi-finger gestural input , 2005, SIGGRAPH '06.

[2]  Abhishek Ranjan,et al.  An exploratory analysis of partner action and camera control in a video-mediated collaborative task , 2006, CSCW '06.

[3]  Patrick Baudisch,et al.  High-Density Cursor: a Visualization Technique that Helps Users Keep Track of Fast-moving Mouse Cursors , 2003, INTERACT.

[4]  Judee K. Burgoon,et al.  The nature and measurement of interpersonal dominance , 1998 .

[5]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  The interdisciplinary study of coordination , 1994, CSUR.

[6]  James D. Thompson.  Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory , 1967 .

[7]  John C. Tang,et al.  Liveboard: a large interactive display supporting group meetings, presentations, and remote collaboration , 1992, CHI.

[8]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  A Descriptive Framework of Workspace Awareness for Real-Time Groupware , 2002, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[9]  Thomas P. Moran,et al.  Pen-based interaction techniques for organizing material on an electronic whiteboard , 1997, UIST '97.

[10]  Patrick Baudisch,et al.  Precise selection techniques for multi-touch screens , 2006, CHI.

[11]  E.,et al.  GROUPS : INTERACTION AND PERFORMANCE , 2001 .

[12]  Chris North,et al.  Dynamic size and speed cursor for large, high-resolution displays , 2006 .

[13]  Mary Czerwinski,et al.  Toward Characterizing the Productivity Benefits of Very Large Displays , 2003, INTERACT.

[14]  Vernon L. Smith,et al.  Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Auction Market , 1982 .

[15]  George W. Fitzmaurice,et al.  A remote control interface for large displays , 2004, UIST '04.

[16]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Determinants of Coordination Modes within Organizations , 1976 .

[17]  John R. Anderson.  Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications , 1980 .

[18]  Terry Winograd,et al.  Fluid interaction with high-resolution wall-size displays , 2001, UIST '01.

[19]  Luc Renambot,et al.  Collaborative Visualization using High-Resolution Tiled Displays , 2005 .

[20]  Saul Greenberg,et al.  Rapidly Prototyping Single Display Groupware through the SDGToolkit , 2004, AUIC.

[21]  Walter Bender,et al.  Influencing group participation with a shared display , 2004, CSCW.

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

[23]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  High Precision Touchscreens: Design Strategies and Comparisons with a Mouse , 1991, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[24]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  CHAPTER 12 – Applying Social Psychological Theory to the Problems of Group Work , 2002 .

[25]  C. Macklin,et al.  Big is better? Human factors issues of large screen displays with military command teams , 2001 .

[26]  Allison Druin,et al.  Single display groupware: a model for co-present collaboration , 1999, CHI '99.

[27]  Desney S. Tan,et al.  The large-display user experience , 2005, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[28]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  Distance Matters , 2000, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[29]  Stephanie D. Teasley,et al.  Rapid Software Development through Team Collocation , 2002, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

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

[31]  Dan R. Olsen,et al.  Laser pointer interaction , 2001, CHI.

[32]  Anastasia Bezerianos,et al.  The vacuum: facilitating the manipulation of distant objects , 2005, CHI.

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

[34]  Wolfgang Stuerzlinger,et al.  Laser Pointers as Collaborative Pointing Devices , 2002, Graphics Interface.

[35]  Erik Brynjolfsson,et al.  Could the Internet Balkanize Science? , 1996, Science.

[36]  Xing Chen,et al.  Lumipoint: multi-user laser-based interaction on large tiled displays , 2002 .

[37]  Daniel Vogel,et al.  Interactive public ambient displays: transitioning from implicit to explicit, public to personal, interaction with multiple users , 2004, UIST '04.

[38]  Ronald E. Rice,et al.  Video as a technology for informal communication , 1993, CACM.

[39]  Sidney Fels,et al.  Exploring collaboration with group pointer interaction , 2004 .

[40]  Daniel Vogel,et al.  Distant freehand pointing and clicking on very large, high resolution displays , 2005, UIST.

[41]  Meredith Ringel Morris,et al.  Beyond "social protocols": multi-user coordination policies for co-located groupware , 2004, CSCW.

[42]  S. Barley.  The alignment of technology and structure through roles and networks. , 1990, Administrative science quarterly.

[43]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[44]  Robert J. K. Jacob,et al.  Integrality and separability of input devices , 1994, TCHI.

[45]  Wei Huang,et al.  Camera angle affects dominance in video-mediated communication , 2002, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[46]  Kori Inkpen Quinn,et al.  The Effect of Turn-Taking Protocols on Children's Learning in Mouse-Driven Collaborative Environments , 1997, Graphics Interface.