View
222
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Communication
previous research on impact of communication channels on collaborative tasks has produced mixed findings …
beyond being there (Hollan & Stornetta, 1993)
no difference (ROCOCO project) (Maziloglou, et al., 1996)
video channel Important (Harrison
& Minneman, 1990; Tang & Issacs, 1993, Olson, et al., 1997)
video channel not Important (Vera, et al., 1998; Gabriel, et al., 1998)
Com
mun
icat
ion
chan
nels
&
Col
labo
rativ
e D
esig
n
face-to-face (FTF)
computer-mediated collaborative design with full communication channels (CMCD-a)
computer-mediated collaborative design with limited communication channels (CMCD-b)
Exp
erim
ents
...
Experiments ...
5th & 6th year architecture students @ Architecture Faculty - University of Sydney
9 pilot experiments using 18 - 6th year students (September 1997)
26 final experiments using 52 - 5 & 6th year students (September 1998)
Sub
ject
s ..
.
Subjects ...
Brie
f &
Site
...
Brief & Site ...
Verbal Communication inCollaborative Design
CommunicationControl
DesignCommunication
SocialCommunication
CommunicationTechnology
Cod
ing
Sch
eme
...
InterruptionFloor
HoldingHandOver
OnlineAcknow.
Tools &Environment
Social &Interpersonal
Design Ideas Design ScopeDesign Task
Introductionof Idea
Rejectionof Idea
Confirmationof Idea
Evaluationof Idea
Acceptanceof Idea
Clarificationof Idea
Developmentof Idea
Repetitionof Idea
Referencingof Idea
Revisitingof Idea
LLD HLDBrief Schedule Task ActionInstructionDesign
Representation
Cod
ing
Sch
eme
...C
odin
g S
chem
e ...
Coding Scheme
Obs
erve
d D
iffer
ence
s...
Observed Differences
The Four Primary Coding Categories
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
DesignCommunication
SocialCommunication
CommunicationTechnology
CommunicationControl
FTF CMCD-a CMCD-b
Obs
erve
d D
iffer
ence
s...
Observed Differences
Design Idea
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Introductionof idea
Acceptanceof Idea
Rejection ofidea
Clarificationof idea
Confirmationof idea
Developmentof idea
Repetition ofidea
Referencingan idea
Revisiting anidea
Evaluation ofidea
FTF CMCD-a CMCD-b
FTF: ‘spontaneous’ & participants seemed to talk all the time.
CMCD-a: ‘spontaneous’ as in FTF, but with less interruptions.
CMCD-b: ‘less spontaneous’ than FTF & CMCD-a, with no interruptions or floor holding.
Ver
bal R
epr
ese
nta
tion .
..
Preliminary ...
most of the time working simultaneously & spontaneously on or around the same sketch.
sketching using traditional media (pencil & paper) was smooth & allowed subjects to produce graphical representations with more ease. F
TF
Gra
phic
al D
iffer
ence
s ...
Differences ...
sometimes working on separate pages & then looking up each other’s pages to evaluate progress.
sketching was spontaneous & at times, accompanied by simple annotations.
emulating FTF by simultaneously illustrating their verbal utterances with graphical sketches & with the added awkwardness of the mouse may have contributed to sketches that were incomprehensible most of the time.
CM
CD-a
Gra
phic
al D
iffer
ence
s...
Differences ...
working on separate pages as in CMCD-a ...
sketching was less spontaneous & ...
... consequently appeared to be more elaborate accompanied by more elaborate annotations most of the time as well as 3D representations...
CM
CD-b
Gra
phic
al D
iffer
ence
s...
Differences ...
natural use of verbal communication plus familiarity of sketching environment, allowed participants to produce graphical representations with more ease.
eye contact varied depending on subjects and rarely simultaneous ...
FT
F C
omm
ents
... smooth & straightforward apart from interruptions
Comments ...
some difficulty in the beginning adjusting to the new medium.
hardly used video channel & most of the time covered it with the brief window for remainder of session.
higher levels of social communication, interruptions & repetitions of verbal utterances, in order to establish and maintain on-line presence.
2D graphical representations most of the time … & not always comprehensible
(even by their authors). CM
CD
-a C
omm
ents
...
Comments...
difficulty in typing and drawing at the same time. Therefore subjects proceeded to annotate their sketches with verbal representations.
fewer words, less repetition & more thinking/ reflecting with subjects getting straight to the point. Often seen rewording or revisiting verbal representations
the semi-synchronous nature of the CMCD-b collaborative environment appeared to allow participants more time to reflect on ideas.
consequently their graphical representations responded to well thought out ideas instead of a spontaneous reactions to the verbal representations at hand.CM
CD
-b C
omm
ents
...
Comments...
some of the differences show that computer-mediation may in some cases, be more appropriate than a FTF meeting, eg CMCD-b produced a better record of the collaborative session than the FTF or the full audio and video experiments.
the three categories of communication for design collaboration explored in the experiments are indicative of the alternatives available now.
In s
umm
ary
...
Summary ...
we observed differences in the way people communicate using different communication channels.
… we propose that each category has its own strengths and difficulties for design collaboration.
therefore each category should be selected on the basis of the type of communication that would be most effective for the stage and tasks of the design project.
“designers need to decide when they want socially and culturally FTF communication, and when they want and need synchronous or semi-synchronous remote communication.” (Mitchell, 1995)
Summary ...
In s
umm
ary
...
Collaborative design in a 3D virtual world, Active Worlds
Verbal communication by typing
Gesture communication with avatars
Summary ...
3D C
olla
bora
tive
Wor
ld
Design communication through 3D models
Com
mu
nic
ati
on
An
aly
sis
Communication control17% Communication Technology3%
Navigation6%
Design Communication67%Social communication7%
Major communication categories in 3D world chat
Com
mu
nic
ati
on
An
aly
sis
Evaluation of idea7%
Low-level design6%
High-level design14%
Brief5%
Schedule2%
Task/Instruction17%
Refinement of idea8%
Clarification of idea20%
Acceptance of idea1%
Rejection of idea4%
Introduction of idea16%
Design codes for 3D world chat
Smmary ...
Com
mu
nic
ati
on
An
aly
sis
0 2 4 6 8 10ClientProject CoordiatorTeam ManagerDesigner 1Designer 2Designer 3Designer 4Designer 5Designer 6
words
How many words did each person use in the session?
Alternatives for drawing or model communication include: sketches, drawings, 3D modelling
Alternatives for verbal communication include: video, audio, chat
Video contact is not essential for effective collaboration while designing
Communication is primarily about the design in CMCD
In c
oncl
usio
n