Stacey D. Scott
ABSTRACT
Researchers seeking alternatives to traditional desktop computers have begun exploring the potential collaborative benefits of digital tabletop displays. However, there are still many open issues related to the design of collaborative tabletop interfaces, such as whether these systems should automatically orient workspace items or enforce ownership of workspace content. Understanding the natural interaction practices that people use during tabletop collaboration with traditional media (e.g., pen and paper) can help to address these issues. Interfaces that are modeled on these practices will have the additional advantage of supporting the interaction skills people have developed over years of collaborating at traditional tables. To gain a deeper understanding of these interaction practices we conducted two observational studies of traditional tabletop collaboration in both casual and formal settings. Our results reveal that collaborators use three types of tabletop territories to help coordinate their interactions within the shared tabletop workspace: <i>personal, group</i>, and <i>storage</i> territories. Findings from a spatial analysis of collaborators' tabletop interactions reveal important properties of these tabletop territories. In order to provide a comprehensive picture of the role of tabletop territoriality in collaboration, we conclude with a synthesis of our findings and previous research findings and with several relevant design implications.
- Altman, I. (1975). The Environment and Social Behavior. Monterey, California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.Google Scholar
- Bauer, D., Fastrez, F., & Hollan, J. (2004). Computationally- Enriched 'Piles' for Managing Digital Photo Collections. Proc of Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bly, S.A. (1988). A Use of Drawing Surfaces in Different Collaborative Settings. Proc. of CSCW'88, pp. 250--256. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Deitz, P. & Leigh, D. (2001). DiamondTouch: A Multi-User Touch Technology. Proc. of UIST'00, pp. 219--226. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Edney, J.J. (1976). Human territories: Comment on functional properties. Environment and Behavior, 8, pp. 31--47.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fisher, J.D., Bell, P.A., & Baum, A. (1984). Environmental Psychology, 2nd ed. Toronto: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
- Kruger, R., Carpendale, M.S.T., Scott, S.D., & Greenberg, S. (2003). How People Use Orientation on Tables: Comprehension, Coordination and Communication. Proc. of GROUP'03, 369--378. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Malone, T.W. (1983). How do people organize their desks? Implications for the design of office information systems. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 1(1), pp. 99--112. Google ScholarDigital Library
- McGrath, J. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance. Englewood, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- Omojola, O., Post, E.R., Hancher, M.D., Maguire, Y., Pappu, R., Schoner, B., Russo, P.R., Gershenfeld, N., & Fletcher, R. (2000). An Installation of Interactive Furniture. IBM Systems Journal, 39(3/4), pp. 861--879. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pinelle, D., Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (2003). Task Analysis for Groupware Usability Evaluation: Modeling Shared Workspace Tasks with the Mechanics of Collaboration. ACM Trans. on Computer-Human Interaction, 10(4), pp. 281--311. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rekimoto, J. & Saitoh, M. (1999). Augmented Surfaces: A Spatially Continuous Work Space for Hybrid Computing Environments. Proc. of CHI '99, pp. 378--385. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Scott, S.D., Grant, K.D., & Mandryk, R.L. (2003). System Guidelines for Co-located, Collaborative Work on a Tabletop Display. Proc. of ECSCW'03, pp. 159--178. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shen, C., Everitt, K.M., & Ryall, K. (2003). UbiTable: Impromptu Face-to-Face Collaboration on Horizontal Interactive Surfaces. Proc. of UbiComp'03, pp. 281--288.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shen, C., Lesh, N., Vernier, F., Forlines, C., & Frost, J. (2002), Sharing and Building Digital Group Histories. Proc. of CSCW'02, pp. 324--333. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shen, C., Vernier, F.D., Forlines, C., & Ringel, M. (2004). DiamondSpin: An Extensible Toolkit for Around-the-Table Interaction. Proc. of CHI'04, pp. 167--174. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sommer, R. (1969). Personal space: The behaviour basis of design. Englewood Cliff, N.J.: Prentice - Hall.Google Scholar
- Ståhl, O., Wallberg, A., Söderberg, J., Humble, J., Fahlén, L.E., Lundberg, J., Bullock, A. (2002). Information Exploration Using the Pond. Proc. of CVE'02, pp. 72--79. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tandler, P., Prante, T., Müller-Tomfelde, C., Streitz, N., & Steinmetz, R. (2001). ConnecTables: Dynamic Coupling of Displays for the Flexible Creation of Shared Workspaces. Proc. of UIST'01, pp. 11--20. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tang, J.C. (1991). Findings from observational studies of collaborative work. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34, pp. 143--160. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Taylor, R. B. (1988) Human Territorial Functioning: An Empirical Evolutionary Perspective on Individual and Small Group Territorial Cognitions, Behaviors, and Consequences. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Tse, E., Histon, J., Scott, S.D., & Greenberg, S. (2004). Avoiding Interference: How People Use Spatial Separation and Partitioning in SDG Workspaces. Proc. of CSCW'04. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Underkoffler, J. & Ishii, H. (1999). Urp: A luminous-tangible workbench for urban planning and design. Proc. of CHI' 99, pp. 386--393. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wu, M. & Balakrishnan, R. (2003). Multi-finger and whole hand gestural interaction techniques for multi-user tabletop displays. Proc. of UIST'01, pp. 193--202. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Territoriality in collaborative tabletop workspaces
Recommendations
Up close and personal: Collaborative work on a high-resolution multitouch wall display
Multitouch wall-sized displays afford new forms of collaboration: They can be used up close by several users simultaneously, offer high resolution, and provide sufficient space for intertwining individual and joint work. The difference to displays ...
Co-Located Collaborative Visual Analytics around a Tabletop Display
Co-located collaboration can be extremely valuable during complex visual analytics tasks. We present an exploratory study of a system designed to support collaborative visual analysis tasks on a digital tabletop display. Fifteen participant pairs ...
Comments