Cited by 7Interactive and Immersive DisplaysInnovative Human-Technology InteractionUsability and User Interface Design

Beyond Presentation: Shared Slideware Control as a Resource for Collocated Collaboration

Chattopadhyay, Debaleena, Salvadori, Francesca, O’Hara, Kenton, Rintel, Sean·2018·Human–Computer Interaction

Abstract

Traditional models of slideware assume one presenter controls attention through slide navigation and pointing while a passive audience views the action. This paradigm limits group interactions, curtailing opportunities for attendees to use slides to participate in a collaborative discourse. However, as slideware permeates contexts beyond simple one-to-many presentations, there are growing efforts to shift the dynamics of collocated interactions. Technologies exist to shift the one-to-many information control paradigm to variations that extend functions to multiple attendees. But there is limited detailed research on how to design such multi-person attentional control and facilitate collocated interactions without disrupting existing work practices. We report on a detailed naturalistic case of using presentation in a design meeting, where participants used Office Social, an experimental slideware technology that enabled open access to shared interaction with slides across multiple devices. We explore how the design of Office Social supported informal collaboration. Our video-based analysis reveals how the orderly structures of conversational turn-taking and bodily conduct were used in conjunction with the affordances of the socio-technical ecosystem to organize collective activity. We suggest that supporting collocated interactions should take account of the existing conversational methods for achieving orderly collaboration rather than superimposing prescriptive technological methods of order.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07370024.2017.1388170

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

  • Dilemmas in a general theory of planning

    Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf01405730 · Cited by 16,338 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “In design review meetings, a design solution is created among the participants, “as a product of incessant judgement, subjected to critical argument” (Rittel & Webber, 1973: p. 157).”
    Background
  • Distributed cognition

    Hollan, J., Hutchins, E., & Kirsh, D. (2000) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/353485.353487 · Cited by 2,300 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “For instance, to do a tightly coupled collaborative review (Fragment 6, Figure 8), meeting participants created an ad-hoc aggregation of phones, large display, and paper printouts to facilitate distributed cognition (Hollan, Hutchins, & Kirsh, 2000).”
    Background
  • Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction

    Dourish, P. (2001) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/7221.001.0001 · Cited by 1,866 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Rather, we need to understand them in terms of the embodied practices of which they are an inherent part (e.g., Dourish, 2001; Heath & Luff, 2000; Goodwin, 1994, 2000; Lynch & Woolgar, 1990; Hartswood, Procter, Rouncefield, & Slack, 2003; Alac, 2008).”
    Background
  • Ambiguity as a resource for design

    Gaver, W. W., Beaver, J., & Benford, S. (2003) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/642611.642653 · Cited by 1,348 · cited 2× · see citing works

    “The on-screen pointer, signifying the deictic reference, however, emphasized an ambiguity of information (Gaver et al., 2003), by not showing the actor, thus forcing participants to mutually make sense of the action and context.”
    Background

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chattopadhyay, D., Salvadori, F., O’Hara, K., & Rintel, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • Human Experience & Design, Microsoft Research, Cambridge, UK
  • Microsoft Research (United Kingdom) (GB)
Corresponding author
Chattopadhyay, Debaleena
Venue
Human–Computer Interaction
Published
2017-11-07
Volume
33
Issue
5-6
Pages
455-498
ISSN
  • 0737-0024 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7051
OpenAlex
W2761504849
Cited by
7
References
4
Citations by year
2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Interactive and Immersive Displays
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
collocated collaboration, attentional control, multi-device interaction, turn-taking, informal collaboration, design meetings, collective activity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review