The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Territoriality in collaborative tabletop workspaces
Open accessAbstract
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: personal, group, and storage 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.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Groups: Interaction and Performance.
Polley, R. B., & McGrath, J. E. (1984) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393041 · Cited by 3,290
DiamondTouch: a multi-user touch technology
Dietz, P., & Leigh, D. (2001) · Proceedings of the 14th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology · doi:10.1145/502348.502389 · Cited by 1,149
(1975) · Cited by 1,065
Using NVIVO in Qualitative Research
Richards, L. (1999) · Cited by 1,000
How do people organize their desks?: Implications for the design of office information systems
Malone, T. W. (1983) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/357423.357430 · Cited by 799
Augmented surfaces: a spatially continuous work space for hybrid computing environments
Rekimoto, J., & Saitoh, M. (1999) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems the CHI is the limit - CHI '99 · doi:10.1145/302979.303113 · Cited by 688
Urp: a luminous-tangible workbench for urban planning and design
Underkoffler, J., & Ishii, H. (1999) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems the CHI is the limit - CHI '99 · doi:10.1145/302979.303114 · Cited by 604
Findings from observational studies of collaborative work
Tang, J. C. (1991) · International Journal of Man-Machine Studies · doi:10.1016/0020-7373(91)90039-a · Cited by 586
Multi-finger and whole hand gestural interaction techniques for multi-user tabletop displays
Wu, M., & Balakrishnan, R. (2003) · Proceedings of the 16th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology · doi:10.1145/964696.964718 · Cited by 427
System Guidelines for Co-located, Collaborative Work on a Tabletop Display
Scott, S. D., Grant, K. D., & Mandryk, R. L. (2003) · ECSCW 2003 · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-0068-0_9 · Cited by 405
Self-citation
Cited by
Evaluating Information Visualizations
Carpendale, S. (2008) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-70956-5_2 · Cited by 364
Collaborative visualization: Definition, challenges, and research agenda
Isenberg, P., Elmqvist, N., Scholtz, J., Cernea, D., Ma, K.-L., & Hagen, H. (2011) · Information Visualization · doi:10.1177/1473871611412817 · Cited by 299
Cooperative gestures: multi-user gestural interactions for co-located groupware
Morris, M. R., Huang, A., Paepcke, A., & Winograd, T. (2006) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1124772.1124952 · Cited by 257
Territorial Functioning in Collaborative Writing: Fragmented Exchanges and Common Outcomes
Larsen-Ledet, I., & Korsgaard, H. (2019) · Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1007/s10606-019-09359-8 · Cited by 43
Building a Birds Eye View: Collaborative Work in Disaster Response
Fischer, J. E., Reeves, S., Rodden, T., Reece, S., Ramchurn, S. D., & Jones, D. (2015) · Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2702123.2702313 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Scott, S. D., Carpendale, M. S. T., & Inkpen, K.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2004-11-06
- Pages
- 294-303
- OpenAlex
- W2012417801
- Cited by
- 622
- References
- 21
- FWCI
- 18.58
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Territoriality in collaborative tabletop workspaces. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1031607.1031655
- The paper
- Scott, S. D., Carpendale, M. S. T., & Inkpen, K. (2004). Territoriality in collaborative tabletop workspaces. Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work. https://doi.org/10.1145/1031607.1031655
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
