Last week I was sitting with one friend and video conferencing with our other friend to try and plan a summer trip. Due to conflicting schedules, we made a point to designate this time slot to meet online. My friend, Meghan and I were here in Ithaca sharing a computer, while my other friend, Mal, was in Richmond, Virginia, which made this a hybrid configuration.
The first thing I noticed was the formation of an in-group between me and Meghan. Our communication face to face was much more natural and fluid compared to our communication with Mal, as much of it was visual and relied on co-location . As Bos stated “groups communicating face to face were found to make faster and more effective decisions than groups using computer mediated communication”. This was often the case, as Meghan and I would decide we didn’t like the page we were looking at and move on to the next, leaving Mal behind.
Meghan and I, although communicated faster and more effectively, sometimes struggled with was the inability to simultaneously interact. She was in control of the mouse which limited my input. With a shared screen and shared mouse, I was unable to click whatever caught my eye. As we were browsing hotels, I would find one interesting and say "oh, what about..." and she was already scrolling passed it. Although it might reflect a lack of patience, it also exemplifies why sharing a screen can be difficult, as it doesn't support simultaneous interaction.
In addition, the three of us had trouble transitioning between activities. Between me and Meghan- Often times, I wasn't done reading the page and she clicked the next button. "Most current tabletop research systems avoid this issue by focusing on a single type of activity such a sketching or moving objects around the table without providing any capabilities for modifying these objects". If both users were able to activate a "read" mode that froze the screen in it's current state, it would prevent this issue from occurring.
I found that our planning worked best when we operated independently. Working personally on our own screen, then sending each other links and sharing feedback via video chat. If there was a video-chat software/technology where my team could see my computer screen, and my face in the top corner, they would be able to look at my screen without me sending them the link.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I was recently in a similar situation in which I was in a conference call with the boss of my research group. There were three other people in the room with me, and only the one person on the other end. It was sometimes difficult or rather inefficient because we could easily make decisions, nod heads, make gestures, etc. and the other person had no idea that any of this was happening. Often the phone didn't pick up everything that was being said, so if a decision was made rather quietly between two people on my side, we had to re-explain what had happened to our boss.
ReplyDeleteHowever, just like you had, we had one computer on our side being projected onto the wall. It was difficult to use just one, especially in terms of pointing, because it wasn't as simple as pointing on the computer screen. If someone was referring to something, the person with the mouse and to move it around and it took a lot of "you mean this line? no.. this one?" etc.
I really like the idea of activating a mode so that people can focus on what they are doing, rather than having someone skip the activity when they want. I am guessing you used video conferencing because you and your friends wanted to plan a Summer trip simultaneously. In planning a trip, easy access to information and getting that information to others effectively to discuss about it are important. I suggest using Twiddla (www.twiddla.com) in which all of you can co-browse a page and mark on it the same time. This would get rid of the in-group formation and enable everyone to collaborate together. I would say the only hindrance in the beginning is getting used to the online tool.
ReplyDelete