Communication and collaboration models
•Download as PPT, PDF•
0 likes•1,357 views
This document discusses various aspects of face-to-face communication and how they compare to computer-mediated communication. It addresses topics like nonverbal cues, turn-taking, establishing common ground, and maintaining context in both synchronous and asynchronous text-based communication. Key challenges in computer-mediated communication include lack of nonverbal cues, weaker back channels, loss of granularity and pace, and difficulties maintaining sequencing and context in discussions.
Report
Share
Communication and collaboration models
- 1. chapter 14 communication and collaboration models ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 2. CSCW Issues and Theory All computer systems have group impact – not just groupware Ignoring this leads to the failure of systems Look at several levels – minutiae to large scale context: – face-to-face communication – conversation – text based communication – group working ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 3. Face-to-face communication • Most primitive and most subtle form of communication • Often seen as the paradigm for computer mediated communication? ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 4. Transfer effects • carry expectations into electronic media … … sometimes with disastrous results • may interpret failure as rudeness of colleague e.g. personal space – video may destroy mutual impression of distance – happily the `glass wall' effect helps ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 5. Eye contact • to convey interest and establish social presence • video may spoil direct eye contact (see video tunnel, chap 19) • but poor quality video better than audio only ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 6. Gestures and body language • much of our communication is through our bodies • gesture (and eye gaze) used for deictic reference • head and shoulders video loses this So … close focus for eye contact … … or wide focus for body language? ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 7. Back channels Alison: Do you fancy that film … err1 … `The Green' um2 … it starts at eight. Brian: Great! • Not just the words! • Back channel responses from Brian at 1 and 2 – quizzical at 1 – affirmative at 2 ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 8. Back channels (ctd) • Back channels include: – nods and grimaces – shrugs of the shoulders – grunts and raised eyebrows • Utterance begins vague … … then sharpens up just enough ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 9. Back channels -media effects Restricting media restricts back channels video – loss of body language audio – loss of facial expression half duplex – lose most voice back-channel responses text based – nothing left! ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 10. Back channels and turn-taking in a meeting … – speaker offers the floor (fraction of a second gap) – listener requests the floor (facial expression, small noise) Grunts, ‘um’s and ‘ah’s, can be used by the: – listener to claim the floor – speaker to hold the floor … but often too quiet for half-duplex channels e.g. Trans-continental conferences – special problem – lag can exceed the turn taking gap … leads to a monologue! ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 11. Basic conversational structure Alison: Do you fancy that film Brian: the uh (500 ms) with the black cat ‘The Green whatsit’ Alison: yeah, go at uh … (looks at watch – 1.2 s) … 20 to? Brian: sure Smallest unit is the utterance Turn taking ⇒ utterances usually alternate … ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 12. Adjacency pairs Simplest structure – adjacency pair Adjacency pairs may nest: Brian: Do you want some gateau? Alison: is it very fattening? Brian: yes, very Alison: and lots of chocolate? Brian: masses Alison: I'll have a big slice then. Structure is: B-x, A-y, B-y, A-z, B-z, A-x – inner pairs often for clarification … but, try analysing the first transcript in detail! ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 13. Context in conversation Utterances are highly ambiguous We use context to disambiguate: Brian: (points) that post is leaning a bit Alison: that's the one you put in Two types of context: • external context – reference to the environment e.g., Brian's ‘that’ – the thing pointed to • internal context – reference to previous conversation e.g., Alison's ‘that’ – the last thing spoken of deictic reference ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 14. Referring to things – deixis Often contextual utterances involve indexicals: that, this, he, she, it these may be used for internal or external context Also descriptive phrases may be used: – external: ‘the corner post is leaning a bit’ – internal: ‘the post you mentioned’ In face-to-face conversation can point ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 15. Common Ground Resolving context depends on meaning ⇒ participants must share meaning so must have shared knowledge Conversation constantly negotiates meaning … a process called grounding: Alison: So, you turn right beside the river. Brian: past the pub. Alison: yeah … Each utterance is assumed to be: relevant – furthers the current topic helpful – comprehensible to listener ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 16. Focus and topic Context resolved relative to current dialogue focus Alison: Oh, look at your roses : : : Brian: mmm, but I've had trouble with greenfly. Alison: they're the symbol of the English summer. Brian: greenfly? Alison: no roses silly! Tracing topics is one way to analyse conversation. – Alison begins – topic is roses – Brian shifts topic to greenfly – Alison misses shift in focus … breakdown ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 17. Breakdown Breakdown happens at all levels: topic, indexicals, gesture Breakdowns are frequent, but – redundancy makes detection easy (Brian cannot interpret ‘they're … summer’) – people very good at repair (Brain and Alison quickly restore shared focus) Electronic media may lose some redundancy ⇒ breakdown more severe ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 18. Speech act theory A specific form of conversational analysis Utterances characterised by what they do … … they are acts e.g. ‘I'm hungry’ – propositional meaning – hunger – intended effect – ‘get me some food’ Basic conversational act the illocutionary point: – promises, requests, declarations, … Speech acts need not be spoken e.g. silence often interpreted as acceptance … ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 19. Patterns of acts & Coordinator • Generic patterns of acts can be identified • Conversation for action (CfA) regarded as central • Basis for groupware tool Coordinator – structured email system – users must fit within CfA structure – not liked by users! ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 20. Conversations for action (CfA) Circles represent ‘states’ in the conversation Arcs represent utterances (speech acts) ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 21. CfA in action • Simplest route 1–5: Alison: have you got the market survey on chocolate mousse? request Brian: sure promise Brian: there you are assert Alison: thanks declare • More complex routes possible, e.g., 1–2–6–3 … Alison: have you got … request Brian: I've only got the summary figures counter Alison: that'll do accept ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 22. Text-based communication Most common media for asynchronous groupware exceptions: voice mail, answer-phones Familiar medium, similar to paper letters but, electronic text may act as speech substitute! Types of electronic text: – discrete directed messages, no structure – linear messages added (in temporal order) – non-linear hypertext linkages – spatial two dimensional arrangement In addition, linkages may exist to other artefacts ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 23. Problems with text No facial expression or body language ⇒ weak back channels So, difficult to convey: affective state – happy, sad, … illocutionary force – urgent, important, … Participants compensate: ‘flaming’ and smilies ;-) :-( :-) ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 24. example – ‘Conferencer’ linear conversation area – LHS RHS – spatial simulated pinboardARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 25. Pin board has similar granularity ‘cards’ only appear on other participants’ screens when edit/creation is confirmed Note separate ‘composition box’ – transcript only updated when contribution ‘sent’ – granularity is the contribution Conferencer (ctd) Note separate ‘composition box’ – transcript only updated when contribution ‘sent’ – granularity is the contribution Pin board has similar granularity ‘cards’ only appear on other participants’ screens when edit/creation is confirmed ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 26. Grounding constraints Establishing common ground depends on grounding constraints cotemporality – instant feedthrough simultaneity – speaking together sequence – utterances ordered Often weaker in text based communication e.g., loss of sequence in linear text ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 27. loss of sequence Network delays or coarse granularity ⇒ overlap 1. Bethan: how many should be in the group? 2. Rowena: maybe this could be one of the 4 strongest reasons 3. Rowena: please clarify what you mean 4. Bethan: I agree 5. Rowena: hang on 6. Rowena: Bethan what did you mean? Message pairs 1&2 and 3&4 composed simultaneously – lack of common experience Rowena: 2 1 3 4 5 6 Bethan: 1 2 4 3 5 6 N.B. breakdown of turn-taking due to poor back channels ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 28. Maintaining context Recall context was essential for disambiguation Text loses external context, hence deixis (but, linking to shared objects can help) 1. Alison: Brian's got some lovely roses 2. Brian: I'm afraid they're covered in greenfly 3. Clarise: I've seen them, they're beautiful Both (2) and (3) respond to (1) … but transcript suggests greenfly are beautiful! ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 29. Non-linear conversation hypertext-based or threaded-message systems maintain ‘parallel’ conversations 1. Alison: Brian’s got some lovely roses 2. Brian: I’m afraid they’re covered in greenfly 3. Clarise: I’ve seen them they’re beautiful 4. Clarise: have you tried companion planting? ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 30. Pace and granularity Pace of conversation – the rate of turn taking face-to-face – every few seconds telephone – half a minute email – hours or days face-to-face conversation is highly interactive – initial utterance is vague – feedback gives cues for comprehension lower pace ⇒ less feedback ⇒ less interactive ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 31. Coping strategies People are very clever! they create coping strategies when things are difficult Coping strategies for slow communication attempt to increase granularity: eagerness – looking ahead in the conversation game Brian: Like a cup of tea? Milk or lemon? multiplexing – several topics in one utterance Alison: No thanks. I love your roses. ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 32. The Conversation Game Conversation is like a game Linear text follows one path through it Participants choose the path by their utterances Hypertext can follow several paths at once ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 33. Brian: mmm, but I’ve had trouble with greenfly … like a game Alison’s turn Brian’s turn Alison: they’re the symbol of the English summer Alison: they’re the universal sign of love Brian: thanks, I’ll try that next year Brian: talking of love . . . Alison: have you tried companion planting? Brian: the red ones are my favourite Alison: Oh, look at your roses Alison’s turn Brian’s turn Alison: nice weather for the time of year participants choose the path by their utterances ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 34. Group dynamics Work groups constantly change: – in structure – in size Several groupware systems have explicit rôles – But rôles depend on context and time e.g., M.D. down mine under authority of foreman – and may not reflect duties e.g., subject of biography, author, but now writer Social structure may change: democratic, autocratic, … and group may fragment into sub-groups Groupware systems rarely achieve this flexibility Groups also change in composition ⇒ new members must be able to `catch up' ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 35. Physical environment Face-to-face working radically affected by layout of workplace e.g. meeting rooms: – recessed terminals reduce visual impact – inward facing to encourage eye contact – different power positions ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 36. power positions traditional meeting room white board power positions at front in reach of white board ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 37. power positions augmented meeting room shared screen power positions at back – screen accessed by keyboard ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE
- 38. Distributed cognition Traditional cognitive psychology in the head Distributed cognition suggests look to the world Thinking takes place in interaction – with other people – with the physical environment Implications for group work: – importance of mediating representations – group knowledge greater than sum of parts – design focus on external representation ARULKUMAR V AP/CSE SECE