Roles of Orientation in Tabletop Collaboration: Comprehension, Coordination and Communication

Abstract

Abstract. In order to support co-located collaboration, many researchers are now investigating how to effectively augment tabletops with electronic displays. As far back as 1988, orientation was recognized as a significant human factors issue that must be addressed by electronic tabletop designers. As with traditional tables, when people stand or sit at different positions around a horizontal display they will be viewing the contents from different angles. One common solution to this problem is to have the software reorient objects so that a given individual can view them 'right way up.' Yet is this the best approach? If not, how do people actually use orientation on tables? To answer these questions, we conducted an observational study of collaborative activity on a traditional table. Our results show that the strategy of reorienting objects to a person's view is overly simplistic: while important, it is an incomplete view of how people exploit their ability to reorient objects. Orientation proves critical in how individuals comprehend information, how collaborators coordinate their actions, and how they mediate communication. The coordinating role of orientation is evident in how people establish personal and group spaces and how they signal ownership of objects. In terms of communication, orientation is useful in initiating communicative exchanges and in continuing to speak to individuals about particular objects and work patterns as collaboration progresses. The three roles of orientation have significant implications for the design of tabletop software and the assessment of existing tabletop systems.

Exploring Social Interaction With a Tangible Music Interface

“…The use of liminal components that indicate the type of activity and the available access points from a walking distance appear useful for both activity access and group change: hearing the sound from the table speakers combined with seeing headphones allow for smooth overlaps and fluid transitions between groups because they indicate the type of activity and available spaces in which to join the activity. Orienting headphones to oneself before leaving the exhibit signals intentional communication using nonverbal conversational acts (Kruger et al, 2004); the person is leaving and ensures there is a free available access point. This evidences that orienting an object to oneself in crossgroup interaction is different from orienting an object to oneself in inter-group interaction, in which group members understand that the person is doing their own personal work instead (Kruger et al, 2004).…”

“…Orienting headphones to oneself before leaving the exhibit signals intentional communication using nonverbal conversational acts (Kruger et al, 2004); the person is leaving and ensures there is a free available access point. This evidences that orienting an object to oneself in crossgroup interaction is different from orienting an object to oneself in inter-group interaction, in which group members understand that the person is doing their own personal work instead (Kruger et al, 2004).…”

“…There is a large corpus of work on interactive surfaces and tabletops addressing a range of topics, such as size and orientation of display (Kruger et al, 2004), territoriality , interaction techniques (Nacenta et al, 2010), and awareness . Work on tabletop awareness is a topic of research in the literature that provides evidence of the connection between awareness and resolving interferences with others' activities for successful collaboration .…”

“…Tabletop collaboration has been investigated in terms of territoriality , orientation (Kruger et al, 2004), or coupling styles between individual and group work (Tang et al, 2006). Scott et al (2004) presented three tabletop territories in group collaboration: personal, group, and storage territories; Kruger et al (2004) identified intentional communication with a lack of verbal communication when orienting an object to oneself, to another person, or to the group; and Tang et al (2006) discussed implications for design in terms of supporting fluid transitions between coupling styles.…”

“…Scott et al (2004) presented three tabletop territories in group collaboration: personal, group, and storage territories; Kruger et al (2004) identified intentional communication with a lack of verbal communication when orienting an object to oneself, to another person, or to the group; and Tang et al (2006) discussed implications for design in terms of supporting fluid transitions between coupling styles. There are a number of studies of tabletops in public settings focusing on social interaction in groups.…”