multiview: improving trust in group video conferencing through spatial faithfulness
DESCRIPTION
CHI07 Presentation on the MultiView Project and Trust. Presented in San Jose. Best Paper Award Winner. David Nguyen and John CannyTRANSCRIPT
BERKELEY INSTITUTE OF DESIGNMultiView: Improving
Trust in Group Video
Conferencing through Spatial
Faithfulness
David NguyenJohn CannyUC Berkeley
ACM SIGCHI 2007San Jose, CAApril 28 – May 3
Perspective Invariance
Perspective Invariance
Perspective InvarianceMona Lisa
(the painting)
Your viewingposition
YourPerspective/
Leonardo DaVinci’sPerspective
21 3
CL R
21 3
Perspective Invariance andGroup Video Conferencing
21 3
21 3
21 3
CL R
21 3
Perspective Invariance andGroup Video Conferencing
21 3
21 3
The Apprentice…
Donald Accidentally Fires Entire Staff
Video
Conference
System to
BlameYou’re
Fired!
Effects of Video Conferencing
• Turn Taking(Vertegaal et al., 2000)
• Cooperation(Bradner and Mark, 2002)
• Persuasion (Bradner and Mark, 2002)
• Deception (Bradner and Mark, 2002)
• Trust(Bos et al., 2002)
Research Question
How do spatial distortions affect trust formation between two meeting groups?
Before that, we need a spatially faithful video conferencing system.
Our Approach
Our Approach
Gen 1
Gen 2
Gen 3
Gen 4
Our Approach
MultiView: Spatially Faithful Group Video Conferencing
Cameras
Projectors
MultiViewDisplay
1 32
L RC
1 32
1 32
1 32
1 32
L RC
1 32
1 32
1 32
Research Question
How do spatial distortions affect trust formation between
two meeting groups?
Trust Measure: DayTrader (Bos et al, 2002)
• Daytrader is a measure of trust.
• Daytrader is an Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma (PD) Game with Noise
• There were >30 rounds. In each round, groups were given 60 credits
• They chose how much to invest cooperatively and how much to keep individually
• Cooperative investments had a fluctuating market (average 50%) and split evenly, regardless of initial cooperative investment by each team (teams only knew their earnings)
• Every 5 rounds, a bonus is split between the two teams. The higher a team’s earning, the bigger their share of the bonus
0 60
0
60
A
B
60
10560
909045
45
105
Team A Investment
Tea
m B
In
vest
men
t
Does meeting through standard video conferencing affect trust formation when compared to face-to-face?
Can we improve trust formation patterns by using a spatially faithful video conferencing system such as MultiView?
Experimental Conditions
Face to
Face
MultiView
Standard Video Conferencing
Experimental Design
•N = 169 participantso 110 females, and 59 maleso 156 students (20), 13 staff members (39)o Formed 29 groups of 2 and 37 groups of 3o Groups were randomly formed
Results: Overview
Results: Overall Trust
2600.09 2627.641928.28
Face-to-Face vs. non-Directional Video Conferencing, p<0.05Directional Video Conferencing vs. Non-Directional Video Conferencing, p<0.05
Face-to-Face vs. Directional Video Conferencing, p>0.05
Results: Overall Trust
4.424 4.3883.562
Face-to-Face vs. non-Directional Video Conferencing, p<0.05Directional Video Conferencing vs. Non-Directional Video Conferencing, p<0.05
Face-to-Face vs. Directional Video Conferencing, p>0.05
Results: Overview
Results: Fragile Trust
-1.968 -2.348-4.520
Face-to-Face vs. non-Directional Video Conferencing, p<0.05Directional Video Conferencing vs. Non-Directional Video Conferencing, p<0.05
Face-to-Face vs. Directional Video Conferencing, p>0.05
Ability to Build Trust…… not always good!
Conclusions
Does meeting through standard video conferencing affect trust formation when compared to face-to-face? YES!
Can we improve trust formation patterns by using a spatially faithful video conferencing system such as MultiView? YES!
Acknowledgements
Nathan Bos
Questions?• Developed a spatially faithful video
conferencing system• Extended existing trust measure to support
group-to-group experimentation• Experimentally compared trust formation
patterns between groups meeting face-to-face, through standard video conferencing, and through spatially faithful video conferencing.
• Shown that spatial fidelity plays key role in trust formation between two groups meeting over video conferencing.
Prior Work: (Bos et al, 2002)
Trust Formation and CMC
Face-to-Face
Video
Audio Text
Results: Overall Trust
Results: Delayed Trust
Results: Fragile Trust
Face-to-Face vs. non-Directional Video Conferencing, p<0.05Directional Video Conferencing vs. Non-Directional Video Conferencing, p<0.05
Face-to-Face vs. Directional Video Conferencing, p>0.05
Construction
• Retroreflective LayerReflects image back in direction of source
• Vertical DiffuserDiffuses image vertically to accommodate varying viewing heights
• Antireflective/Antiglare Reduces distracting glares due to glossy surface and front projection setup
MultiView Directional Display
• Big, Bright, High Resolution Display
• Each view is provided by a projector
• The projected image is reflected directly back in the direction of the projector
• The image can be seen at varying heights only behind the projector
0
50
100
150
200
250
-30 -10 10 30
viewing angle (degrees)
illu
min
an
ce
(lu
x)
Illuminance vs. Viewing Angle
0O
α-20O
• JND Power Half Width = 7.5o (15”)
Planned Comparisons
•When doing pair wise comparison you can…o Perform and omnibus ANOVA followed by
pair-wise comparisons technique with proper adjustments
o Or, if you have specific comparisons driven by theory or prior data, you can use Planned Comparisons without any adjustment