Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Effects of tasks and phases on nonverbal communication
Liv Lefebvre - Alexandre Pauchet - Laurence Perron
France Telecom R&D
University of South Britany, France
2
Mediated communications
3
Theorical basis
4
Theorical basis
Computer Mediated Communications studies:
– Face to face
– Audio-visual
– Audio alone
Results : consequence of absence of visual cues :
– Management of communication turn is less fluent
– Reference to the shared environment must be more explicit
– Less mutual comprehension
– Negotiation and consensus more difficult to find, less solutions
BUT Whittaker's hypothesis (2003) : effects of mediated communication are task dependent
– Resolution problem tasks: few differences
– Task that require access to interpersonal information: larger differences
5
The experiment
6
Task comparison
Narrative co-conceptionPuzzle completion task
"create the most beautiful and coherent story possible with
your partner"
16 dyads18 dyadsParticipants:
Instructions : "complete the puzzle as quickly as possible with your partner
"
7
Task comparison: narrative co-conception task
8
Task comparison: puzzle completion task
9
Task comparison
Narrative co-conceptionPuzzle completion task
spatialverbal
knownnot knownNature of the solution :
Nature of the task :
10
Technical device
11
Measurement
Nonverbal production:
– Gaze
12
Measurement
Nonverbal production:
– Gaze
– Communicative gestures: serve to complete and module discourse (Ekman & Friesen, 1969 ; Goldin-Meadow, 1999 ; McNeill, 1992)
– Metaphorics
– Beats
metaphoric beat
13
Measurement
Nonverbal production:
– Non communicative gestures (adaptors):– are gestures produced in case of personal
disorganization (Ekman and Friesen, 1969)– they don't have any relation with social interaction
(Argentin, 1984 ; Masse, 2000)
adaptators
14
Measurement
Nonverbal production:
– Gaze– Communicative gestures: serve to complete and module
discourse (Ekman & Friesen, 1969 ; Goldin-Meadow, 1999 ; McNeill, 1992)– Metaphorics– Beats
– Non communicative gestures (adaptors):– are gestures produced in case of personal disorganization
(Ekman and Friesen, 1969)– they don't have any relation with social interaction
(Argentin, 1984 ; Masse, 2000) Rate of nonverbal production = ( time spend to product /
session's time ) * 100
15
Results
16
Results: comparison between two tasks
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
puzzle completiontask
narrative co-conception task
Ra
tes
of
no
nv
erb
al p
rod
uc
tio
n
Non communicativegestures
Communicativegestures
Gaze
17
Results: comparison between two tasks
Puzzle completion
taskNarrative co-
conception taskGaze 16 % 44 %
Communicative gestures 6 % 7 %
Non communicative gestures 79 % 49 %
Patterns of nonverbal production are task dependent
Can see his partner is not necessary in puzzle completion task…
…but there isn't the case in narrative co-conception task
Confirmation of the Whitaker's hypothesis
18
Results: comparison between phases in the puzzle completion task
Comparison between phases in the puzzle completion task
– Planning phase
– Execution phase
19
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Planificationphase
Executionphase
Rat
e o
f n
on
verb
al p
rod
uct
ion
Non communicativegestures
Communicativegestures
Gaze
Results: comparison between phases in the puzzle completion task
Planning phase
Execution phase
20
Results: comparison between phases in the puzzle completion task
Big difference in non verbal production
Planning phase Execution phase
Gaze 53 % 7%
Communicative gestures 42% 4%
Non communicative gestures 5% 90%
21
Results: comparison between phases in the narrative co-conception task
21 dyads interact via computers
– Same task
– Same instructions
Differences between phases are less clear:
– Review of items
– Narrative phase
– Interaction phase
22
Results: comparison between phases in the narrative co-conception task
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Review ofitems
Narrativephase
Interactionphase
Rat
es o
f n
on
verb
al p
rod
uct
ion
Non communicativegestures
Communicative gestures
Gaze
23
Results: comparison between phases in the narrative co-conception task
Review of items Narrative phase Interaction phase
Gaze 34% 30% 46%
Communicative gestures 2% 13% 9%
Non communicative
gestures 64% 57% 45%
24
Results summary
Production of gaze:
– In puzzle completion task in planning phase: 53 %
– In narrative co-conception task: 44 %
– In interaction phase: 46 %
Production of communicative gestures:
– In puzzle completion task in planning phase: 42 %
Production of non communicative gestures:
– In puzzle completion task: 79 %
– In execution phase: 90 %
25
Conclusion
26
Conclusion
Whittaker's hypothesis (2003) is verified:
– During the narrative co-conception: more gaze and communicative gestures
– During puzzle completion: more non communicative gestures In addition: differences between phases in interactions:
– Planification phase: more gaze and communicative gestures– Execution phase: more non communicative gestures
Applications for design of new systems of mediated communications
– Importance of visual access:– During tasks that require access to interpersonal information– When users have need to negotiate the task planification
– Not necessary to have a visual access:– During resolution problem tasks– When users have already plan the task and they execute their
plans
thank you
contact: [email protected]
Whittaker, S. (2003). Theories and Methods in Mediated Communication. In A. C. Graesser & M. A. Gernsbacher &S. R. Goldman (Eds.), Handbook of Discourse Processes. Mahwah: NJ: LEA.
28
29
30
Experimental manipulation
4 experimental conditions:
– At a distance with the same view on the material
– At a distance with opposite view on the material
– Collocated situation side-by-side
– Collocated situation face-to-face
31
Experimental manipulation
4 experimental conditions:
– At a distance with the same view on the material
– At a distance with opposite view on the material
– Collocated situation side-by-side
– Collocated situation face-to-face
32
Experimental manipulation
4 experimental conditions:
– A a distance with the same view on the material
– A a distance with opposite view on the material
– Collocated situation side-by-side
– Collocated situation face-to-face
33
Experimental manipulation
4 experimental conditions:
– A a distance with the same view on the material
– A a distance with opposite view on the material
– Collocated situation side-by-side
– Collocated situation face-to-face
34
Results by conditions
Distance
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
puzzle completion narrative co-conception
Rat
es o
f n
on
verb
al p
rod
uct
ion
Non communicativegestures
Communicative gestures
Gaze
35
Results by conditions
collocated
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
puzzle completion narrative co-conception
Rat
es
of
no
nv
erb
al p
rod
uc
tio
n
Non communicativegestures
Communicativegestures
Gaze
36
Results by conditions
face-to-face
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
puzzle completion narrative co-conception
Rat
es
of
no
nv
erb
al p
rod
uc
tio
n
Non communicativegestures
Communicativegestures
Gaze
37
Results by conditions
Side-by-side
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
puzzle completion narrative co-conception
Ra
tes
of
no
nv
erb
al p
rod
uc
tio
n
Non communicativegestures
Communicativegestures
Gaze
