Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Articles
Published: 2021-12-31

Are you there? Presence in collaborative distance work

1Digital Transformation and Lifelong Learning Research Group, School of Technologies, University of Tallinn
Department of Education, Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki
Learning Environments Research Group, Aalto University
Department of Education, Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki
Department of Education, Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki
Department of Education, Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki
Department of Education, Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki
Research-based design tracking presence computer-mediated communication collaboration at work distance work

Abstract

Already before the pandemic, digitally mediated collaborative work and communication were perceived as challenging. We investigate the attitudes towards emerging technologies and for transforming practises in workplaces. The focus lies on understanding the readiness for appropriating emotional tracking on presence and support for collaboration. The research-based design framework allowed to combine the various perspectives of the transdisciplinary team. Methods included participatory design, design thinking, contextual inquiry and prototype testing for enhancing presence while working with shared objects in video conferencing to explore the appropriation of tools. The findings revealed four indications: 1) awareness of interlocutors’ presence during synchronous communication is crucial. 2)  Emotion and behaviour tracking raises concerns about privacy and personal control over what is displayed to others, and technology could be simpler non-distracting the work at hand.  3) The prototype was found to enhance the feeling of presence without disturbing work at hand, and 4) appropriation requires a step-by-step approach.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. Ackerman, M. S. (2000). The intellectual challenge of CSCW: The gap between social requirements and technical feasibility. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), Human Computer Interaction in the New Millennium, (pp. 303–324). New York: ACM Press.
  2. Anderson, J. F. Beard, F. K., & Walther, J. B. (2010). Turn-taking and the local management of conversation in a highly simultaneous computer-mediated communication system, Language@ Internet. 7(7).
  3. Arias, E., Eden, H., Fischer, G., Gorman, A., & Scharff, E. (2000). Transcending the individual human mind—creating shared understanding through collaborative design. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 7(1), 84–113.
  4. Arrighi, C., & Ferrario, R. (2008). Abductive Reasoning, Interpretation and Collaborative Processes. Foundations of Science, 13, 75–87.
  5. Bakker, D., Kazantzis, N., Rickwood, D., & Rickard, N. (2016). Mental Health Smartphone Apps: Review and Evidence-Based Recommendations for Future Developments. JMIR mental health. 3(1), e7. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.4984.
  6. Balters, S., Mayseless, N., Hawthorne, G., & Reiss, A. L. (2021). The Neuroscience of Team Cooperation Versus Team Collaboration. Design Thinking Research: Interrogating the Doing, 203.
  7. Bauters, M., Purma, J., & Leinonen, T. (2014). In-time on-place learning. In 10th International Conference on Mobile Learning 2014, (pp. 256–260). IADIS Press.
  8. Bauters, M. (2017). Experience in Design and Learning Approaches–Enhancing the Framework for Experience. Revista Română de Comunicare şi Relaţii Publice, 19(1), 51–68.
  9. Bayer, J. B., Campbell, S. W., & Ling, R. (2015). Connection Cues: Activating the Norms and Habits of Social Connectedness. Communication Theory, 26(2), 128–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12090
  10. Bhattacharjee, T., Datta, S., Das, D., Choudhury, A. D., Pal, A., & Ghosh, P. K. (2018). A Heart Rate Driven Kalman Filter for Continuous Arousal Trend Monitoring. In 2018 40th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, (pp. 3572–3577). (EMBC), IEEE
  11. Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Burgoon, J. K. (2003). Toward a more robust theory and measure of social presence: Review and suggested criteria. Presence: Teleoperators & virtual environments. 12(5), 456–480.
  12. Boon, S. D., & Holmes, J. G. (1991). The dynamics of interpersonal trust: Resolving uncertainty in the face of risk. In R. A. Hinde & J. Groebel (Eds.), Cooperation and Prosocial Behavior, (pp. 190–211). Oxford, K: Basil Blackwell.
  13. Cameron, A. F., & Webster, J. (2005). Unintended consequences of emerging communication technologies: Instant messaging in the workplace. Computers in Human behavior. 21(1), 85–103.
  14. Carroll, J. M., Rosson, M. B., Farooq, U., & Xiao, L. (2009). Beyond being aware. Information and Organization. 19, 162–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2009.04.004
  15. Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, and S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition, (pp. 127–149). Washington, DC: APA Books.
  16. Dourish, P., & Bellotti, V. (1992). Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Toronto. 107–114.
  17. Dourish, P. (2003). The appropriation of interactive technologies: Some lessons from placeless documents. Computer Supported Cooperative Work. 12(4), 465–490.
  18. Feenberg, A. (2010). Between reason and experience: Essays in technology and modernity. MIT Press.
  19. Fiore, S. M., & Wiltshire, T. J. (2016). Technology as teammate: Examining the role of external cognition in support of team cognitive processes. Frontiers in psychology. 7, 1531. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01531.
  20. Garro-Abarca, V., Palos-Sanchez, P. & Aguayo-Camacho, M. (2021). Virtual Teams in Times of Pandemic: Factors That Influence Performance. Front. Psychol. 12, 624–637. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.624637
  21. Grassini, S., & Laumann, K. (2020). Questionnaire measures and physiological correlates of presence: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology. 11, 349.
  22. Gravina, R., Parastoo, A., Ghasemzadeh, H., & Fortino, G. (2017). Multi-sensor fusion in body sensor networks: State-of-the-art and research challenges. Information Fusion. 35, 68–80.
  23. Gross, T. (2013). Supporting effortless coordination: 25 years of awareness research. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). 22 (4–6), 425–474.
  24. Grudin, J. (1994). Groupware and social dynamics: Eight challenges for developers. Communications of the ACM. 37(1), 92–105.
  25. Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (1998). Design for individuals, design for groups: tradeoffs between power and workspace awareness, in Proceedings of CSCW’98, (pp. 207–216). Seattle, WA).
  26. Hannola, L., Richter, A., Richter, S., & Stocker, A. (2018). Empowering production workers with digitally facilitated knowledge processes–a conceptual framework. International Journal of Production Research. 56(14), 4729-4743.
  27. Hinds, P. J., & Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication. Organization Science. 16(3), 290–307.
  28. Hontvedt, M., & Øvergård, K. I. (2019). Simulations at Work—a Framework for Configuring Simulation Fidelity with Training Objectives. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 1–29. https://doi.org/1-29.10.1007/s10606-019-09367-8
  29. Iacoboni, M., Molnar-Szakacs, I., Gallese, V., Buccino, G., Mazziotta, J. C., & Rizzolatti, G. (2005). Grasping the intentions of others with one's own mirror neuron system. PLoS biology. 3(3), e79.
  30. Ingusci, E., Signore, F., Giancaspro, M. L., Manuti, A., Molino, M., Russo, V., Zito, M. & Cortese, C. G. (2021). Workload, Techno Overload, and Behavioral Stress During COVID-19 Emergency: The Role of Job Crafting in Remote Workers. Front. Psychol. 12:655148. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.655148
  31. Järvenpää, S. L., Shaw, T.R., & Staples, D. S. (2004). Toward Contextualized Theories of Trust: The Role of Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Information Systems Research, INFORMS. 15(3), 250–267, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23015796. Accessed 25 July 2019.
  32. Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American psychologist. 39(10), 1123.
  33. Koskinen, I., Zimmerman, J., Binder, T. Redstrom, J. & Wensveen, S. (2013). Design Research Through Practice: From the Lab, Field, and Showroom. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 56(3), 262–263.
  34. Kruger, J., Epley, N., Parker, J., & Ng, Z.-W. (2005). Egocentrism over e-mail: Can we communicate as well as we think?. Journal of personality and social psychology. 89(6), 925.
  35. Kuo, F.-y., & Yu, C.-p. (2009). An exploratory study of trust dynamics in work-oriented virtual teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 14(4), 823–854.
  36. Mackay, W. (2000). Responding to cognitive overload: Co-adaptation between users and technology. Intellectica. 30(1), 177–193.
  37. Latour B. (1999). On Recalling Ant. The Sociological Review. 47(1_suppl), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1999.tb03480.x
  38. Lee, K. M. (2004). Presence, explicated. Commun. Theory. 14, 27–50. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00302.x
  39. Leslie, D., & Briggs, M. (2021). Explaining decisions made with AI: A workbook (Use case 1: AI-assisted recruitment tool). Available at SSRN 3808512. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3808512 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3808512
  40. Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review. 23(3), 438–458.
  41. Mattelmäki, T. (2006). Design probes. Aalto University. Publication Series of the University of Art and Design Helsinki A, 69/2006.
  42. McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, & V., Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems Research. 13(3), 334–359.
  43. Mueller, F., Maes, P., & Grudin, J. (2019). Human-Computer Integration (Dagstuhl Seminar 18322). Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik. https://doi.org/10.4230/DagRep.8.8.18
  44. Nardi, B. A., & Miller, J. R. (1991). Twinkling lights and nested loops: Distributed problem solving and spreadsheet development. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies. 34(2), 161–184.
  45. Noble, S. U., & Roberts, S. T. (2016). Through Google-colored glass (es): Design, emotion, class, and wearables as commodity and control. Emotions, Technology, and Design (Academic Press. ) 187–212.
  46. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Johnson, R. B. (2006). The validity issue in mixed research. Research in the Schools. 13(1), 48–63.
  47. Paavola, S., & Miettinen, R. (2019). Dynamics of Design Collaboration: BIM Models as Intermediary Digital Objects. Comput Supported Coop Work. 28, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-018-9306-4.
  48. Peake, J. M., Kerr, G., & Sullivan, J. P. (2018). A critical review of consumer wearables, mobile applications, and equipment for providing biofeedback, monitoring stress, and sleep in physically active populations. Front. Physiol. 28(9), 743. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2018.00743.
  49. Pejoska, J., Bauters, M., Purma, J., & Leinonen, T. (2016). Social augmented reality: Enhancing context‐dependent communication and informal learning at work. British Journal of Educational Technology. 47(3), 474–483
  50. Pirinen, A. (2016). The barriers and enablers of co-design for services. International Journal of Design, 10(3), 27–42.
  51. Preece, J. (2004). Etiquette, empathy and trust in communities of practice: Stepping-stones to social capital. JUCS. 10(3), 294–302.
  52. Pöysä-Tarhonen, J., Awwal, N., Häkkinen, P., & Otieno, S. (2020). From monitoring to sharing of attention in dyadic interaction : The affordances of gaze data to better understand social aspects of remote collaborative problem solving. In H.-J. So, M. M. Rodrigo, J. Mason, & A. Mitrovic (Eds.), ICCE 2020 : Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computers in Education, Volume I (pp. 109-118). Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education, from https://apsce.net/upfile/icce2020/ICCE%202020%20Proceedings%20-%20Volume%20I%20v4.pdf
  53. Quan-Haase, A., Cothrel, J., & Wellman, B. (2005). Instant Messaging for Collaboration: A Case Study of a High-Tech Firm. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 10(4) JCMC10413. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00276.x
  54. Ramstead, M. JD., Veissière, S. PL. & Kirmayer, L. J. (2016). Cultural affordances: Scaffolding local worlds through shared intentionality and regimes of attention. Frontiers in psychology. 7, 1090.
  55. Rogers, P., & Lea, M. (2005). Social presence in distributed group environments: The role of socialidentity. Behaviour & Information Technology. 24(2), 151–158.
  56. Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-disciplinary view of trust. Academy Management Review. 23(3), 393–404.
  57. Salminen, M., Järvelä, S., Ruonala, A., Timonen, J., Mannermaa, K., Ravaja, N., et al. (2018). Bio- adaptive social VR to evoke affective interdependence – DYNECOM. In 23rd international conference on intelligent user interfaces, (pp. 73–77).
  58. Sanders, E. B-N. (2003). From user-centered to participatory design approaches, in Design and the social sciences, CRC Press. 18–25.
  59. Schmidt, K. & Bannon, L. J. (1992). Taking CSCW seriously: Supporting articulation work, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW): An International Journal. 1(1–2), 7–40.
  60. Schober, M. F., & Spiro, N. (2016). Listeners' and performers' shared understanding of jazz improvisations. Frontiers in psychology, 7, 1629.
  61. Sivunen, A., & Nordbäck, E. (2015). Social Presence as a Multi-Dimensional Group Construct in 3D Virtual Environments. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 20(1), 19–36. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12090.
  62. Stahl, G. (2016). From intersubjectivity to group cognition. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). 25(4–5), 355–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-016-9243-z.
  63. Stewart, D. W., & Shamdasani, P. N. (2014). Focus groups: Theory and practice. 20. Sage publications.
  64. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003). Major Issue and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioural sciences. In C. Tashakkori & A. Teddlie (Eds.), A Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research, (pp. 3–50.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage).
  65. Trenerry, B., Chng, S., Wang, Y., Suhaila, Z. S., Lim, S. S., Lu HY & Oh, P. H. (2021). Preparing Workplaces for Digital Transformation: An Integrative Review and Framework of Multi-Level Factors. Front. Psychol. 12, 620766. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.620766
  66. Trigg, R. H., & Bødker, S. (1994). From implementation to design: Tailoring and the emergence of systematization in CSCW. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW. (pp. 45–54). Chapel Hill: ACM Press, '94.
  67. Törpel, B., Pipek, V., & Rittenbruch, M. (2003). Creating heterogeneity: Evolving use of groupware in a network of freelancers. Computer Supported Cooperative Work. 12(4), 381– 409.
  68. Van der Pol, J. (2007). Facilitating online learning conversations. Exploring tool affordances in higher education. Dissertation. IVLOS Series, Utrecht.
  69. Wikström, V., Makkonen, T., & Saarikivi, K. (2017). SynKin: A Game for Intentionally Synchronizing Biosignals. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’17), (pp. 3005–3011). ACM, New York, NY, USA, https://doi.org/10.1145/3027063.3053195.
  70. Wikström, V., Falcon, M., Martikainen, S., Pejoska, J.,Durall, E. Bauters, M., & Saarikivi, S. (2021). Heart Rate Sharing at the Workplace. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 5(10), 60. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti5100060.
  71. Wulf, V., Müller, C., Pipek, V., Randall, D., Rohde, M., & Stevens, G. (2015). Practice-based computing: Empirically grounded conceptualizations derived from design case studies. In Designing socially embedded technologies in the real-world, (pp. 111–150.) Springer, London.
  72. Zaki, J., & Ochsner, K. N. (2012). The neuroscience of empathy: progress, pitfalls and promise. Nature Neuroscience. 15(5), 675.
  73. Zhao, X., Lampe, C., & Ellison, N. B. (2016). The social media ecology: User perceptions, strategies and challenges. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, (pp. 89–100 ). ACM.
  74. Zhao, G., & Li, X. (2019). Automatic micro-expression analysis: open challenges. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 1833.

How to Cite

Bauters, M., Pejoska, J., Durall, E., Saarikivi, K., Wikström, V., Falcon, M., & Martikainen, S. (2021). Are you there? Presence in collaborative distance work. Human Technology, 17(3), 261–293. https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2021.17-3.5