lecture #12 collaboration. eye tracking. tvorba uživatelského rozhraní
TRANSCRIPT
TUR 2011
(4)
Reasons for computer supported collaborationReasons for computer supported collaboration
(4)
TUR 2011
(6)
Groupware in group actvitiesGroupware in group actvities
Groupware supports group activity,Groupware supports group activity,
that isthat is
- - communicationcommunication
- - collaborationcollaboration
- - coordination.coordination.
[Ellis, Gibbs, Rein, 1991][Ellis, Gibbs, Rein, 1991]
(6)
TUR 2011
(7)
Groupware definitionGroupware definition
Computer- based systemsComputer- based systems
that support groups of people engaged in athat support groups of people engaged in a
common task (or goal) andcommon task (or goal) and
that provide an interface to a sharedthat provide an interface to a shared
environment.environment.
[Ellis, Gibbs, Rein, 1991][Ellis, Gibbs, Rein, 1991]
(7)
TUR 2011
(10)
Construction Site
Project ManagerWorkerQuality Control Manager
Use case – Construction Area
MUMMY system
TUR 2011
(11)
Mummy Server
construction plans
Inspector
Construction site
Construction Site Inspection – Data Adaptation
TUR 2011
(12)
Inspector
Construction site
Construction Site Inspection – Data Adaptation
Mummy Server
construction plans
Adaptation
TUR 2011
(13)
Inspector
Construction site
Construction site inspection – Annotation Sharing
Mummy Server
construction plans
Adaptation
Remote expert
TUR 2011
(14)
Inspector
Construction site
Construction Site Inspection – Annotation Sharing
Remote expert
TUR 2011
(15)
CSCW Interview Guide Wasson, B. Guribye, F. & Mørch, A. (2000). Project DoCTA : Design and use Of
Collaborative Telelearning Artefacts. ITU Research Report, 5, 380 pages. Unipub Forlag : Oslo. ISBN: 82-7947-005-0.
Communication– The tool should facilitate both synchronous and asynchronous communication
between the team members. Administration
– The tool should provide functions to support the team in administration tasks such as scheduling meetings, distribution of work tasks etc.
Production– The tool should support the team in production of artefacts such as text documents,
images, web ages etc. Presentation
– The tool should facilitate the presentation and exchange of various types of information between the team members.
Navigating– The tool should provide guidance for how to use the tool and how to maneuver within
it.
TUR 2011
(16)
Communication Synchronous communication
– To what extent do you think the product made it possible for the group to communicate synchronously?
– What was the quality of this communication?– Which tools did you use for synchronous communication?– Do you have any suggestions for ways the synchronous
communication could have been improved?
Asynchronous communication– Did TeamWave make it possible for the team to communicate
asynchronous?– What was the quality of this communication?– Which tools did you use for asynchronous communication?– Do you have any suggestions for ways the asynchronous
communication could have been improved?
TUR 2011
(17)
Administration Do you think that the product supported the team in the
administration of the teamwork? If no:
– How did you administrate the teamwork? Otherwise:
– Which tools did you use to support administrative tasks? Are you satisfied in the way the team administrated the
work, or did you experience any problems?
TUR 2011
(18)
Production
Did you, through the support of the product, manage to produce the elements you wanted to include in the task (such as documents, images etc.)?
Which tools did you use to support these tasks? How well did these tools support production? Please report tools that you felt were missing, if any
TUR 2011
(19)
Presentation
To what extent did the product support you in presenting information for other team members?
Which tools did you use as aids when presenting information?
How well did these tools perform?
TUR 2011
(20)
Navigating
Was it ok to navigate within the various modes within the product?
How did you manage in finding the other members of your team (easy or difficult)?
TUR 2011
(21)
Help
To what extent did you use product’s help system? Did you use and of the web based help pages?
TUR 2011
(22)
General Questions
Are there any other aspects of the product that you want to comment on? – Not necessarily the specific tools, but rather some words
on your experiences in using the product as a GroupWare tool.
TUR 2011
(24)
Notes on the CSCW Testing
Methodology varies, depending on the type of the application– Collaboration over PC– Collaboration in the mobile environment
TUR 2011
(25)
Ecological Validity
= “the test setup reflects the real use” CSCW heavily influenced by social factors
– How people communicate– Boss vs. Employee– Personal relationships
Must be taken into account otherwise the test is ecologically invalid.– “I will rather send him a message using a private channel (no CC to
others) so that they don’t know I helped him, because they would think I am a stupid brown-noser.”
– “I would help him, but he would owe me one, and he does not want to feel obliged towards me. I would have a hard time with him.”
TUR 2011
(27)
Physiological Responses
Can’t read mind directly … yet …– (Actually, do we really want such a thing?)
But we have– Eye movement– Heart activity– Activity of the sweat glands– Electrical activity in muscle– Electrical activity in the brain
Free examination
Wealth of family
Ages of people
What were theydoing just before?
Remember theclothes worn
Remember the positionof the people
For how longhas he been gone?
Yarbus (1967) via Webb and Renshaw (2008)Yarbus (1967) via Webb and Renshaw (2008)Study of Unexpected Visitor (1888) by RjepinStudy of Unexpected Visitor (1888) by Rjepin
TUR 2011
(29)
Eye Movement
Non-homogenous resolution of retina– Fovea vs. peripheral vision– 2° of visual angle
Fixation– Constant direction of gaze– 200—300 ms
Saccade– Rapid movement of eye between fixations
Smooth pursuit– Following – Horizontal movement tracked better than vertical movement
TUR 2011
(30)
Eye Movement
Pupil dilation– Caused by luminance or cognitive workload
Pupil dilation, blink rate– Explored as a means of cognitive load and stress
TUR 2011
(31)(31)Federico M. Facca 31
Eye Tracking
Records eye movements Originally designed for mobility impaired users Relies on the “eye-mind” hypothesis
– “People look at what they are thinking about”
Used in neuroscience, cognitive psychology, advertising, and now … usability
TUR 2011
(32)
Eye Tracking
Previously a highly invasivemethod– Surgical modifications to the eyes
State-of-art systems– No physical contact– No constrains on the (reasonable) participants’ movement
Stanley Kubrick: A Clockwork Orange (1971)
TUR 2011
(33)(33)Federico M. Facca
Eye Tracking
Equipment– Head-mounted systems– Remote systems (ERICA)– Computer monitor camera
systems
TUR 2011
(34)(34)Federico M. Facca 34
Eye Tracking
Eye movements collected– Fixations – where the eye stops
long enough to absorb information– Saccades – move the eye from one
fixation to the next
Visual representation– Scanpath – the temporal sequence
of fixations and saccades
Other representations– Numerical– Real-time
TUR 2011
(35)(35)Federico M. Facca 35
Eye Tracking
Provides a higher level of granularity than other data collection methods & quantitative measures of user behavior
Reveals behavior not evident in concurrent think-aloud protocol– Scanning continues when people are silent or using verbal
fillers (ums and ahs)– Eye movement occurs faster than verbalization
Shows parts of a user interface/web page that receive user attention and how search is visually distributed.
TUR 2011
(36)
What to Measure
Number of fixations– More fixations in a task less efficient search strategy
Fixation duration– Longer fixations indication of a difficulty with a display
Scan path– Areas of interest– Search strategy– Cognitive load
TUR 2011
(37)
Example Questions that Can Be Resolved
Search– Where do people search for the correct link?
Comprehension– Is the navigation link, that people find, easy to
understand?– How long does it take to make a sense of a stimulus?
Making decisions– In what sequence do people look at visual elements?– Do different user groups show different visual behavior?
According to Webb and Renshaw (2008)
TUR 2011
(38)
Example Questions that Can Be Resolved
Reading and scanning– Parts that were scanned– Parts that were read
Efficiency of task completion– Is there a strategy of expert users?
Visual elements capturing attention– Do people notice banners?– Do certain elements distract users?
TUR 2011
(39)
“Golden Triangle” http://eyetrackingupdate.com/2010/06/14/eye-tracking-web-
usability-study-reveals-golden-triangle/
How many people see what when using Google– … when scanning a page– Top of the page: seen by 100 %– Bottom of the screen: 85 %– “Below the fold”: < 50 %– Last entry: 20 %
TUR 2011
(44)
Other Users for Eye Tracking
As a pointing device– Relatively low precision– Problems with two-focus interactions– Problems with actuation
• Dwell time?
• Blinking?
Typing for the motor-impaired people– http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvWdwB6nTkk
TUR 2011
(45)
Eye Tracking Videos
BBC News Reading– http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6DRl6tTjCU
Semi-commercial videos– http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lo_a2cfBUGc – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75RpQ2Z6nYc
TUR 2011
(46)
Doing a Study
Goals of the Study– Must be well defined– “Use the site for 10 minutes” is not enough
• Different people were doing different things• Browsing interesting articles?• Watching the ads?
Ethics– People reveal a lot about themselves
• More than they wish• Never give your raw data to anyone
– Many institutions require that experiment proposals are approved by an ethical committee
TUR 2011
(47)
Case study: Tomb Raider Study
Renshaw, Stevens and Finlay (2006)via Webb, Renshaw (2008)
Goals– Why even experienced players get stuck at particular
levels– Whether any changes in eye movement can be related
to player’s stress– Whether different levels would yield different
distributions of fixations
TUR 2011
(48)
Case study: Tomb Raider Study Method
– Playing Tomb Raider “Peru: Ball Puzzle” and “England: Pool Area”
– Tobii 1750 eyetracker– Pentium 4 PC, Playstation 2 Dualshock
controller. Procedure
– 7 males between 20 and 29 y.o.– Pre-test: General briefing, discussion of
the gaming experience– Not informed that each level is limited by
5 minutes– Asked at a given interval to use single-
word expressions such as “fine”, “great”, “frustrated”, how they feel.
TUR 2011
(49)
Case study: Tomb Raider Study
Replay of recorded eye movements The plot in the Peru level required the users to
locate an indentation in the floor.– No fixations not located by any user.
Correspondence of the fixation lengths and the mood reports not found
Fixation distributions differed in the two levels– Peru: Within a confined area– England: People needed to search for objects in
distance Advertisers need to know the optimal placements
TUR 2011
(50)
Other Physiological Measurements
Heart activity– Stress or anger
Activity of the sweat glands– Galvanic skin response– Levels of arousal and mental effort
Electrical activity in muscle– Electromyogram– Involvement in the task
Electrical activity in the brain– Electroencephalogram– Decision making, attention, motivation
TUR 2011
(51)
Other Physiological Measurements
Determining user’s emotional response to an interface
Current research question– How to interpret these measurements in the context of
the usability testing?– E.g. Increased heart rate means:
• “I can’t find that icon”
• “OMG, this test takes so long and I forgot to go to the bank.”