Investigating collaborative (mobile) media beyond work

Shooting and sharing

Converging

Giving

Living together

Today’s topics

Mobile collaborative activity Shooting and sharing

How and why are images shared? What can be learned from everyday capturing and sharing of

images to support the design of camera phones Giving

Txts as ‘gifts’ and implications for design Converging

Usability and acceptability issues in the merging of collaborative and personal technologies

Living together Researching cooperation at home

What are photos for - printed photos as shared resources Printed photos - Liechtl & Ichikawa (2000)

Shared photos: giving to/sharing with friends Household photos: framed and displayed Work photos: displayed at work Wallet photography: personal photos carried in wallet or

purse Tourist photography: holiday photos

OK, but what are photos for? This surely affects the way we might store, share and search on camera phones Reminiscing? Reinforcing social contact? Reference, shared or otherwise?

Classify the images stored on your (or your neighbour’s) camera phone according to Type of picture content - people, objects, landscapes Why they were captured and stored How - if at all - they are shared with other people

What are photos for - camera phones

Increasingly researched from the perspective of technology design

Two in-depth naturalistic studies, sociological/ethnographic (Okabe) and design-oriented (Kindberg), but similar observations

Emergent social practices: Okabe (2004) Okabe, D (2004) Emergent Social Practices, Situations and Relations through

Everyday Camera Phone Use, Proc. Int’l Conf. Mobile Comm. and Social Change, 2004, pp. 1–19.

http://keitai.sfc.keio.ac.jp/ja/pdf/okabe_0410-1.pdf

Japanese ethnographic study, undertaken in 2003 Camera phones comprised >60% of all mobiles

Aim “to provide qualitative and experiential contexts” Diaries of usage - content and contextual details

Time of usage, who in contact with, recipient or initiator, where… Records of photos taken, received & shared (& collected last

10 pictures) In-depth interviews 15 participants: high school & college students, housewives,

professionals

Usage patterns 1 Personal archiving “most photos”

Note taking “momentary slice of a viewpoint”

Highly personal and individual, related to identity construction

Onamori (good luck charm) Intimate sharing

Usually viewed together on handset, not sent

Sending photos is intrusive and expensive

Close family and friends “distributed co-presence” Maintaining close contact as an

end in itself: “tele-cocooning”

Usage patterns 2

Peer-to-peer news and reporting “noteworthy events that

others may be interested in”

Less intimate mode of sharing

Everyday photo-journalism

Also for online photo-journals

Conclusions

Ubiquitous and lightweight camera phones capture fleeting and unexpected moments

More strongly personal, first-person content compared with the third party perspective of a family group or scene captured with a traditional camera

Archive of fragments of everyday life Sharing protocols still evolving Gaze of others always potentially present

The Ubiquitous Camera: Kindberg et al (2005) Kindberg, T. Spasojevic, M., Fleck, R. and Sellen, A. (2005) The Ubiquitous Camera: An in-depth

study of camera phone use, IEEE Pervasive Computing, April-June 2005, 42-50

Interview-based study Aim to “understand how people use these devices to help steer a

course for facilities that people will truly value” Two interviews, 2-5 weeks apart

5 ‘random’ images from phone For each image asked details of capture, sharing and usage

Logged image data for inter-interview period Difficulties, perceived value and wishlist

34 participants, rather more men than women 9 aged 16-21 and 10 over-21 in UK 4 aged 16-21 and 11 over-21 in US Experienced users, variety of comms technology

Basic findings

Around 34 photos captured per month Only c.2 images received per month Most sharing face-to-face

Around 6 images sent directly per month, also some sent via PCs

Only 12 people printed photos Around 15 photos archived per month

Kindberg et al. (2000), p.46

Reasons for capture 1

6 categories Affective or functional Social or individual

To share with others present To share with absent others

Mutual experience (affective/social) (35%) To be shared immediately As mementos

Absent friends (affective/social) (21%) Usually images of specific meaningful things or people, often woven into

conversational context A way to stay close: “telepresence”

Often intended to be shared but not sent Time and effort? Or lost impulse? Or quality?

Wanted to keep some indefinitely but quality problems

Reasons for capture 2

Personal reflection (affective/individual) (41%) Largest category - as in the Osabe study Portability important

“It’s nice to capture a little moment to carry with you.” Keeping treasured object/person close Reflecting aspirations and achievements (e.g.coveted house) Around two-thirds also shared, around one-third intended to keep

Mutual task (functional/social) (4%) Task undertaken together at the time Demonstrating/experimenting with phone Shared record required (e.g. meeting, state of plumbing)

Remote task (functional/social) (8%) Task undertaken with someone absent at the time of capture Mostly of object connected with the task e.g. fish to feed, jacket to buy Timeliness often important, images sent rather than shown

Reasons for capture 3

Personal task (functional/individual) (10%) Usually things connected with the task, e.g. gift ideas,

meeting notes Personal reminders

‘Functional’ images tend not to be kept

Overall observations/design implications Sharing mostly face-to-face and spontaneous - as in Osabe

study Images sent rely on shared context; depend on and strengthen

relationships Support for tasks is a ‘new form of communication’ (?) Substantial element of keeping images long-term (27%) Images captured in settings where unlikely to carry

conventional camera Need for

Reduced technical complexity, lower costs, improved quality Simple send and broadcast Continue communication while browsing/sharing Better searching/browsing/archiving - role for contextual information?

Sound, location, other people…

So, what about video on mobiles?

www.3g.co.uk, June 2006 -Use of fixed and mobile videotelephony, Western Europe, 2006–11

Usage of personal videocommunications devices and services is set to take off in Western Europe Analysy “global advisers on telecoms, IT and media” http://research.analysys.com

By 2010 household penetration of fixed videocommunications will reach 32% 11% of adult population will be using mobile videotelephony.

Mobile videotelephony's ergonomic complexity means that its usage levels may never be as high as broadband's, even with the higher quality of 3.5G

While 30% of 3G users in the UK had tried videotelephony, impact on revenue has been minimal

Why?

O’Hara, Black & Lipson (2006) Everyday Practices with Mobile Video Telephony Authors from HP Labs and Orange, suggesting real

commercial pressure to find out what’s going on Marketing experience and established research has

consistently found resistance to the adoption of fixed-point videotelephony Business video-conferencing facilities underused Personal videotelephony failed to replace voice, despite

confident predictions Social concerns - privacy, control of self-presentation… Practical barriers - setting up the kit, cost…

Might mobile videotelephony change this? Mobile phones have stimulated shifts in

behaviours and attitudes in relation to audio technology

Does similar shifts occur with video calls? More scope to show objects, context and other people

with mobile video More spontaneous set-up

“identify new behaviours, attitudes and concerns around mobile video telephony”

The study

21 participants, all users of 3G phones 13 men, 8 women, aged 20 - 40 Distributed across full range of market segments for lifestyles

and patterns of phone use Each knew some of the others (so they had someone to talk

to using video) Paid for participation

Data gathering Diary (via answerphone) of all video calls over 5 weeks

Made or received the call Who, when, why, what Why video

Interviews pre- and post- 5 week period

Usage findings

Only 58 successful video calls made, 32 received On average received 1 call every 3 weeks and made

one every 2 weeks Location for making calls

Home 30% Workplace 19% Shop 14% Car 8% Public transport 6% Bar 4%

Reasons

Keeping in touch with ‘small talk’ - 50% Maintaining relationships with partner, family and especially children

Here mobility and flexibility are the important factors, as well as adding emotional depth

Showing things - 28% Potential purchases e.g. trying on a dress Other people - who’s in the office? Again mobility and opportunistic availability, but problems with

framing the desired image & switching between face-to-face and object vie

Functional to achieve a goal or task - 22% Typically making arrangements, business discussions Video is incidental, and even a hindrance

Social barriers (largely about managing boundaries) Audio is too public Video is too public More inconvenient to receive than audio in

inappropriate circumstances Too much personal information Difficult to lie Aurally and visually intrusive

Practical barriers

High ambient noise - because the phone is held away from the face

Poor lighting and camera angles Difficulties of dual tasking - physical and social

Design suggestions

Easier switching between audio and video modalities

More sophisticated profiles settings to filter video calls or to inform callers of recipient’s context (e.g. home, work, car…)

Some issues inherent to mobile video use, e.g. dual tasking?

‘Gift-giving’ through txt

Taylor, A.S. and Harper, R. Age-old practices in the “New World”: A study of gift-giving between teenage mobile phone users. Proc. CHI’02, New York, ACM Press

From giving images to giving txts - sociological study demonstrating how the practical use of mobile technology shaped by entrenched social practices - in this case, gift giving in the shape of text messages

4 month ethnographic study of six London 16-19 year olds, 2 boys, 4 girls Observations and interviews Experienced and frequent use of phones, more

particularly, text

Aspects of gift giving 1

Gifts embody meaning associated with the giver and the relationship Yeah, Peter sends me loads of nice messages and I

want to keep them all. It’s so sad cause he sends me so many nice ones and I have to delete some. I feel horrible.... And like, I really don’t want to give the phone back because it’s got so many little memories and things on. And it’s not the same having them written down... cause it’s not from him anymore...

And often form a ritual of exchange ‘Good-night’ messages between friends

Aspects of gift giving 2

Gifts impose obligations of exchangeAlex: [Asks where they use their phones and what for.]

Jennifer: Mostly text messages, I think… At home, in my room, on my bed…. And then I get moody if they don’t reply and it’s like one o’clock in the morning. I’ve got ones that are recorded at like three o’clock in the morning. [group laughs] It’s like wicked.

Alice: And I do that to. Sometimes I’m like ‘okay, if I’m not sleeping then you have no right to be asleep.’

Jennifer: Yeah, that’s what I do. ‘How dare you be asleep when I’m awake?’

Alice: … and then I wake them up. And if I send a message and I see that they’re ignoring it then I call them. [Laughs] It rings and they just can’t get away from me.

Aspects of gift giving 3

Reinforce alliance and friendship Both at distance and face-to-face A group of four girls sit round a table. Two of the girls are

using mobile phones. One, G1, looks as though she is playing a game. She is heavily engaged with the phone and seems focused on it. The other, G2, is looking at a phone’s display with a third girl, G3. They laugh and talk as they look at the phone. G2 hands the phone to G3 and then retrieves another phone from a bag on the table. Meanwhile, G1 has taken G3’s phone and now holds two phones – one in each hand. She seems to be pressing the keys on one of the phones and looking between them (perhaps copying something). The four girls carry on interacting with their phones.

Aspects of gift giving 4

Gifts demonstrate status and rivalry You can use it to wind people up. Sometimes when, umm, I call him

[boyfriend], I call his phone and the minute it rings – just the first ring – I’ll hang up… I’ll do that about five or six times. And I’m always afraid he’s in a lesson. He doesn’t tend to switch his phone off or put it on silent. It’s always on personal. So if it rings I know it’s going to interrupt his lesson. If I’m feeling evil I just do that and I call him like six times and just hang up each time and then eventually he’ll switch it off. And then he’ll call me and go: ‘You stupid girl. Why were you calling me?’ I’m like: ‘Calling you? Oh my phone must have been… I forgot to lock it or something so I must have sat on it or something.’ I’m like ‘how dare you call me stupid!’ and he starts apologising. I feel really good. I’ve never told him that I actually do it intentionally. He doesn’t know that yet,… but it’s fun… And he’s like: ‘I’m sorry, I’m sorry. You know I love you really. I’m so sorry, I’ll never ever...’

Aspects of gift giving 5

Gifts carry different values I hate it when they do it [send text messages] in capitals and

sometimes when they don’t put punctuation marks in, ah, it annoys me. Another thing I’ve noticed is that… Ok, you’re going outside the normal rules of the normal everyday English language writing and everything and so because of that you don’t have to keep conforming to the commas, full stops, and the capitals and all that. But still, it bugs me when people refuse to do it properly. They put three words together and there’s no indication of where it starts or where it ends, no full stop, no nothing. It just looks horrible…. Yeah, because there’s some words for instance… if you don’t have enough space ok and you’re too cheap to send two messages instead of one, what you cando is probably,… use the symbol - ‘&’– so even if you join it together… that kind of isn’t as bad as if you squashed everything together… just looking urgh…

Aspects of gift giving 6

Gifts can be personal or shared … And ones that are directed at a lot of people like I told

you my friend text me to say ‘thanks for asking me out. I had really nice time. Say hi to everyone.’ And I showed that around and said ‘argh, how cute is she?’ Because she hardly ever comes out with us, and umm,… everyone was like ‘arr, yeah…’ And then there are ones that say… Umm, I can’t think of anything. Like [pauses]… Like my friend was telling me that he used to get bullied at school and stuff and like he was saying how horrible it was and like I would never show that message to anyone, which is why I deleted it.

Taylor and Harper’s design suggestions A tangible means to store messages, such as memory

cards, could be used so as to support the embodiment of meaning in the physical object.

Mobile phones should be designed so that the objects of exchange—the memory cards—can be shared and swapped in practical ways, ways that support observable ritual performance.

Elements of the design, such as access privileges to stored messages, could be used to sustain alliances and rivalries between social groups.

By allowing stored text messages to be accessed in the proximity of particular places or people, meaning and thus value may be ascribed to the messages.

Convergence in mobile devices

Murphy, J., Kjeldskov, J., Howard. S., Shanks, G. and Hartnell-Young, E. The Converged Appliance: I love it but I hate it, Proc. Ozchi ‘05

Perspectives on convergence: Utopian: more means more Dystopian: less is more Hybrid: only up to a point -

the ‘usability knee’ Convergence of functionality

and merging of collaborative, work, social and individual purposes

Empirical study of convergence and divergence Use of converged devices by young urban professionals

6 people, 5 completed the study Data gathering using ‘cultural probes’ - multi-faceted

technique originally popularised by Gaver (1999) to have users collect data themselves on technology-in-use In this case diary, scrapbook, Polaroid camera, set of

catchphrases “prompting the participants to reflect on their use of technology” - used for 4 weeks

Interviews before and after Analysed for convergence and divergence themes

Study results

No neat patterns of convergence or divergence, or support for utopian, dystopian or hybrid perspectives

Reported added value of converged devices BlackBerry email devices with phone Phones with cameras and email Desire for the device which would be good at everything

But frustration with converged devices pushed past the ‘usability knee’ Poor usability of BlackBerry phone: separate phones

used instead, hence problems solved by divergence

Convergence-in-use findings

Convergence of different purposes for same device: work, home, leisure (e.g. all on the same PC)

And divergence in use according to purpose iPods used for music in leisure settings, even though could be done

through PDA or phone In some cases seemed to be done explicitly to demarcate work and

leisure E.g. multiple mobile phones, as well as the iPod example

The position of the ‘usability knee’ seems to change according to purpose (and presumably goals and tasks) Carrying a highly converged PDA in work hours, but a simple mobile

at weekends A tendency for convergent devices for work and divergent for leisure

Researching collaborative technologies in the home Technologies for the home change and are

changed by domestic social relations designing for the home can be viewed as ‘a social and

political act’ (Bell et al., 2005)

Much of what goes on at home requires, in some sense, cooperation and coordination

We all ‘know’ about home life, so assumptions are invisible Need to defamilarise the home (Bell)

Techniques for investigating the home Technology biographies Cultural/technological probes Sharing domestic activitiesSupported by Interviews, usually in situ Ethnographic observations Diaries Artefact collection and narration (remember the studies of camera

phones)

Use of techniques woven through the following examples…

At home with the technology

O'Brien, J., Rodden, T., Rouncefield, M. and Hughes, J. At home with the technology: an ethnographic study of a set-top-box trial. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, Vol.6, No. 3, 1999, pp. 282 – 308.

“study of the social organization of a number of domestic environments in the northwest of England…the ways in which an understanding of the nature of the home is of interest to the developers of future interactive technology.” Specifically a set-top digital box for interactive services delivered by

broadband(note date is 1999, but the approach remains valid) A set of “sensitising concerns” for design

11 households, range of household types, technological experience, etc.

Aim not to be representative, but to obtain a broad understanding of how particular technologies might be used

Techniques & topics

Homes are private, so conventional ethnography unacceptable Evening visits by researchers, taking part in activities and

sharing meals Informal interviews and observations

In conjunction with a trial of the set-top box (STB) The report discusses, in the context of media technology

in general Daily routines The ownership and management of domestic space Co-ordination and interaction

F usually gets back at about 2:30/3:00 p.m. and picks C2 up and then starts “the evening”—she then watches children’s TV with C1 when he gets in. Then they eat at about 6:30 when M comes back from work; have dinner together in the kitchen around the table.

M “There’s no conflict [over use of space]. They all do what they’re told! [All laugh]... There could be a possible conflict of interest, but it’s such a big house,that if you want to do something and find a hole in which to do it... um, the only conflict arises when we’ve got one television and one hifi stereo system, in a similar area... and that... which is up there... but both of them can actually be plugged into headphones, so if there’s only one person wanting to watch Baywatch [R had joked earlier about his enjoyment of this program]...”

The STB trial

Box provided access to film, television, music, radio, games, shopping, local information, timetables, tickets, energy use monitoring, bill-paying, home banking - pin-based security

Issues surfaced Aesthetics Control of the technology and its costs Perceptions and understanding of the technologyM “Where’s it all stored, all the past episodes... is it stored in there?” [Points to

STB. Fieldworker briefly outlines the infrastructure] F “So you have got virtually infinite storage?”M “So are you paying all the time on all the services on-line?”

Security Concentration of technology

Conclusions

Need for technology which can be exploited in a flexible manner, often in distributed locations homes and routines are very different

Need for transparent management and control of the technology

Distributed and cooperative nature of domestic live The importance of social aspects in the adoption of

technology Useful role of ethnography in surfacing these issues

Technology biographies

Blythe, M., Monk, A., and Park, J. 2002. Technology biographies: Field study techniques for home use development. CHI’02 Extended Abstracts.

A structured technique for home ethnography

Elements of the technology biography Technology tour

Tour of the house, what technology is used where, why, when, by whom

Also ‘tour’ of PCs Social and temporal patterns of use

‘Last time’ questions E.g. when was the last time you enjoyed a domestic task? Patterns, routines, disruptions

Personal history Changes in domestic technology over one’s lifetime

Guided speculation Hopes and fears for homes of the future

Three wishes I wish I had…

Findings from small pilot study

Labour saving devices do not save time Housework is no fun Gendered technology Privatisation of domestic space

“a move towards a holistic and explicit method that takes the researcher from home visits to provocative illustrative product suggestions”

Used in later studies

“Probes” 1

The interLiving project’s technology probes Hutchinson, H., Mackay, W., Westerlund, B., Bederson, B., Druin, A., Plaisant, C., Beaudouin-Lafon, M.,

Conversy, S.,Evans, H., Hansen, H., Roussel, N., Eiderbäck, B., Lindquist, S. and Sundblad, Y. (2003) Technology Probes: Inspiring Design for and with Families. Proc. CHI’03, 17-24

“families from Sweden, France, and the U.S. to design and understand the potential for new technologies that support communication among diverse, distributed, multi-generational families”

Aim to achieve active participation in the design process

Cultural probes and technology probes Gaver et al.’s cultural probes - materials such as disposable

cameras and diaries meant to inspire people to reflect on their lives

interLiving’s technology probes installing a technology into a real context, watching how it is used

over a period; reflecting on use to gather information about the users and inspire ideas for new technologies

Idea is that users will both adapt and adapt to the technology Not prototypes, but probes Encountered logistical & technical problems, but all probes used for

> 1 month Other data collection

Families logged use Interviews Lo-tech participatory prototyping workshops

Message probe

Digital Post-Its in a zoomable space

Written in Java Synchronous Writable tablet/pen interface Connected to small number of

family members No need for address list etc All could edit each note All notes visible to everyone

The probes deployed

US 3 families, 6 weeks Nuclear family + grandparents Used everyday Usage

Grandfathers > fathers > children & mothers > grandmothers

Mainly grandparents to/from nuclear family coordination of childcare

Not considered reliable Wanted notification of new

items

Sweden Two pairs of sisters &

partners/children over several months

Used mainly by sisters (frequently) to complement other communication

Often playful Messages annotated and re-

annotated Also notification issue, but thought

might be intrusive Overall

“helpful in revealing communication patterns and technology needs and desires”

videoProbe

Simple, impromptu image sharing Snapshots from a (detachable) video camera mounted above a simple display Could be stored and browsed, faded over time Attempted - not very successfully - to fit in with the furniture Installed in homes of pairs of brothers and sisters in France Used for fun - making faces - and messages - by taking a picture of the

message (early results)

Conclusions

Revealed directions for further investigation: design for playful or purposeful communication

Need for better means of specifying recipients of communication

Design to augment existing objects

“staying connected with and aware of family was important, but people had different motivations for doing so and wanted to do it in different ways” (!)

From ethnography to design - supporting interactive design for domestic settings with patterns Crabtree, A., Hemmings, T. and Rodden, T. (2002) Pattern-based

support for interactive design in domestic settings”, Proc, DIS’02, 265-276

Means of structuring ethnographic material for use in design Similar to work-based CSCW Patterns

Alexander’s original idea of a pattern language for architecture, based on the patterns of actions and events that organise people’s interaction with places

Later translated to software analysis and design, becoming very popular

Proposed as a means of dealing with the rich ethnographic data from field studies for computer supported cooperative work

The basic idea

Condensed from a much more theory-laden presentation in the original

Using patterns to structure analysis & presentation of the data, but not - at this stage at least - to generalise between studies, because domestic life is so diverse Aligning research results with “the broad needs of

design” Place-based patterns of action and technology

usage

Data for the patterns

Video ethnography 6000 hours of digital video from 16 households Minimum 10 consecutive days per year over 2 years Kitchen, childrens’ bedroom and (where available) study “conducted their affairs without undue concern” - more

concerned with getting on

Analysed in detail to identify regularities

The patterns themselves

Web-based, allowing multimedia contents Elements:

Title Key technologies

Interactional setting Where and who and what is involved, and related primary pattern

Organizational context The practical issue addressed

Work of the pattern Synopsis of activities and transcript

Social practices ordering the work of the pattern Recurring ways in which things get done

Connecting patterns

Comment

The various elements of the patterns seem too undifferentiated for easy use as an analysis tool

The contents and structuring of the patterns are very much in academic sociological terms

Authors’ conclusions: Importance of legacy technologies in domestic interaction design Generic patterns of interactional practices may be usefully drawn

upon in design of new technologies A contribution to the development of models of domestic technology

use

In summary

The role of mobile phones in supporting some aspects of everyday social life

Cooperation at home, and how it has been investigated