Assignment 8, Option 2

The Kraut et al paper takes many ideas from Clark, and considers them in the visual realm. Kraut et al are interested in seeing how different visual spaces affect the performance and the efficiency of language use while doing a task. In all of their hypotheses they predicted that performance would be better and more efficient in the spaces with the most visual cues – face to face being the “best,” then video conference, then audio conference. In general their hypotheses were correct, except sometimes when they found that simple presence of visual cues made a difference, but it didn’t matter if they were actually co-present or simply visually co-present. Based on all of their findings, the authors were able to make some great suggestions at the end as to how to improve video communication technologies.

One of the main points from Clark that Kraut et al consider is the effect of grounding. In the visual realm, grounding is able to be accomplished many different ways. There can still be verbal input, in the form of acknowledgements and other utterances to show you share common ground. Also, grounding can occur in the knowledge that you can see the same things. When the worker looked at something, the helper could also see it, and they shared that knowledge. Because the technology was not perfect, however, sometimes it needed to be clarified what could be seen and what was out of view. This is something the authors address in their implications.

I am a bit concerned as to the whole premise behind the experiment – the participants were given a small benefit for participating, which is common practice, but they were also promised a $20 prize if they did it the fastest and the best. I am curious if you believe or saw evidence that this may have affected the participants in any way. Being motivated to go fast might have caused them to act certain ways that they wouldn’t have acted otherwise. In many collaborative discussions, there is no prize for getting done quickly, and participants are more at ease. Do you think the promise of reward/stress of going quickly affected the data or experiment in any way? (If allowed to take their time, might the results have been different?)

I agree with your concern about not being able to include any data about non-verbal communication. It is clear from this experiment how beneficial it is to be able to see each other, and part of this is due to the occurrence of non-verbal communication such as gestures or emotions. I believe that non-verbal communication is critical to understanding video communication. What do you think you might have found out if you could have incorporated data from their non-verbal communication? For example, if you could have included gestures, or studied how they reacted to emotion, how do you think this would have affected visual/non-visual communication.