1. LET’S TALK ABOUT NOT-TALKING
Micro-coordination: Because We did not Already Learn Everything We Need to Know about Working
with Others in Kindergarten
Joon-Suk Lee

2. MOTIVATION

3. illustration: Joon-Suk lee
"One HCI researcher shared with me that she and
her husband text message instead of simply talking
when they are lying next to one another in the same bed."
Branham, S. & Harrison, S., Designing for Collocated Couples, Connecting Families: The Impact of New Communication Technologies on Domestic Life.
In C. Neustaedter, S. Harrison, & A. Sellen, eds. Springer.

4. INTERACTION IN DUAL SPACE

5. Digital Space
Social Space

6. THE STUDY

9. THE STUDY
• Participants
recruited from
the Psychology Participant
pool, N>1200
• 168 (89 female, 79 male)
college students
• 24 dyads & 40 triads

10. THE STUDY
• Informed Consent
• Questionnaire 1
• Walk-Through
• Game 1
• Questionnaire 2
• Game 2
• Questionnaire 3

11. • Three people played the same Sudoku puzzle on
different screens for 15 min.

12. FINDINGS

16. NO ONE

17. TALK VS. NON TALK
• TALK was diagnostic of
satisfaction
• LACK of TALK was not
diagnostic of dissatisfaction

18. TALK VS. NON TALK
• Groups that had little
or no discourse
differed considerably
from one another.

19. “SOUNDS OF SILENCE”

20. BY GROUP
Conversational Turns (group)
c.t. = zero
11% c.t. < 10
10 <= c.t. < 20
14% 20 <= c.t. < 30
46%
3%
30 <= c.t. < 40
3% 40 <= c.t. < 50
5%
50 <= c.t. < 100
3%
c.t. >= 100
16%

21. BY GROUP
Conversational Turns (group)
11%
14%
46%
3%
• 37 Groups
3%
5%
3%
16%

22. BY GROUP
Conversational Turns (group)
c.t. = zero c.t. < 10 10 <= c.t < 20
20 <= c.t < 30 30 <= c.t < 40 40 <= c.t < 50
50 <= c.t < 100 c.t. >= 100
11% • 11% of the groups
14%
never exchanged a
46%
3%
word during the 15
3%
5%
min game.
3% (4 out of 37)
16%

23. BY GROUP
Conversational Turns (group)
c.t. = zero c.t. < 10 10 <= c.t < 20
20 <= c.t < 30 30 <= c.t < 40 40 <= c.t < 50
50 <= c.t < 100 c.t. >= 100
11% • 24% had less than
14% ten conversational
46%
3%
turns.
3%
5%
(9 out of 37)
3%
16%

24. BY INDIVIDUAL
Conversational Turns (individual)
c.t. = zero
2%
14%
c.t. < 10
25%
10 <= c.t. < 20
20 <= c.t. < 30
19% 30 <= c.t. < 40
40 <= c.t. < 50
10%
50 <= c.t. < 100
8%
13%
c.t. >= 100
10%

25. BY INDIVIDUAL
Conversational Turns (individual)
2%
14%
25%
19%
• 111 participants
10%
13%
8%
10%

26. BY INDIVIDUAL
Conversational Turns (individual)
c.t. = zero c.t. < 10 10 <= c.t < 20
20 <= c.t < 30 30 <= c.t < 40 40 <= c.t < 50
50 <= c.t < 100 c.t. >= 100
14%
2%
• 14% never said
25%
anything during the
19%
15 min game.
10%
(15 out of 111)
13%
8%
10%

27. BY INDIVIDUAL
Conversational Turns (individual)
c.t. = zero c.t. < 10 10 <= c.t < 20
20 <= c.t < 30 30 <= c.t < 40 40 <= c.t < 50
50 <= c.t < 100 c.t. >= 100
14%
2%
• 33% had less than
25%
ten conversational
19% turns.
10%
(36 out of 111)
13%
8%
10%

28. BY INDIVIDUAL
Conversational Turns (individual)
c.t. = zero c.t. < 10 10 <= c.t < 20
20 <= c.t < 30 30 <= c.t < 40 40 <= c.t < 50
50 <= c.t < 100 c.t. >= 100
14%
2%
• 56% took less than
25%
one conversational
19% turn every 30 sec.
10%
8% 13%
10%

29. A Relatively Large Number of People Remained
more or less Taciturn during the Game.

30. “SOUNDS OF SILENCE”

32. PERFORMANCE?
Number of Correct & Incorrect Cells
50
Correct
Incorrect
38
25
13
0
58 24 82 33 38 19 40 88 89 53 57 34 62 65 55 80 47 18 25 74 29 39 41 52 42 91 90 28 76 30 43 32 36 54 93 78 87

33. PERFORMANCE?
Number of Correct & Incorrect Cells
50
Correct
Incorrect
38
25
13
0
58 24 82 33 38 19 40 88 89 53 57 34 62 65 55 80 47 18 25 74 29 39 41 52 42 91 90 28 76 30 43 32 36 54 93 78 87

34. PERFORMANCE?
Number of Correct & Incorrect Cells
50
Correct
Incorrect
38
25
13
0
58 24 82 33 38 19 40 88 89 53 57 34 62 65 55 80 47 18 25 74 29 39 41 52 42 91 90 28 76 30 43 32 36 54 93 78 87

35. TACITURN GROUPS
Number of Correct & Incorrect Cells
50
Correct
Incorrect
38
25
13
0
58 24 82 33 38 19 40 88 89 53 57 34 62 65 55 80 47 18 25 74 29 39 41 52 42 91 90 28 76 30 43 32 36 54 93 78 87

36. NON-TALKING GROUPS
Number of Correct & Incorrect Cells
50
Correct
Incorrect
38
25
13
0
58 24 82 33 38 19 40 88 89 53 57 34 62 65 55 80 47 18 25 74 29 39 41 52 42 91 90 28 76 30 43 32 36 54 93 78 87

38. “SOUNDS OF SILENCE”:
VARIETIES OF NON-TALK

39. JULIANA, STACY & JASON
Group 32

40. JULIANA, STACY & JASON
DID NOT TALK AT ALL

41. AVERAGE GROUPS/INDIVIDUALS
Average Conversational Turn (Group) : 642
Average Conversational Turn (Individual) : 214

42. JULIANA, STACY & JASON
DID NOT TALK AT ALL

43. JULIANA, STACY & JASON
Number of Correct & Incorrect Cells
50
Correct
Incorrect
38
Group 32
25
13
0 58 24 82 33 38 19 40 88 89 53 57 34 62 65 55 80 47 18 25 74 29 39 41 52 42 91 90 28 76 30 43 32 36 54 93 78 87

44. JULIANA, STACY & JASON
Number of Correct & Incorrect Cells
50
Correct Best Performing
Incorrect Group
38
Group 32
25
13
0 58 24 82 33 38 19 40 88 89 53 57 34 62 65 55 80 47 18 25 74 29 39 41 52 42 91 90 28 76 30 43 32 36 54 93 78 87

45. BOBBY, MICHAEL & MEG
Group 91

46. BOBBY, MICHAEL & MEG
DID NOT TALK AT ALL

47. BOBBY, MICHAEL & MEG
Number of Correct & Incorrect Cells
50
Correct
Incorrect
38
Group 91
25
13
0
58 24 82 33 38 19 40 88 89 53 57 34 62 65 55 80 47 18 25 74 29 39 41 52 42 91 90 28 76 30 43 32 36 54 93 78 87

48. MEG

51. MICHAEL

53. BOBBY

61. JULIANA, STACY & JASON

63. TO THINK ABOUT...
• Is performance everything?
• Should we encourage silent collaboration?
• What about a situation in which two people with better
Sudoku knowledge leaving out the third person who does not
know much about Sudoku?
• Clearlyit would be a way of minimizing any process-loss. But
would that be something we should encourage?

64. presented at CSCW 2012 on 2/14/2012
LET’S TALK ABOUT NOT-TALKING
Thank you.
Joon-Suk Lee
joonlee@vt.edu Virginia Tech