Intermittent participation how sociability and usability shape mediated mobile interaction
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Intermittent participation how sociability and usability shape mediated mobile interaction






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 2 2


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Intermittent participation how sociability and usability shape mediated mobile interaction Intermittent participation how sociability and usability shape mediated mobile interaction Presentation Transcript

  • Intermittent Participation: HowSociability and Usability ShapeMediated Mobile InteractionDana Rotman, Prof. Jennifer Preece
  • INTRODUCTIONSmart phone are everywhere, offering constantconnectivity, creating a culture of constant engagement –through social networking tools and collaborative applications.Social networking – used to take place in a stationaryenvironments, now can be done everywhere, anytime, on thego.How do these changes affect social interactions?
  • PREVIOUS WORKMobile communication “affect every aspect of our personal andprofessional lives either directly or indirectly” (Katz andAakhus, 2002)HCI – research of specific applications, lesser emphasis on theoverall effect of perpetual connectivity on mediated interactionEducation – emphasis on mobile applications in the learningenvironment, less on the social aspects of mobile connectivityin educational settings
  • PREVIOUS WORK“There is a youth culture that finds in mobile communication anadequate form of expression and reinforcement” (Castells et al.2007) Young users are considered part of a “multimediageneration”, they are “digital natives” that were born withtechnology, and specifically mobile technology, at the palm oftheir hands.
  • UNIVERSITY OF MARYLANDMOBILITY INITIATIVE• Honors students and other selected groups of students received mobile devices (iPhones) to be used on and off campus.• Integrated curricular and student-life applications within a university portal• Mobile devices are used in class or for class projects• The university promoted mediated interaction between students and faculty
  • PARTICIPANTS Honors students Communication students N 12 (13%) 21 (64%) Age 18.7 (SD = .5) 20.1 (SD = 1) Gender (M:F) 2:3 2:3 Previous 100% 100% ownership of mobile device Previous 100% 100% ownership of computer Social 100% 100% networking profiles
  • METHODOLOGY• Focus groups – • Open ended discussions that were used to elicit and validate collective testimonials, and produce particular experiences, practices and insights.• Personal interviews – • Based on data collected in the focus groups, some participants were contacted for personal interviews in which the same topics were discussed in depth• Cooperative Inquiry – • An interactive method for engaging users in technology design, in which participants reflect on their use of technology, their likes and dislikes (Druin et al. 2005)• Survey data – • Collecting demographics and data about personal interaction patterns
  • FINDINGS –COMMUNICATION PATTERN All the Time 100 Every Hour 90 Several Times a Day 80 Once a Day 70 Not Everyday 60 Never 50 40 30 % or Responses 20 10 0
  • SOCIABILITY People Purpose Policy (Preece, 2000)
  • SOCIABILITY Communication Partner Message Etiquette Content
  • SOCIABILITY Communication Partner Subjective Etiquette norm Message Content
  • USABILITYUsability - ensuring that interactive products are easy tolearn, effective to use and enjoyable from the users perspective(Shneiderman, 2009). “My daily life revolves around my iPhone, I just have everything on my iPhone, my music, my email, my calendar, Facebook, reminders. I can write myself notes, just everything on one spot" (Kate, female)
  • USABILITY ISSUESDissimilar mobile and online applications
  • USABILITY ISSUESKeyboard layout and lack of tactile movement
  • USABILITY ISSUESScreen size – problematic when interacting online
  • INTERMITTENT PARTICIPATION“I can check it (Facebook) on my mobile too, but I dont reply toanyone on this; I dont send out any information. I check myemail, my Gmail, if I have to send an email or if its something I canwritequickly, that is more urgent, then I do send it off my mobile…. Butif I have my laptop I would probably take out my laptop and useit" (Ben, male)"If I have messages or check into chat, Im not going to reply to allof them. I just like to check and know that, yes, I have to reply tothese messages" (Samantha, female).
  • CONCLUSIONS• When using iPhones, sociability and usability pulled users indifferent directions• Users could not enjoy the affordances of mobile connectivityin their entirety due to design hindrances• The tension between sociability and usability creates anawareness of others, while circumventing usabilityconstraints, and calibrating participation to the most desiredand useful level.•Filtering information and maintaining intermittentparticipation is somewhat similar to the communicationoverload phenomenon (Whittaker et al. 1998)
  • AND THEN…..