CoSearch: A System for Co-located Collaborative Web Search
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

CoSearch: A System for Co-located Collaborative Web Search

on

  • 1,384 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,384
Views on SlideShare
1,384
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
16
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

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.

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

    CoSearch: A System for Co-located Collaborative Web Search CoSearch: A System for Co-located Collaborative Web Search Presentation Transcript

    • CoSearch: A System for Co-located Collaborative Web Search Saleema Amershi, Meredith Ringel Morris
      • Search often considered to be a solitary activity
      Do People Search Collaboratively?
    • Do People Search Collaboratively?
      • 3.8 to 1 student-to-computer ratio in U.S. public schools
      • 5000 to 3 person-to-computer ratio in U.S. public libraries
      • 10 to 1 student-to-computer ratio in developing world schools
      • YES!
      • … but current search engines and web browsers do not support collaborative search.
      Do People Search Collaboratively?
      • People
        • 2 Librarians
        • 3 Teachers
        • 2 Developing world researchers
      • Questions
        • Who collaboratively searches the Web?
        • Why do they collaboratively search?
        • How do they currently search in co-located settings?
      Interview Study
    • Who Collaboratively Searches & Why?
      • Youth, Teens & Students
      • Seniors & new immigrants
      • People in rural regions of the developing world
      • Small business employees
      • Pedagogical and social value
      • Unfamiliarity with technology
      • Resource constraints
      • Drivers control input devices
      • Observers make suggestions verbally or through gestures
      How Do They Collaboratively Search?
      • Difficulties contributing
        • Controlling drivers may ignore observer suggestions
        • Demanding observers may make it difficult for drivers to make contributions
      Limitations
      • Pacing problems
        • Scrolling too fast or too slow
        • Navigating away from a page too quickly
      Limitations
      • Referential difficulties
        • Difficulty referring to on-screen content if situated away from the display
      Limitations
      • Single-track strategies
        • No division-of-labor
        • Inefficient
      Limitations
    • Limitations
      • Difficulties contributing
      • Pacing problems
      • Referential difficulties
      • Single-track strategies
      • Lack of hands-on learning
      • Information loss
    • Design Implications
      • Facilitate co-located collaborative search
      • Enable distributed control and division of labor
      • Encourage collaboration, communication and awareness
      • Leverage ubiquitous devices (mice and mobile phones)
        • Related work (Inkpen, 1999; Pawar et al ., 2007; Paek et al., 2004; Ballagas et al ., 2005; Mahaney and Pierce, 2003; Han et al ., 2000)
      • CoSearch with multiple mice
        • Refer to paper
      • CoSearch with mobile phones
        • In this talk
      CoSearch
      • Individual color-coded cursors
      • Also helps to
        • Refer to on-screen content
        • Enable hands-on-learning
      Distributing Control
    • Enabling Contributions
      • Color-coded Page Queue
      Page Queue
      • Color-coded Page Queue
      • Color-coded Query Queue
      • Query by text messaging
      Query Queue
    • Reading at Your Own Pace
      • Viewing Web pages on mobile phones
      • Also enables division of labor
    • Status-quo Limitations CoSearch Features Difficulties contributing Individual color-coded cursors, Query Queue & query by text messaging, Page Queue Pacing Problems Viewing Web pages in mobile phones Referential difficulties Individual cursors controlled by mice or mobile phones Single-track strategies Viewing Web pages in mobile phones Lack of hands-on learning Individual input devices (mice and mobile phones) Information loss Notes regions, summaries
    • Evaluation Goals
      • Assess how well CoSearch enables:
        • Distributed control
        • Division of labor
        • Group communication
        • Awareness
    • Participants
      • 3 person groups, 12 groups
        • 21 males, 15 females
        • 12 - 76 years old
        • Experienced and non-experienced searchers
        • Experienced and non-experienced mobile phone users
        • Friends, siblings, children with parents, adults with grandparents
      • Within-subject
      • 3 conditions: CoSearch, Shared, Parallel
      • 2 tasks per condition
        • One fixed (e.g., “Which state is the birthplace of the most U.S. Vice Presidents?”)
        • One group-selected (e.g., planning a trip or group activity)
      • Questionnaires, log data, observations
      Study Design
    • Results
      • Communication
        • CoSearch and Shared better than Parallel (p<.01)
      • Collaboration
          • CoSearch and Shared better than Parallel (p<.01)
      Communication & Collaboration
      • Communication
        • CoSearch and Shared better than Parallel (p<.01)
      • Collaboration
          • CoSearch and Shared better than Parallel (p<.01)
      • Frustration
        • Observers more frustrated in Shared than drivers (p<.03)
        • Experienced searchers more frustrated in Shared than less experienced (p<.01)
        • No differences in CoSearch
      Reduced Frustration
      • Distribution of Control
        • “ Submit search topics without having to yell at the person on the computer”
        • ” Have more of a say in what’s going on on screen”
        • “ Go at my own pace”
      • Division of Labor
        • “ We could search many offshoots of the same topic at once”
        • “ Input more ideas on how to find the answer”
      Control & Division of Labor
      • Overall
        • #1 Favorite: Parallel (15 participants)
        • #2 Favorite: CoSearch (11 participants)
        • #3 Favorite: Shared (7 participants)
      • CoSearch better than Parallel for communication collaboration
      • CoSearch intended for resource-constrained environments where Parallel is not feasible
      • CoSearch better than Shared for distribution of control, division of labor, and reduced frustration
      Overall
      • Awareness
        • Shared better than CoSearch and Parallel (p<.04)
        • Experienced SMS users more aware of group in CoSearch than less experienced users (p<.02)
      • Feelings of being ignored
        • More so in CoSearch and Parallel than Shared (p<.01)
        • Only 55.3% of observer queries were executed by drivers
        • Only 10.88% of observer Web pages viewed by group
      Problems with CoSearch
      • Usability
        • People able to quickly learn CoSearch
        • More-experienced searchers found it easier than less experienced (p<.03)
      • Technological Limitations
        • Lag in WiFi and Bluetooth
        • Small screens and keypads
      CoSearch Usability
    • Recap
      • Interview Study to learn about status-quo co-located collaborative search practices (Shared & Parallel)
      • Developed CoSearch to address limitations of current practices
      • Evaluated CoSearch against current practices
        • CoSearch better than Parallel for communication and collaboration
        • CoSearch better than Shared for reducing frustrations and increasing control and division of labor
        • Still room for improvement in CoSearch
    • Conclusion
      • Shared-computing still prevalent in many scenarios.
      • CoSearch enhances the shared-computing experience by leveraging additional devices in the environment.
    • Thank you! Status-quo Limitations CoSearch Features Difficulties contributing Individual cursors, Query Queue & query by text messaging, Page Queue Pacing Problems Viewing Web pages in mobile phones Referential difficulties Cursors controlled by mice or mobile phones Single-track strategies Viewing Web pages in mobile phones Lack of hands-on learning Individual input devices (mice and phones) Information loss Notes regions, summaries