Flipside Workspace versus Videoconferencing

Flipside Workspace versus Videoconferencing: Comparing User
Experience of Collaborative Online Platforms
October 2015
Lynn T. Patra, Anna Marie Etcheverria, & Lisa L. Duncan

Flipside Workspace versus Videoconferencing
Table of Contents
Page
Introduction…………….……………………………………………………………………........... 4
1. Self-Consciousness…………………………………………………………………………… 5
Self-Consciousness: An Anticipatory Reaction to Potential Social Judgment,
Stereotyping, Bias, & Discrimination…………………….…………………………. 5
How Self-Consciousness Relates to Confidence………………….…………....... 6
2. Work Engagement………………………………………………………...……………......... 6
Overview: Misunderstanding & Misuse of the Construct of “Engagement”…….. 6
Our Definition of Engagement………………………………………....……………. 7
3. Equal Participation…………………………………………………………………………….. 8
Supporting Equal Participation among Individuals in Heterogeneous Group
Interactions…………………………………………………………………………….
.
8
4. Identity Exploration……………………………………………………………………………. 9
Method…………………………………………………………………………….…………………. 10
5. Participants………………………………………………………….……….………………… 10
Flipside Workspace Participants………………………………….……………….... 10
Videoconferencing Participants…………………………………….…………..….. 10
6. Research Design………………………………………………………………..…………….. 11
7. Surveys…........................................................................................................................ 11
8. Procedure…………………………………………………..………………….………………. 11
9. Recruitment…………………………………………………..………………….……………... 11
10. Instructions for Participants………………………………………………….……………….. 12
Flipside Workspace
Participants……………………………………………………..
12
Videoconferencing Participants……………………………………………………. 12
11. Flipside Workspace Tutorial………………………………………………………………….. 13
12. Online Meeting…………………………………………………………..…………………….. 13
13. Survey Administration…………………………………………………………………………. 14
Results………………………..………………………………………………………………........... 14
14. Self-Consciousness…………………………………………………………………………… 14
15. Work Engagement………………………………………………………...………………….. 14
Figure 1. Participants’ Self-Reported Engagement
Level…………………………
15
16. Equal Participation………………………………………………………...…………………... 15
Figure 2. Participants’ Perception of Bias Reduction for Flipside Workspace..... 16
Figure 3. Participants’ Perception of Bias Reduction for Videoconferencing…. 16
17. Identity Exploration…………………………………………………..…………….………….. 17
Sample of Participants’ Comments…………………………………………………. 17
18. The Need to Multitask…………………………………………….….……………………….. 18
19. Comfort Level with Speaking Up…………………………………………………………….. 18
20. Inclusiveness: Feeling Included in the Conversation……………………………………… 18
Figure 4. Participants’ Feelings of Being Included as “Part of a
2

Conversation” In Flipside Workspace………………………………………………. 19
3

Table of Contents
Page
Discussion………………………………………………………………………………………... 19
21. Strengths and Limitations………………………………………………………………….. 19
22. Implications and Suggestions for Future Studies…………………………………...…... 20
Fairness in Evaluation: How Presence and Absence of Physical
Appearance Impacts Judgment Rendered to Work……………………………. 20
How Reducing Self-Consciousness Impacts Work Performance…………….. 21
Gender Differences in Computer-Mediated Communication...……………….. 21
Personality Differences in Computer-Mediated Communication……………... 21
23. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………... 22
References………………………………………………………………………………………... 23
Appendices...…………………………………………………………………………………….. 24
24. Appendix A: Responses to survey items 3 through 10 for FW group and 3 through
8 for VC group.…………………………………………………………………..…………. 24
Table 1. Flipside Workspace vs. Videoconferencing: Ease and Comfort
with Communication, Need to Multitask, and Self-Consciousness…..………. 24
Table 2. Flipside Workspace vs. Videoconferencing:
Engagement and Inclusiveness………………………………………………….. 25
Table 3. Importance of Engagement to Business Productivity as High Level
Benefit…………………………...…………………………………………………. 26
Table 4. Flipside Workspace Participants’ Online Communication Tool
Preferences………………………………………………………………………... 27
Table 5. Participants’ Perception of Bias Reduction…………………………... 28
Table 6. Participants’ Feelings about Bias Reduction…………………………. 29
Table 7. Impact of Visual Cues…………………………………………………... 30
Table 8. Identity Exploration…………………………………………………….... 31
25. Appendix B………………………………………………………………………………….. 32
Responses to survey item 1: Participants’ previous experiences with online
collaboration tools (video)………………………………………………………… 32
Responses to survey item 2: Participants’ previous experiences with online
collaboration tools (non-video)…………………………………………………… 33
26. Appendix C: Participant recruitment announcement………………………………….... 34
27. Appendix D: Statement of consent and procedure for participants using Flipside
Workspace……………………………………………………………………….………….. 36
28. Appendix E: Statement of consent and procedure for participants using
videoconferencing…………………….……………………………………………….…… 38
29. Appendix F: Flipside Workspace user experience survey……………………………... 40
30. Appendix G: Videoconferencing user experience survey……………………………… 47
4

Flipside Workspace versus Videoconferencing: Comparing User
Experience of Collaborative Online Platforms
October 2015
Lynn T. Patra, Anna Marie Etcheverria, & Lisa L. Duncan
Introduction
Every once in a long while, an online platform emerges and revolutionizes the way we
communicate with each other. For example, Twitter and Facebook have made a huge
impact on the way people relate to each other. To quote an acquaintance’s observation,
“It’s like a magazine but it’s full of articles and posts from my friends, and I sift through it
every day to see what interests me.”
Similarly, Flipside Workspace’s™ 1
design impacts how people communicate and relate
to one another. Though it embodies a “fun” factor, as a digital environment which visually
resembles an elaborately crafted video game, this alternative way of communicating
(compared to a videoconferencing platform) merits further investigation.
This pilot study, sponsored by Flipside Workspace, officially began in January 2015. The
data collection phase was completed in July 2015. The purpose of this study was
twofold: (a) compare the experiences of Flipside Workspace (FW) users with
videoconferencing (VC) users and (b) provide a basis for running a future, large-scale
study.
In doing so, this study explores several issues pertaining to how online collaboration
platforms can shape and enhance users’ experience. These issues include:
1. How does each platform impact users’ self-consciousness?
2. Which platform better enhances users’ engagement with the task of meeting and
interacting with others?
3. Which platform better facilitates equal participation in situations where meeting
participants differ in physical appearances, age, race, ethnicity, or gender?
4. As FW is unique among collaboration platforms for allowing users to conduct
identity exploration through avatar selection, what impact does this have on
users’ choices? What are some possible ramifications of users’ decisions –
whether they opt to explore another identity or not?
1
Flipside Workspace™ is a digital workspace in the form of an immersive online business district that
takes those perks of real-life office dynamics and brings them into a virtual environment. It was created and
developed by Duncan+Coleverria, Inc. (D+C), a unique business resource that focuses on creating solutions
that work for independent consultants and small businesses. More information can be found at their website
at http://www.flipsideworkspace.com/ and http://duncancoleverria.com/#home.
5

5. How much do users feel the need to multi-task during a meeting?
6. How comfortable are users with speaking up during a meeting?
7. Inclusiveness: How included do users feel in the conversation?
Some of these issues are self-explanatory. Thus, the next section provides background
information regarding the first four issues:
1. Self-consciousness
2. Work engagement
3. Equal participation
4. Identity exploration
This information is intended to provide interested readers with an understanding of why
these issues are relevant to improving collaboration between professionals who are
physically separated (whether in different areas in a building or in different regions of the
world).
1. Self-Consciousness
Most of us rely on visual cues in our environment for information. This is beneficial in
some situations (e.g., driving) but can be detrimental in others. For example, though
many are unaware, judgments about others’ appearances often happen instinctively
and, as such, there are several reasons why people may feel self-conscious while using
VC.
Self-Consciousness: An Anticipatory Reaction to Potential Social Judgment,
Stereotyping, Bias, & Discrimination
One issue many can relate to involves self-consciousness over perceived flaws in one’s
appearance (e.g., grooming, attire, skin conditions, signs of ill health, or disabilities).
Another issue is awareness that people often categorize and stereotype others based on
appearances (e.g., perceived age, race, ethnicity, gender) and may react in biased or
discriminatory ways due to such judgment.
Stereotyping is an example of a heuristic, a cognitive shortcut that is learned or encoded
during the evolutionary process. The purpose of heuristics is to facilitate judgment and
decision-making processes in a complex environment that would otherwise overload an
individual’s cognitive capacities. Gigerenzer (1991) explains further:
6

Because of limited information-processing abilities… humans have to construct
simplified models of the world. Heuristics are a product of these; they are short
cuts[sic] that can produce efficient decisions…
“People rely on a limited number of heuristic principles which reduce the complex
tasks of assessing probabilities and predicting values to simpler judgmental
operations. In general, these heuristics are quite useful, but sometimes they lead
to severe and systematic errors.” (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974, p. 1124)
The first author maintains that stereotypes, bias, and discrimination exist without making
claims about prevalence. Attempting to quantify their prevalence would go beyond the
focus of this study and this author’s expertise.
How Self-Consciousness Relates to Confidence
In sum, self-consciousness is experienced as a negative state of mind and one that is
often regarded as the enemy of confidence (a characteristic many working professionals
desire to possess). Subsequently, reducing self-consciousness may bolster confidence.
Given that self-consciousness is often a part of interactive experiences, this study sets
out to test the assumption that, unlike VC, platforms that obscure people’s physical
features within the communication medium, such as the case with FW, reduce feelings
of self-consciousness for users.
2. Work Engagement
The term “engagement” is used synonymously with “work engagement” or “employee
engagement.” Human resources practitioners, however, often use this term to denote a
positive sense of stimulation or interest that is derived from the organizational culture or
the people within the organization – a definition that goes beyond stimulation by the task
or work at hand.
Overview: Misunderstanding & Misuse of the Construct of “Engagement”
Consequently, the meaning of this term has been diluted over popular discourse. In his
online article, Critically Examining Engagement, Chris Collins, associate professor of HR
Studies and Director of Executive Education at Cornell University's School of Industrial
and Labor Relations, states:
There are many different definitions, even more variety in measures, and quite a
bit of confusion in separating what employee engagement is versus how it is
created or what it affects.
7

I have reviewed more than 20 reports, white papers and articles from consulting
firms, academics, and popular press publications, and have found a wide range
of factors that have been included in definitions of employee engagement...
In his online article, How to Leverage the Power of Language to Support a Thriving
Workplace Culture, Jon Robinson, Ph.D. provides an example of how the concept is
misused:
Employee Engagement[sic] is a well-known construct in the business world. It
refers to how employees feel about their work, as Ringleb and Rock write in a
fascinating article titled “NeuroLeadership in 2009”:..
Workplace wellness professionals commonly misuse the word engagement
when they are actually describing wellness program participation. In fact, it is
possible (though perhaps not likely) to have high participation in wellness
programs, and not have good employee engagement. Likewise, it is possible to
have people highly engaged in their work who do not necessarily participate in
programs.
Our Definition of Engagement
For the purposes of this study, “engagement” is used in the manner as the generally
accepted formal definition originating within the field of Industrial-Organizational
Psychology. Engagement is experienced in relation to the work being performed.
In this study, engagement relates to the act of meeting, not towards the specific person
with whom one is meeting with. It may be difficult to distinguish between stimulation
derived through the act of meeting and stimulation derived from interacting with the
individual(s) one is meeting with, but participants are directed to focus on the task (i.e.,
the act of meeting using the online platform) in assessing their engagement level.
In What is Engagement? (2013), Wilmar Schaufeli, a professor of work and
organizational psychology at Utrecht University in the Netherlands and distinguished
research professor at Leuven University, writes:
Work engagement, in this view, is defined as a concept in its own right: “a
positive, fulfilling, work related state of mind that is characterized by vigor,
dedication, and absorption” (Schaufeli, Salanova, González-Romá, and
Bakker,2002: 74), whereby vigor refers to high levels of energy and
mental resilience while working, the willingness to invest effort in one’s
work, and persistence even in the face of difficulties; dedication refers to
being strongly involved in one’s work, and experiencing a sense of
significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and challenge; and
absorption refers to being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in
one’s work, whereby time passes quickly and one has difficulties with
detaching oneself from work. To date, most academic research on
engagement uses the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES), a brief,
8

valid and reliable questionnaire that is based on the definition of work
engagement as a combination of vigor, dedication, and absorption
(Schaufeli, 2012) .
This is the working definition of engagement that is used in this study. Given the benefits
of engagement during online meetings (where it is easier to let attention lapse or perform
non-meeting related activities unnoticed compared to on-site meetings), this study
compares working professionals’ opinions on whether FW or VC better enhances users’
engagement with the task of meeting with others.
3. Equal Participation
The previous discussion on self-consciousness pointed to the problem of judging people
on the basis of physical appearances and how this impacts the way we treat others.
Consequently, the issue of judgment extends to the problem of facilitating equal
participation among heterogeneous group members.
Supporting Equal Participation among Individuals in Heterogeneous Group Interactions
Rebecca Heller elaborates on this problem in her discussion of the disadvantages of
face-to-face communication and advantages of computer-mediated communication
(CMC). In her paper, A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Face-to-Face and Virtual
Communication: Overcoming the Challenges, Heller writes:
Although face-to-face communication has long been the trusted mode of
contact, it also has a number of disadvantages. Research suggests that
minority expression is lower in face-to-face groups, inhibiting trust in
heterogeneous groups and creating unequal participation among
members (Krebs, Hobman, & Bordia, 2006; Lind, 1999; McLeod, Baron,
Weighner Marti, & Kuh Yoon, 1997)…
…CMC eliminates the non-verbal cues and power differences (Bower et
al., 2001) that inhibit equal participation, resulting in more equal levels of
participation within heterogeneous groups (Dietz-Uhler & Clark, 2001;
Hertel et al., 2005; Lind, 1999). Dietz-Uhler and Clark (2001) found that
when groups engaged in CMC followed by a face-to-face discussion, they
perceived their interactions as more enjoyable than groups who did not
engage in CMC prior to a face-to-face discussion. Dietz-Uhler and Clark
(2001) argue that this difference was attributable to the fact that CMC
enables greater freedom of thought, in turn improving the dialogue.
Moreover, Lind (1999) and Nowak (2003) found that women reported
feeling more social presence and were more satisfied in a CMC
environment than men.
Also, CMC can create equal opportunities in the workplace. Physically
disadvantaged employees have greater access to the virtual environment
9

than the physical workspace, creating teams that are more diverse in
makeup and fostering greater creativity and innovation. Moreover, as
performance in a virtual team is evaluated solely on productivity (given
that physical appearance remains anonymous), age and race
discrimination are greatly reduced in a virtual setting (Bergiel et al., 2008).
This view is supported by Gernot Grabher and Oliver Ibert in their online article, Virtual
hybrid communities show that you don’t have to meet face-to-face to advance great
ideas. They similarly laud quasi-anonymous online communication as a “powerful social
leveler” thereby fostering egalitarianism.
It is reasonable to suspect that the disadvantages of face-to-face communication extend
to VC. This study examines working professionals’ opinions on this issue. In doing so,
they are asked to specify: (a) estimation of appearance-based bias reduction and (b) the
extent to which they experience positive feelings with regard to this estimation.
4. Identity Exploration
Unlike VC platforms, FW provides several humanoid avatars of different racial
backgrounds, genders, and body types from which users can select. Users may opt to
choose an avatar that most accurately matches them or one that differs from their racial
background, gender, or body type.
In Situated Learning in Virtual Worlds and Immersive Simulations, Dawley and Dede (in
press) elaborate on the ramifications of choosing an avatar that allows a user to explore
a different identity:
Situated embodiment in virtual environments and immersive simulations
offers the potential for identity exploration, in which a participant plays a
role different than that portrayed by that person in everyday life. Laurel
(1993) and Murray (1997) described design strategies that can enhance
participants’ identity exploration, such as providing options to modify the
avatar’s appearance, gender or clothing; creating role-play opportunities
in historical or fantasy-based settings; and experiential learning
opportunities to be someone other than yourself and reflect on the
experience. However, freedom to play with identity can cause confusion,
and users must learn to manage their reputation when using institutional
avatars in professional contexts such as teacher, or that are associated
with their institution or organization (Warburton, 2009).
Regarding identity exploration, this study explores the following issues: (a) the extent to
which working professionals are open to choosing a FW avatar that doesn’t match their
identity and (b) the possible reasons why users may or may not be open to identity
exploration within a professional context.
10

Method
The FW staff provided the FW platform, the tutorial, and answered technical questions,
but was not involved in any of the recruitment, management, or analysis of the study
unless otherwise noted.
Participants
A total of 20 individuals participated, 10 in the FW group and 10 in the VC group (using
Skype or Google+ Hangouts). There were a total of 10 men and 10 women. In the FW
group specifically, there were three women and seven men. In the VC group, there were
seven women and three men. In cases of participant attrition, other participants were
recruited in order to ensure a total of 10 participants in each group.
Flipside Workspace Participants
Within the FW group, a total of three participants dropped out. One dropped out due to
her computer system not meeting the requirements of the study. Two dropped out due to
a lack of time availability to participate in the study. Due to this attrition and the difficulty
of recruiting participants online to try out a collaboration platform that is unfamiliar to the
general population, four participants were selected from a roster of current FW users.
Consequently, it is possible that these four users were already more predisposed in
favor of FW compared to other participants.
None of these participants knew that a comparative user experience study for VC was
being conducted. Moreover, with the exception of the four current users mentioned
above, participants were not informed that FW was sponsoring this study until they
completed it and received their compensation.
Videoconferencing Participants
In contrast, owing to familiarity with VC platforms such as Skype and Google+ Hangouts,
recruiting for the VC group came with less difficulty. Three dropped out due to
scheduling difficulties and were replaced through additional recruiting however.
Out of all participants in the VC group, two participants were recruited from the social
network of a FW founder. However, these participants were told that an unaffiliated,
independent researcher who is a colleague of the FW founder was conducting a VC user
experience study.
Finally, none of these participants knew that a comparative user experience study for
FW was being conducted until they completed the VC study. Moreover, participants
were not informed that FW was sponsoring this study until they completed it and
received their compensation.
11

Research Design
Responses to the first two open-ended survey items (see Appendix B) indicate that all
participants had previous experience using online communication tools (both video and
non-video). This establishes that those in the FW group are able to evaluate and
compare FW with previous VC experience. Those in the VC group only evaluated VC
and served as a comparison group.
This design allows the researcher to compare opinions about VC from those who have
used FW with those who have not used FW. Consequently, differences in evaluation of
VC between those in the FW group and the VC group might suggest that people change
their minds about VC after using FW.
Surveys
Online surveys were designed for each group (FW and VC) using SurveyMonkey (see
Appendices F and G). Both are mainly comprised of 5-point Likert scale items. The
appropriate survey was emailed to participants once they completed the interactive
meeting session of the study.
With regard to survey design, the researcher provided a written definition of engagement
in visible locations preceding survey items related to engagement. The definition read,
“’Engagement’ is defined as the experience of feeling vigor, dedication, and absorption
towards the task at hand.”
Procedure
Recruitment
Twenty participants were recruited through announcements about this study via multiple
social media networks. The call for participants in the FW group was broadcasted on a
Wordpress blog called, “Work-Life Strategies & Solutions” at www.worklifestrategies.net
(see Appendix C) as well as on Twitter, LinkedIn, and Google+. The general public was
allowed to share this announcement with their social networks or through other methods
(e.g., email, text, word-of-mouth). This recruitment effort for both groups garnered
participants who were one or two degrees of separation from the researcher.
The following information was included in the announcement:
1. The amount of time it would take to complete the study: Approximately 35-45
minutes (i.e., 5 minutes to complete the FW tutorial for those assigned to this
group, 30 minutes to interact using the platform, and 5-10 minutes to complete
the survey)
12

2. Prerequisites to participate: Participants must be, or had been, working
professionals; able to understand written and spoken English; have previous
experience using an online communication tool; be available to participate in the
online meeting session during the afternoon or evening during Pacific Standard
Time; and have access to a headset or earphones for the meeting
3. A statement communicating assurance that potential participants’ privacy and
confidentiality will be maintained
4. Eligibility terms for the reward (i.e., a $25.00 Amazon e-gift card would be
emailed to the participant upon completing the study)
5. Instructions for participants to email the researcher if they had questions about
this study or wished to participate
Participants were recruited exclusively for either the FW or the VC group. They were not
informed that there was a comparison group. This ensured that the participants were not
able to guess the real purpose of this study - to compare users’ experience using FW
with VC for meetings.
Instructions for Participants
With the exception of the interactive online meeting session, all interactions with
participants were conducted by email. As initial emails from prospective participants
were received, the researcher provided procedural information for the study and asked
them to acknowledge that they read, understood, and accepted the terms of the study.
The researcher requested that participants complete the study within a month of signing
up for the study in the “Statement of Consent.” See Appendices D and E.
Flipside Workspace Participants
For the FW group, the researcher also instructed prospective participants to indicate
consent to participate by providing an email address that the researcher and FW can
use for (1.) setting up their FW account at http://www.flipsideworkspace.com/register.php
and (2.) sending participants an online survey.
Videoconferencing Participants
For the VC group, the researcher asked prospective participants to indicate their consent
to participate by providing:
1. The email address to be used for sending an online survey
2. Preference of either Skype or Gmail’s chat feature (Google Hangouts)
plus their username
13

3. Days and times (as half-hour time slots for which they are available for
the meeting)
Once this information was provided, the researcher scheduled the online meeting to
occur during a mutually agreed upon time slot.
Flipside Workspace Tutorial
Once FW participants provided the required information, indicating their consent to
participate, the researcher instructed them to proceed with the FW tutorial at a time of
their choosing. The researcher also instructed them to contact her once they completed
the tutorial in order to schedule the online meeting.
To establish a FW account and complete the tutorial, participants were required to
download the FW application along with its necessary plug-ins. Upon establishing an
account, all participants were able to log in and choose one of 12 avatars (6 male and 6
female) of various racial backgrounds and body types.
Four participants who were longtime FW users were told to skip the tutorial and proceed
with scheduling the meeting. However, all other FW participants learned how to operate
their avatar and other platform features through the tutorial. It covered how to walk,
change direction, sit, stand up from a seated position, and use the chatbox (which
provides the option to communicate with specific users or all users in the immediate area
by typing).
Online Meeting
Rather than have participants answer a list of interview questions about the platform
they’re using (FW or VC), the 30-minute one-on-one meeting with the researcher was
conducted in an unstructured, open-ended format. Despite the format of the meeting
being explained in the procedural instructions that participants received, this
unstructured format surprised a few participants who expected a structured interview.
The reason for de-emphasizing structure was to provide participants with an experience
that replicates a realistic, two-way conversation.
For both FW and VC groups, the researcher initiated the meeting by either calling (for
VC) or logging in and appearing in the designated plaza of the virtual world (for FW). In
some cases, for the FW group, the participant appeared for the study early and waited in
the plaza.
During the meeting, the researcher facilitated a conversation about relevant issues
pertaining to using online collaboration tools for work-related purposes. At the conclusion
of the meeting, participants were told that a survey would be sent from SurveyMonkey to
their previously designated email address.
14

Survey Administration
Upon emailing the relevant survey to participants, the researcher reminded them that
their privacy, anonymity, and confidentiality are assured; that they may complete the
survey at a time of their choosing and proceed at their own pace; and that they were to
email the researcher if they had problems or questions about the survey at any time. All
participants finished the survey without any indication of difficulties with the instructions,
survey items, site navigation, or procedure.
The researcher sent reminders to a few participants to complete the survey on a weekly
basis, though most participants completed it within a week. The researcher received
notifications from SurveyMonkey as each participant completed the survey and notified
her FW contact who, in turn, emailed an Amazon e-gift card to the participant.
Results
Statistical tests were not conducted due to this pilot study’s small sample size. However,
there are a number of interesting differences between groups that seem worth exploring
in a large-scale study. Descriptions of these differences follow. Please refer to the
relevant tables in Appendix A for this discussion.
1. Self-Consciousness
This discussion refers to results shown in Table 1. Please refer to Table 1 for more
detailed information about survey responses on this issue.
According to FW participants’ responses to the survey item, “Did using Flipside
Workspace enable you to feel LESS self-conscious in comparison to using
videoconferencing?,” 100% of this group rated the degree to which this platform
accomplished this as “very much” to “extremely.”
Videoconferencing participants were asked, “To what extent do you feel self-conscious
while using videoconferencing?” in their survey. According to responses, 50% were at
least moderately self-conscious while 20% were “very much” to “extremely” self-
conscious. These results show that it was common for participants to feel self-conscious
when using VC.
2. Work Engagement
For this discussion on engagement level, refer to Table 2 for detailed information about
survey responses.
Survey responses indicate that 90% of FW participants were “very much” to “extremely”
engaged during their meeting. When asked to recall and compare previous experiences
15

using VC with FW, 56% indicated that they were “very much” to “extremely” engaged
when using VC for meetings. These results are summarized in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Participants’ Self-Reported Engagement Level
90
0
56
11
70
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Percentof
Participants
FWusers
evaluating
FW
FWusers
evaluating
VC
VCusers
evaluating
VC
Engagement Level Rating
"Very much" to
"Extremely"
"None" to "A little"
Figure 1 compares FW participants’ evaluation of both FW and VC with VC participants’
evaluation of their VC meeting. As a point of comparison, 70% of VC participants (who
didn’t have any experience using FW) indicated they were “very much” to “extremely”
engaged during their VC meeting. Consequently, more FW participants (90%) felt “very
much” to “extremely” engaged in their FW meeting compared to VC participants (70%)
who indicated the same for their VC meeting.
3. Equal Participation
As expected, FW participants’ responses indicated that quasi-anonymity granted by the
use of avatars reduces potential for bias during interactions. This difference held across
all characteristics of interest: Facial/physical appearance, attire, age, race/ethnicity, and
gender. Their responses are summarized in Figure 2.
16

Figure 2. Participants’ Perception of Bias Reduction for Flipside Workspace
100
0
100
0
100
0
80
0
60
10
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Percentof
Participants
Facial/physical
appearance
Attire
Age
Race/ethnicity
Gender
Bias Reduction Rating
"Very Much" to
"Extremely"
"Not at all" to
"Slightly"
In contrast, VC participants indicated that VC platforms don’t reduce potential for bias
due to visibility. Their responses are summarized in Figure 3 below.
Figure 3. Participants’ Perception of Bias Reduction for Videoconferencing
0
90
10
80
0
80
0
100
0
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Percentof
Participants
Facial/physical
appearance
Attire
Age
Race/ethnicity
Gender
Bias Reduction Rating
"Very Much" to
"Extremely"
"Not at all" to
"Slightly"
Refer to Table 5 for details on participants’ perception of extent to which each platform
reduced potential for bias. Table 6 summarizes participants’ positive feelings in reaction
to perceived degree of bias reduction.
17

4. Identity Exploration
Table 8 summarizes FW participants’ responses to survey items examining identity
exploration issues. All FW participants indicated that they purposefully chose an avatar
(as opposed to randomly choosing one). Here are the key findings:
1. 80% chose an avatar that matched their own gender; 20% did not
2. 67% said “Yes” while 33% said “No” to “Is it important to have an avatar that
matches your gender?”
3. 22% said “Yes” while 78% said “No” to “Is it important to have an avatar that
matches your appearance?”
Sample of Participants’ Comments
The comments that accompanied the identity exploration survey items reveal why
participants either chose, or didn’t choose, an avatar that matched their own physical
appearance. To illustrate the range of opinions, here are examples of those responses:
 No. I suppose I felt like it would seem strange to go with a different gender,
perhaps confusing to others.
 I chose an avatar that correlated to my gender and appearance as it seemed
logical to represent myself with the avatar that more closely matched my own
traits. It is however of very limited importance in my opinion, and indeed one of
the advantages of such a platform is to make collaboration possible without
being forced to broadcast one's image. While even gender neutral avatars would
have been fine by me, populating the environment with a host of nondescript,
anonymous characters would likely have a visually unappealing result. A
reasonable measure of customization and diversification of the avatars would
perhaps be helpful, not for the added accuracy, but rather to create a more
varied and relatable experience within the platform.
 I selected a male avatar simply because none of the female avatars really
represented how I looked, specifically in the fact that they were all thin. So I
chose the heaviest looking male avatar. I realize that anyone speaking with me
in Flipside will immediately be able to identify my gender as female based on my
voice, so I didn't hope to (or want to) mask my gender. I just didn't want to select
a thin female avatar because it felt inauthentic to me - I preferred to select an
avatar that did not represent me physically at all. It would be really cool to be
able to choose an avatar that looked more like me (there are already avatars that
match my gender and race, so it's simply a matter of body size for me, though
others may not have the same experience.) It would be awesome if there was a
fat, or at least mid-sized, avatar. That said, I really appreciate the reduction of
appearance-based stigma that is offered by this platform - so having the option
to choose an avatar that doesn't at all match your physical characteristics is even
more important in the big picture.
18

5. The Need to Multitask
A difference between groups emerged with regard to feeling a need to multitask during
the meeting. Referring to the results shown in Table 1, 60% of FW participants indicated
that they felt the need to multitask “Not at all” to “Slightly” while 20% of VC participants
responded similarly regarding their VC meeting.
6. Comfort Level with Speaking Up
Table 4 provides details on FW participants’ online communication tool preferences.
Flipside Workspace participants were asked to indicate the form of online
communication they felt most comfortable speaking up in. Here are some key findings:
1. 63% selected “Flipside Workspace”
2. 25% who chose “Other NON-video-based tool”
3. 13% who chose “Video-based tool”
7. Inclusiveness: Feeling Included in the Conversation
According to results shown in Table 2, 100% of FW participants rated the degree to
which they felt included, or “part of a conversation,” as “very much” to “extremely.” In
reference to their previous experiences with VC, 56% indicated they felt “very much” to
“extremely” included as “part of a conversation” during VC meetings. These results are
summarized in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Participants’ Feelings of Being Included as “Part of a Conversation” in
Flipside Workspace
100
0
56
11
80
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Percentof
Participants
FWusers
evaluating
FW
FWusers
evaluating
VC
VCusers
evaluating
VC
Inclusiveness Rating
"Very much" to
"Extremely"
"None" to "A little"
19

Figure 4 compares FW participants’ evaluation of both FW and VC with VC participants’
evaluation of their VC meeting. As depicted, 80% of VC participants (who did not have
experience using FW) rated the degree to which they felt like “part of a conversation” as
“very much” to “extremely” during their VC meeting. Taken together, more FW
participants (100%) felt “very much” to “extremely” included in their FW meeting
compared to VC participants (80%) who indicated the same for their VC meeting.
Discussion
Strengths and Limitations
One of the strengths of this study, which would be difficult to reproduce in a large-scale
study, is the degree of methodological reliability attained when the same researcher
interacts with all participants. As the same researcher ran all participants through the
study, differences in participants’ responses and experiences cannot be attributed to
differences between multiple researchers’ characteristics.
Additionally, because the internet presents greater potential for outreach, it enables the
recruitment of a more demographically diverse pool of participants when compared to
recruiting individuals from a localized area who must participate in person. Hence, future
investigators only need to devise methods to effectively tap into this potential.
A limitation of this study is that participants were solicited from the social networks of
both this researcher and the sponsor of this study. Those who chose to participate might
share this researcher’s or the sponsors’ characteristics, experiences with each platform,
or platform preferences. For instance, there were a couple of representatives from both
the Baby Boomer generation and Generation Y, but the majority of the participants in
this study were similar to this study’s researcher and sponsors such that they were
members of Generation X.
Another limitation to this online study is that, unless foolproof identification and tracking
methods are utilized (e.g., tracking I.P. addresses - a popular method, though unfair to
participants who share a computer), researchers cannot be sure that the individual who
participates in the study or completes the survey is the same individual who signed up
for the study. However, this concern isn’t limited to online research studies. This is also
an issue for studies that require participants to be physically present but do not require
evidence that corroborates the participant’s identity (a possibility regarding studies that
draw from a population of university students where a financial incentive is provided, for
example).
Furthermore, the potential for impersonation constitutes a problem where demographic
backgrounds of participants are a focal point for studies. In this study, there was one
incident where a woman signed up but had her husband participate and complete the
study instead, justifying the switch by citing that her husband had more experience using
VC for work-related purposes. The researcher was privy to the justification for the switch
20

because the original participant was a second-degree connection who offered this
information for the sake of honesty.
Implications and Suggestions for Future Studies
As this is a pilot study, the sample size is too small to make broad inferences based on
the results. However, in this study, FW has been found to be superior to VC in some
ways (e.g., reducing users’ self-consciousness, minimizing bias in order to support
egalitarian interactions, and providing opportunities for identity exploration).
In other words, FW distinguishes itself from VC by presenting unique opportunities to
resolve problems of a social or psychological nature within a professional context. For
instance, working professionals have long been concerned about being judged on the
quality of their work and ideas rather than on their physical appearances. Future studies
should attempt to substantiate these aforementioned advantages of using FW.
Suggestions for future studies follow.
Fairness in Evaluation: How Presence and Absence of Physical Appearance Impacts
Judgment Rendered to Work
One direction for future studies is to examine if online collaboration platform users are
inclined to judge the quality of people’s work (involving tasks or a mock project to
complete) based on merit (i.e., undistracted by physical appearances) while using FW
and compare to using VC. In other words, the question is, “Do people judge others’ work
more fairly while communication and/or collaborating on FW than VC?” Researchers
would observe users’ variation on judgment given to others’ work as a function of
variation in physical appearances (e.g., facial features, visible disabilities, attire, age,
racial/ethnic background, and gender) in VC and compare to a FW-based team’s results.
How Reducing Self-Consciousness Impacts Work Performance
A similar comparative study can be conducted to see if reducing self-consciousness in
FW impacts quality of work or ideas (involving tasks or a mock project to complete). This
would be compared to VC, where self-consciousness is heightened for some users. The
question here is, “Do people’s performance improve while working in FW compared to
VC?”
Gender Differences in Computer-Mediated Communication
According to Lind’s (1999) and Nowak’s (2003) research on gender and sex
categorization in the area of virtual work groups and computer-mediated communication
(CMC), women felt more social presence and satisfaction using CMC than men. Results
in our study did not replicate this difference. Within the FW group, men and women did
not markedly differ on ratings of self-consciousness reduction, engagement level,
perception of equal participation, identity exploration tendencies, the need to multitask,
21

comfort level with speaking up, or feeling included. Survey responses suggested that the
men and women who used FW were similarly satisfied.
With regard to identity exploration, and in terms of choosing an avatar of a different
gender specifically, a gender difference did not emerge. Of the two participants who
chose an avatar that did not match their gender, one participant was female and the
other was male.
It is difficult to detect actual gender differences that might exist in a study with a small
sample and a heavily skewed gender ratio (7 men and 3 women) however. A large-scale
study with an even sampling of men and women would better detect any gender
differences related to the aforementioned issues of interest.
Personality Differences in Computer-Mediated Communication
Differences between individuals on the extroversion-introversion spectrum with regard to
platform preferences are also worth exploring in a large-scale study. Different reactions
and preferences between introverts and extroverts have been noticed across a variety of
contexts (e.g., ambient noise, socializing in large groups, etc.).
It makes sense, then, that different platform preferences might exist. Furthermore,
introverts and extroverts might exhibit differences with regard to propensities towards
self-consciousness, engagement level, perception of equal participation, identity
exploration tendencies, the need to multitask, comfort level with speaking up, or feeling
included.
Extroverted tendencies (e.g., talkativeness, assertiveness, etc.) are known to contribute
to domination of conversations. Therefore, a platform’s potential impact on issues such
as self-consciousness, equal participation, comfort level with speaking up, and feeling
included are especially worth investigating.
Conclusion
Flipside Workspace is, perhaps, the only 3-dimensional, avatar-based online
communication platform geared towards working professionals in the market. For this
reason, researchers concerned with work behavior, psychology, and performance of
professionals who communicate and collaborate online should take advantage of the
opportunity to examine issues and solutions from the unique angles FW provides.
Further investigation of the issues put forth in this study may prove to be a positive step
in the direction of helping professionals perform at their best.
22

References
Collins, C. J. (2008). Critically Examining Engagement. Human Resource Executive
Online. Retrieved from http://www.hreonline.com/HRE/view/story.jhtml?
id=55294828
Dawley, L., & Dede. C. (in press). Situated learning in virtual worlds and
immersive simulations. In J.M. Spector, M.D Merrill, J. Elen, & M.J. Bishop
(Eds.), The Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and
Technology (4th
ed.). New York: Springer.
Gigerenzer, G. (1991). How to Make Cognitive Illusions Disappear: Beyond
"Heuristics and Biases”. European Review of Social Psychology, 2: 83–115.
doi:10.1080/14792779143000033. Retrieved from http://library.mpib-
berlin.mpg.de/ft/gg/gg_how_1991.pdf
Grabher, G., & Ibert, O. (2014). Virtual hybrid communities show that you don’t
have to meet face-to-face to advance great ideas. The London School of
Economics and Political Science. Retrieved from
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2014/03/20/virtual-hybrid-communities/
Heller, R. (n.d.). A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Face-to-Face and Virtual
Communication: Overcoming the Challenges. Retrieved from
https://est05.esalestrack.com/eSalesTrack/Content/Content.ashx?file=440f092d-
3901-432f-8a3b-2110878043ec.pdf
Lind, M. R. (1999). The gender impact of temporary virtual work groups. IEEE
Transactions on Professional Communication, 42(4), 276.
Nowak, K. L. (2003). Sex categorization in computer mediated communication (CMC):
Exploring the utopian promise. Media Psychology, 5(1), 83-103.
Ringleb, A. H., Rock, D. (n.d.). NeuroLeadership in 2009. NeuroLeadershipJournal
Robinson, J. (n.d.). How to Leverage the Power of Language to Support a Thriving
Workplace Culture. Salveo Partners, LLC: Building Tomorrow’s Workplace.
Retrieved from http://salveopartners.com/how-to-leverage-the-power-of-
language-to-support-a-thriving-workplace-culture/?print=print
Schaufeli, W. B. (2013). What is engagement? In C. Truss, K. Alfes, R. Delbridge,
A. Shantz, & E. Soane (Eds.), Employee Engagement in Theory and Practice.
London: Routledge.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and
biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.
23

Appendix A
Responses to survey items 3 through 10 for FW group and 3 through 8 for VC group
Table 1. Flipside Workspace vs. Videoconferencing: Ease and Comfort with
Communication, Need to Multitask, and Self-Consciousness
Question 3: Please think about your experience using videoconferencing/Flipside
Workspace and provide a rating.
–
“Not at all” to “Slightly” “Very much” to “Extremely”
FW group VC group FW group VC group
How important do you feel
your communication
efforts were?
10%
1
0%
0
50%
5
60%
6
How easy was it to speak
up?
10%
1
0%
0
80%
8
80%
8
How easy was it to have a
conversation and feel
connected on this
platform?
0%
0
0%
0
80%
8
70%
7
Did you feel like you were
contributing to the
conversation?
0%
0
0%
0
70%
7
90%
9
Did you feel the need to
multitask during the
meeting?
60%
6
20%a
2
30%
3
20%a
2
Did using Flipside
Workspace enable you to
feel LESS self-conscious in
comparison to using
videoconferencing?
(FW group only)
0%b
0
N/A 100%b
9
N/A
To what extent do you
feel self-
conscious while using
videoconferencing? (VC
group only)
N/A 50%
5
N/A 20%
2
a
Averaged one participant’s three responses to “moderate.”
24

b
Disqualified one participant for choosing both “moderate” and “extremely,” hence percent
reflects 9 participants.
25

Table 2. Flipside Workspace vs. Videoconferencing: Engagement and
Inclusiveness
Question 4: Please compare your experience using videoconferencing/Flipside
Workspace to videoconferencing. For your information, "engagement" is defined as the
experience of feeling vigor, dedication, and absorption towards the task at hand.
–
“None” to “A little” “Very much” to
“Extremely”
FW
group
VC
group
FW
group
VC
group
When using video / Flipside
Workspace, which of the
following describes your level
of engagement?
0%
0
FW
group
evaluates
FW
0%
0
VC
group
evaluates
VC
90%
9
FW
group
evaluates
FW
70%
7
VC
group
evaluates
VC
When using video / Flipside
Workspace, to what degree do
you feel like you were part of a
conversation?
0%
0
FW
group
evaluates
FW
10%
1
VC
group
evaluates
VC
100%
10
FW
group
evaluates
FW
80%
8
VC
group
evaluates
VC
When using videoconferencing
, which of the following
describes your level of
engagement?
(FW group)
0%a
0
FW
group
evaluates
VC
0%
0
VC
group
evaluates
VC
56%a
5
FW
group
evaluates
VC
70%
7
VC
group
evaluates
VC
When using
videoconferencing, to what
degree do you feel like you
were part of a conversation?
(FW group)
11%a
1
FW
group
evaluates
VC
10%
1
VC
group
evaluates
VC
56%a
5
FW
group
evaluates
VC
80%
8
VC
group
evaluates
VC
a
Disqualified one participant for choosing both “none” and “extremely,” hence percent reflects 9
participants.
26

Table 3. Importance of Engagement to Business Productivity as High Level
Benefit
Question 5: The following questions are concerned with engagement and business
productivity. "Engagement" is defined as the experience of feeling vigor, dedication, and
absorption towards the task at hand.
–
“Not at all” to
“Slightly”
“Very much” to
“Extremely”
FW
group
VC
group
FW
group
VC
group
How
important is
engagement
to business
productivity?
0%
0
0%
0
100%
10
100%
10
To what
degree do
you regard
engagement
as a high
level
benefit?
0%
0
0%
0
100%
10
100%
10
27

Table 4. Flipside Workspace Participants’ Online Communication Tool
Preferences
Question 6: Which form of online communication (Flipside Workspace or other virtual
communication tools)...
–FW group only
Flipside
Workspace–
Video-
based
tool–
Other
NON
video-
based
tool–
All tools under
consideration are
about the same–
Garners the
highest level
of trust?
22%a
2
0%a
0
11%a
1
67%a
6
Do you
feel most
comfortable
speaking up
in?
63%b
5
13%b
1
25%b
2
0%b
0
Do you
experience
the
highest level
of
engagement
(i.e., vigor,
dedication,
absorption)
in?
50%
5
20%
2
20%
2
10%
1
a
Disqualified one participant for choosing multiple answers, hence percent reflects 9 participants.
b
Disqualified two participants for choosing multiple answers, hence percent reflects 8
participants.
28

Table 5. Participants’ Perception of Bias Reduction
Question 7 in FW and question 6 in VC: Please indicate the degree to which
videoconferencing/Flipside Workspace minimizes potential biases related to the
following.
–
“Not at all” to “Slightly” “Very much” to
“Extremely”
FW
group
VC
group
FW
group
VC
group
Facial/physical
appearance
0%
0
90%
9
100%
10
0%
0
Attire 0%
0
80%
8
100%
10
10%
1
Age 0%
0
80%
8
100%
10
0%
0
Race/ethnicity 0%
0
100%
10
80%
8
0%
0
Gender 10%
1
100%a
9
60%
6
0%a
0
a
Disqualified one participant for choosing both “not at all” and “extremely,” hence percent
reflects 9 participants.
29

Table 6. Participants’ Feelings about Bias Reduction
Question 8 in FW and question 7 in VC: Please rate how positively you FEEL about the
degree to which videoconferencing/Flipside Workspace minimizes potential biases
related to the following.
–
“Not at all” to “Slightly” “Very much” to “Extremely”
Facial/physical
appearance
0%
0
90%
9
100%
10
0%
0
Attire 10%
1
80%
8
80%
8
0%
0
Age 0%a
0
90%
9
70%a
7
0%
0
Race/ethnicity 0%
0
90%
9
80%
8
0%
0
Gender 0%
0
90%
9
60%
8
0%
0
a
Averaged 1 participant’s 3 responses to “moderate.”
30

Table 7. Impact of Visual Cues
Question 9 in FW and question 8 in VC: The following survey item is concerned with the
impact of visual cues received on video/Flipside Workspace.
–
“Very Low” to “Low” “High” to “Very High”
To what degree did
you notice visual cues
on video / in Flipside
Workspace?
33%a
3
FW group
evaluates
FW
10%
1
VC group
evaluates
VC
67%a
6
FW group
evaluates
FW
50%
5
VC group
evaluates
VC
To what
degree do automated
visual cues received on
video / in Flipside
Workspace build trust
between
communicators?
44%a
4
FW group
evaluates
FW
0%
0
VC group
evaluates
VC
56%a
5
FW group
evaluates
FW
40%
4
VC group
evaluates
VC
Judging from your
previous experience
with
videoconferencing, to
what degree do visual
cues received on video
build trust between
communicators? (FW
group)
22%a
2
FW group
evaluates
VC
N/A 44%a
4
FW group
evaluates
VC
N/A
To what degree do you
agree with the
following?:
Automated visual cues
received in Flipside
Workspace build trust
between
communicators
similarly to visual cues
received on video.
(FW group)
56%a
5
N/A 44%a
4
N/A
a
Disqualified one participant for choosing all responses, hence percent reflects 9 participants.
31

Table 8. Identity Exploration
Question 10: Please reflect on your Flipside Workspace avatar choice and select "Yes"
or "No."
–
Yes– No–
When
choosing
an avatar, I
chose an
avatar that
matches my
gender.
80%
8
20%
2
When
choosing an
avatar, I
chose the
gender at
random.
0%
0
100%
10
Is it
important to
have an
avatar that
matches your
gender?
67%a
6
33%a
3
Is it
important to
have an
avatar that
matches your
physical
appearance?
22%a
2
78%a
7
a
Disqualified one participant for choosing all responses, hence percent reflects 9 participants.
32

Appendix B
Responses to survey item 1: Participants’ previous experiences with online collaboration
tools (video)
1. Please list any synchronous online communication or collaboration tools you have
used that include a video component (e.g., Skype, etc.).
Name of tool FW group
(Number of times
mentioned)
VC group
(Number of times
mentioned)
Total
(Number of times
mentioned)
1. Skype 9 10 19
2, Facetime 3 7 10
3. Google+
Hangouts / Gmail
Chat
4 5 9
4. GoToMeeting /
GoToWebinar /
Citrix
3 1 4
5. Cisco WebEx 1 1 2
6. Lync 0 2 2
7. Adobe Connect 1 0 1
8. Fuze 1 0 1
9. Join.Me 1 0 1
10. Online games /
MMORPGs
1 0 1
11. Protosphere
(Protonmedia)
1 0 1
12. Snapchat 1 0 1
13. UberConference 1 0 1
14. vAcademia 1 0 1
15. Venuegen 1 0 1
16. Zoom 0 1 1
33

Responses to survey item 2: Participants’ previous experiences with online collaboration
tools (non-video)
2. Please list any synchronous communication or collaboration tools you have used that
exclude a video component (e.g., Instant Messenger, etc.).
Name of tool FW group
(Number of times
mentioned)
VC group
(Number of times
mentioned)
Total
(Number of times
mentioned)
1. Instant
Messenger (IM) –
unspecified platform
3 4 7
2. Google+
Hangouts / Gmail
Chat (without using
video)
3 3 6
3. Facebook
Messenger/chat
3 2 5
4. Yahoo Instant
Messenger
1 2 3
5. Lync 1 2 3
6. text/texting 0 3 3
7. Skype (without
using video)
1 1 2
8. Google Docs 1 1 2
9. Online games /
MMORPGs
1 1 2
10. What’s app 0 2 2
11. AOL Instant
Messenger
1 0 1
12. Windows Live
Messenger
1 0 1
13. GoToMeeting /
GoToWebinar /
Citrix
1 0 1
14. Email 0 1 1
15. Yammer 0 1 1
16. Sharepoint 0 1 1
17. Viber 0 1 1
18. iMessage 0 1 1
19. Evernote 1 0 1
20. Mikogo 1 0 1
21. MindMeister 1 0 1
22. Nozbe 1 0 1
23. Todoist 1 0 1
24. WRIKE.com 1 0 1
34

Appendix C
Participant recruitment announcement
http://worklifestrategies.net/2015/01/30/flipside-workspace-user-experience-study-
official-call-for-participants/
Work-Life Strategies & Solutions
On the Evolution of Work Systems in the Digital Economy
Flipside Workspace User Experience Study – Official Call
for Participants
Comments Posted by L. P. on January 30, 2015 Edit
The Flipside Workspace user experience study is set to begin! Hence, I am providing full details about the
procedure and reward for participating. For 40-45 minutes of participation time, which includes partaking in
an interactive one-on-one meeting and successfully completing an online survey before the conclusion of
the study on March 1, 2015 Pacific Standard Time, each participant is automatically eligible to receive a
$25.00 Amazon.com e-gift certificate from Flipside Workspace as a token of appreciation.
Note that this study is limited to 10 participants so I will accept participants in the order in which
participant agreement to consent form terms (a document emailed to each interested individual) is received.
In other words, the first 10 people who choose to participate will be accepted. Others will be placed on a
waiting list and, in the event that a participant does not complete the study, another interested participant will
be notified and allowed to participate.
As a reminder, here are the prerequisites for participation:
• You are, or have been, a working professional
• English proficiency (spoken and reading comprehension)
• Previous experience using an online communication tool (e.g., Skype, etc.)
• Availability to participate in an interactive session during a 30-minute time slot in the afternoon or
evening during Pacific Standard Time – to be pre-scheduled
• Have a headset or earphones to use during the interactive session
Also note that this is an independent study sponsored by Flipside Workspace and is unaffiliated with Better
Collaboration. Contact Lynn Patra at ltpatra@gmail.com to indicate your interest in participating or if you
have any further questions. Without further ado, here is the procedure for your consideration:
Procedure
35

1. Tutorial (3-5 minutes) – You will set up a Flipside Workspace account (that is linked to the email
address you provided) which will be set up to provide you with free access to Flipside Workspace.
Download the Flipside Workspace platform onto your computer (note specifications below*). Log in
and take part in the tutorial to ensure that you understand and are comfortable with Flipside
Workspace’s features. You may do this at any time that is convenient for you. Let Lynn Patra
(at ltpatra@gmail.com) know if you encounter problems or need further assistance with this. Once
you have completed the tutorial, email Lynn Patra and list days and times (any day of the week to
coincide with afternoons or evenings during Pacific Standard Time) for which she can schedule your
meeting.
* Flipside Workspace is a browser-based application. First-time users are required to
download two plug-ins, Unity (environment) and Vivox (VoIP). Headsets are strongly
recommended for using voice in the environment. System requirements: PC: Windows XP /
7 / 8 | MAC: OS X 10.4+ (Intel CPUs only).
2. Meeting (30 minutes) – You will participate in a one-on-one meeting in which we will
discuss any subject related to work-life of interest to you. Hence, taking part in this meeting
does not require any preparation work on your part. Please note that your privacy and confidentiality are
assured. The content and specific statements made during this meeting will not be recorded in any way
(audio or visual recording, written transcripts, etc.). Remember that you will need to plug in and
wear a headset or earphones for this session.
3. Online survey (5-10 minutes) – After completing your 30-minute meeting, a link to an online survey
(via Survey Monkey) will be emailed to you. Please complete this survey shortly after receiving the link to the
survey to ensure that your responses reflect your experience using Flipside Workspace while it is fresh in
your mind. However, if you need a break after the meeting, or at any time while taking the survey, please do
so and return to the survey at your convenience. Once again, if you have any questions or experience any
problems while taking the survey, contact Lynn Patra at ltpatra@gmail.com .
Thanks for your time and consideration. Once again, if you have any questions, don’t hesitate to contact me!
36

Appendix D
Statement of consent and procedure for participants using Flipside Workspace
Dear <name of participant>,
Thank you for your interest in taking part in this study! Before proceeding, please review
the Statement of Consent and Procedure. If you have questions or concerns, or if there’s
anything that you need clarified, please let Lynn Patra know. Otherwise, please
acknowledge that you read and understood this information, and that you consent to
participate by replying and providing the email address to be used by Lynn Patra and
Flipside Workspace for (1.) setting up your Flipside Workspace account at
http://www.flipsideworkspace.com/register.php and (2.) subsequently sending you an
online survey.
Statement of Consent
I, <name of participant>, understand that participation in this study is voluntary and that I
may end my participation at any time should I experience any negative reactions during
any part of this study. I also understand that if I have any questions or concerns during
the course of my participation that I may contact Lynn Patra at ltpatra@gmail.com.
Finally, I understand that I am eligible for the reward after all stages of the study (see
Procedure) have been completed, all of which must be completed by <date>.
Procedure
1. Tutorial (3-5 minutes) – Tutorial (3-5 minutes) – You will set up a Flipside Workspace
account (that is linked to the email address you provided) which will be set up to provide
you with free access to Flipside Workspace. Download the Flipside Workspace platform
onto your computer (note specifications below*). Log in and take part in the tutorial to
ensure that you understand and are comfortable with Flipside Workspace’s features.
You may do this at any time that is convenient for you. Let Lynn Patra (at
ltpatra@gmail.com) know if you encounter problems or need further assistance with this.
Once you have completed the tutorial, email Lynn Patra and list days and times (any day
of the week to coincide with afternoons or evenings during Pacific Standard Time) for
which she can schedule your meeting.
* Flipside Workspace is a browser-based application. First-time users are required
to download two plug-ins, Unity (environment) and Vivox (VoIP). Headsets are
strongly recommended for using voice in the environment. System requirements:
PC: Windows XP / 7 / 8 | MAC: OS X 10.4+ (Intel CPUs only).
2. Meeting (30 minutes) – You will participate in a one-on-one meeting in which we will
discuss any subject related to work-life of interest to you. Hence, taking part in this
meeting does not require any preparation work on your part. Please note that your
privacy and confidentiality are assured. The content and specific statements made
37

during this meeting will not be recorded in any way (audio or visual recording, written
transcripts, etc.). Remember that you will need to plug in and wear a headset or
earphones for this session.
3. Online survey (5-10 minutes) – After completing your 30-minute meeting, a link to an
online survey (via Survey Monkey) will be emailed to you. Please complete this survey
shortly after receiving the link to the survey to ensure that your responses reflect your
experience using Flipside Workspace while it is fresh in your mind. However, if you need
a break after the meeting, or at any time while taking the survey, please do so and return
to the survey at your convenience. Once again, if you have any questions or experience
any problems while taking the survey, contact Lynn Patra at ltpatra@gmail.com .
38

Appendix E
Statement of consent and procedure for participants using videoconferencing
Dear <name of participant>,
Thank you for your interest in taking part in this study! Before proceeding, please review
the Statement of Consent and Procedure. If you have questions or concerns, or if there’s
anything that you need clarified, please let Lynn Patra know. Otherwise, please
acknowledge that you read and understood this information, and that you consent to
participate by replying and providing:
(1) The email address to be used for sending you an online survey
(2) Whether you want to use Skype or Gmail’s chat feature and your username
(3) Days and times (as half-hour time slots for which you can be available for the
meeting)
Statement of Consent
I, <name of participant>, understand that participation in this study is voluntary and that I
may end my participation at any time should I experience any negative reactions during
any part of this study. I also understand that if I have any questions or concerns during
the course of my participation that I may contact Lynn Patra at ltpatra@gmail.com.
Finally, I understand that I am eligible for the reward after all stages of the study (see
Procedure) have been completed, all of which must be completed by <date>.
Procedure
1. Once Lynn Patra receives your consent, in the form of information requested above,
she will email you with regard to scheduling your meeting session. Please confirm that
the proposed time is a good one and add Lynn Patra’s username, ltpatra for either
Skype or Gmail, to your contact list. If you need to cancel or reschedule for a different
time then contact Lynn at ltpatra@gmail.com.
2. Meeting (30 minutes) – You will participate in a one-on-one videoconferencing
meeting in which we will discuss any subjects related to work-life of interest to you.
Hence, taking part in this meeting does not require any preparation work on your part.
Please note that your privacy and confidentiality are assured. The content and specific
statements made during this meeting will not be recorded in any way (audio or visual
recording, written transcripts, etc.).
3. Online survey (5-10 minutes) – After completing your 30-minute meeting, a link to an
online survey (via Survey Monkey) will be emailed to you. Please complete this survey
shortly after receiving the link to the survey to ensure that your responses reflect your
videoconferencing experience while it is fresh in your mind. However, if you need a
39

break after the meeting, or at any time while taking the survey, please do so and return
to the survey at your convenience. Once again, if you have any questions or experience
any problems while taking the survey, contact Lynn Patra at ltpatra@gmail.com .
40

Appendix F
Flipside Workspace user experience survey
Welcome to the Flipside Workspace User Experience Survey
Thank you for participating in our study. Please note that your responses will remain confidential and that
your identity will remain anonymous. The data gathered here will only be used in aggregate form. Once you
complete this survey, you will be eligible for the reward for taking part in this study. If you have any problems
or questions regarding this survey, please contact Lynn Patra at ltpatra@gmail.com.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
2. Please list any synchronous communication or collaboration tools you have used that exclude a
video component (e.g., Instant Messenger, etc.).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1 / 9 11%
41

Next
Flipside Workspace User Experience Survey - Page 2 of 9
3. For the following questions, please think about your experience using Flipside Workspace and
provide a rating.
Not at all Slightly Moderately
Very
much Extremely
How important do you feel your
communication efforts were?
How easy was it to speak up?
How easy was it to have a conversation
and feel connected on this platform?
Did you feel like you were contributing
to the conversation?
Did you feel the need to multitask during
the meeting?
Did using Flipside Workspace
enable you to feel LESS self-conscious
in comparison to using
videoconferencing?
2 / 9 22%
Prev Next
42

4. Please compare your experience using Flipside Workspace to videoconferencing. For your
information, "engagement" is defined as the experience of feeling vigor, dedication, and
None A little Moderate/Moderately
Very
much Extremely
When using Flipside Workspace, which of
the following describes your level of
engagement?
When using Flipside Workspace, to what
degree do you feel like you were part of a
conversation?
When using videoconferencing, which of
the following describes your level of
engagement?
When using videoconferencing, to what
degree do you feel like you were part of a
conversation?
3 / 9 33%
Prev Next
5. The following questions are concerned with engagement and business productivity.
"Engagement" is defined as the experience of feeling vigor, dedication, and absorption
towards the task at hand.
Not at all Slightly Moderately Very much Extremely
How important is engagement to
business productivity?
43

To what degree do you regard
engagement as a high level
benefit?
4 / 9 44%
Prev Next
6. Which form of online communication (Flipside Workspace or other virtual communication tools)...
Flipside Workspace Video-based tool
Other NON video-
based tool
All tools under
consideration are about
the same
Garners the highest level of trust?
Do you feel most comfortable speaking up in?
Do you experience the highest level of engagement (i.e.,
vigor, dedication, absorption) in?
Why?
5 / 9 56%
Prev Next
7. Compared to videoconferencing tools, please indicate the degree to which Flipside Workspace
minimizes potential biases related to the following.
44

Facial/physical appearance
Attire
Age
Race/ethnicity
Gender
Please explain how Flipside Workspace minimizes potential for judgment or bias based on physical characteristics to the
degree that you think it does.
6 / 9 67%
Prev Next
8. Please rate how positively you FEEL about the degree to which Flipside Workspace
minimizes potential biases related to the following.
Facial/physical
appearance
Attire
Age
45

Race/ethnicity
Gender
7 / 9 78%
Prev Next
9. The following survey item compares automated visual cues received in Flipside Workspace to
visual cues received on video.
Very Low Low Moderate High Very High
To what degree did you notice visual cues in
Flipside Workspace?
To what degree do automated visual cues
received in Flipside Workspace build trust
between communicators?
Judging from your previous experience with
videoconferencing, to what degree do visual
cues received on video build trust between
communicators?
To what degree do you agree with the
following?: Automated visual cues received
in Flipside Workspace build trust between
communicators similarly to visual cues
received on video.
8 / 9 89%
46

Prev Next
10. Please reflect on your Flipside Workspace avatar choice and select "Yes" or "No."
Yes No
When choosing an avatar, I chose an avatar that matches
my gender.
When choosing an avatar, I chose the gender at random.
Is it important to have an avatar that matches your gender?
Is it important to have an avatar that matches your physical
appearance?
Unlike videoconferencing, Flipside Workspace allows you to choose a male or female avatar to represent you. Did you
choose an avatar whose gender differed from your own? How did you come to your decision?
9 / 9 100%
Prev Done
47

Appendix G
Videoconferencing user experience survey
Welcome to the Videoconferencing User Experience Survey
Thank you for participating in our study. Please note that your responses will remain confidential and that
your identity will remain anonymous. The data gathered here will only be used in aggregate form. Once you
complete this survey, you will be eligible for the reward for taking part in this study. If you have any problems
or questions regarding this survey, please contact Lynn Patra at ltpatra@gmail.com.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
2. Please list any synchronous communication or collaboration tools you have used that exclude a
video component (e.g., Instant Messenger, etc.).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
48

1 / 7 14%
Next
Videoconferencing User Experience Survey - Page 2 of 7
3. For the following questions, please think about your experience using videoconferencing and
provide a rating.
How important do you feel your
communication efforts were?
How easy was it to speak up?
How easy was it to have a
conversation and feel connected on
this platform?
Did you feel like you were
contributing to the conversation?
Did you feel the need to multitask
during the meeting?
To what extent do you feel self-
conscious while using
videoconferencing?
2 / 7 29%
Prev Next
49

4. Please describe your experience using videoconferencing. For your information, "engagement" is
defined as the experience of feeling vigor, dedication, and absorption towards the task at
hand.
None A little Moderate/Moderately Very much Extremely
Which of the following describes
your level of engagement?
To what degree did you feel like
you were part of a conversation?
3 / 7 43%
Prev Next
5. The following questions are concerned with engagement and business
productivity. "Engagement" is defined as the experience of feeling vigor, dedication, and
How important is engagement to
business productivity?
To what degree do you regard
engagement as a high level
benefit?
4 / 7 57%
Prev Next
50

6. Please indicate the degree to which videoconferencing minimizes potential biases related to the
following.
Facial/physical appearance
Attire
Age
Race/ethnicity
Gender
Please explain how videoconferencing minimizes judgment or bias based on physical characteristics to the degree that
you think it does.
5 / 7 71%
Prev Next
7. Please rate how positively you feel about the degree to which
videoconferencing minimizes potential biases related to the following.
Facial/physical
appearance
51

Attire
Age
Race/ethnicity
Gender
6 / 7 86%
Prev Next
8. The following survey item is concerned with the impact of visual cues received on video.
Very Low Low Moderate High Very High
To what degree did you notice visual
cues on video?
To what degree do visual cues
received on video build trust between
communicators?
7 / 7 100%
Prev Done
52

Flipside Workspace versus Videoconferencing

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Flipside Workspace versus Videoconferencing

Similar to Flipside Workspace versus Videoconferencing (20)

Flipside Workspace versus Videoconferencing