Citation Context

...ithin the groups. Second, we examine how user tabletop position affects where users touch and how much they touch. These results complement our analysis of the verbal interactions presented elsewhere =-=[7]-=-. 4.1 Touch Condition Condition Session 1 Session 2 All 15m 54s 12m 30s Year 3 17m 46s 12m 36s Year 4 12m 10s 12m 19s Multiple 15m 11s 10m 24s Single 15m 34s 14m 21s Table 2. Average session time by c...

Citation Context

...ects of collaboration described in our framework, and analysis of discussion and physical interactions around the table at these points. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS Previously reported findings of OurSpace =-=[7, 16]-=- focused on whether multi-touch was beneficial for learning compared with a single touch interface (i.e. with input restricted to one user at a time). It was found that there was more task-focused tal...

Citation Context

...ration of activities, questions, and explanations related to engaging phenomena.” [16, p. 2] In addition to prolonged engagement, APE exhibits have been shown to appeal to a wide variety of visitors and to foster open-ended exploration and discovery [16]. Visitors ask qualitatively different types of questions at APE exhibits and tend to use the exhibit to pursue their own answers rather than reading exhibit labels. Collaboration and Learning with Tabletops Multi-touch tabletops have been shown to promote physical engagement, reflection, and collaboration in formal learning environments (e.g. [12,26,34]). Researchers have also considered ways to exploit learners’ existing social practices and embodied collaborative actions to facilitate Figure 2. A phylogenetic tree showing evolutionary relationships between five groups of organisms. Shared derived traits (synapomorphies) are labeled on the branches. Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Page(s): 2059--2068 New York, NY, USA, ACM, 2012, ISSN: 978-1-4503-1015-4. Horn, M.S., Leong, Z.A., Block, F., Diamond, J., Evans, E.M., Phillips, B., and Shen, C. (2012). Of BATs and APEs: An interactive tablet...

Citation Context

...d deeper. Besides, previous studies have suggested that the physical properties of tangible tabletops and their support for parallel work can also lead to limited reciprocity and mutual understanding =-=[16, 7, 11]-=-. In [7], it has been found that students using a tangible interface gained fewer in test scores because group members tended to perform individual actions without discussing much with the others.12 ...

Citation Context

...nterface for Collaborative Exploration Based on existing research indicating that tabletop interfaces support collaboration through visibility of actions, egalitarian input and physical participation =-=[5, 8, 20, 21, 30]-=-, facilitate active reading [16], and afford distributed cognition [18, 30], we decided to utilize tabletop interaction to facilitate collaborative data exploration (G4). The GreenTouch tabletop inter...

Citation Context

...ound that tabletops support collaboration [22, 23, 25] and in particular collaborative learning very well. A great majority of these studies has focused on either children’s learning in the classroom =-=[10, 15, 18, 21]-=- or museum settings [1, 12]. Rick et al. [21] investigated individual group dynamics in tabletop collaboration, while Fleck et al. [7] describe conflict resolution and physical interaction on tabletop...

Citation Context

...ps www.ijacsa.thesai.org 60 | P a g e(IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, Vol. 4, No.3, 2013 improve information sharing between group members. Harris et al. =-=[10]-=- compared the differences between single and Multitouch tabletops in group task performance and found that Multi-touch tabletops improved task performance, whereas single-touch tabletops did not. In a...

Citation Context

... novelty of the interface as opposed to the ludic qualities of the games. Nacenta et al. [17] discuss how different types of interaction techniques can affect the way people collaborate on a multi-touch tabletop surface. In particular, they found drag-and-drop to work better than other techniques. Piper and Hollan [19] found advantages in the use of multi-touch surfaces over the use of paper for small study groups reviewing study materials. In particular, the students were more likely to solve problems on their own instead of using answer keys when using the multi-touch surface. Harris et al. [7] studied the impact of multi versus single-touch surfaces on children’s collaborative tasks. They found that when using multi-touch surfaces children talked more about the task they were completing, whereas they spent more time talking about turn taking when using a single-touch surface. The literature has thus far then demonstrated some possible advantages for the use of multi-touch surfaces and displays for collaborative tasks, although the examples above do not provide any comparisons with less expensive and more accessible collaborative setups. 2.2 Multi-Mouse Single Display Groupware Setu...

Citation Context

...re 1. Three users position tables and students in their classroom using OurSpace. OurSpace OurSpace is a desk positioning and seating allocation application designed for three concurrent users (Rick, =-=Harris, et al., 2009-=-). A bird’s eye virtual floor plan of the participants’ classroom is placed in the center of the tabletop so that all participants, irrespective of their position, have good access to it (Figure 1). P...