A user study of weconnect: Communication through personal broadcasting

A user study of weConnect: Communication through personal broadcasting This document describes an exploratory user study of weConnect, an application ...
Author: Maude Holmes
2 downloads 0 Views 1MB Size
A user study of weConnect: Communication through personal broadcasting This document describes an exploratory user study of weConnect, an application for supporting communication through personal broadcasting. The first section provides some background, followed by an overview of the weConnect system description. Section 3 describes the associated research questions and issues, and sections 4 and 5 describe the user study design and the findings from the exploratory user study of the application. Finally, section 6 summarises the pertinent issues derived from the study.

1. Introduction Current mobile communication is facilitated by direct phone calls or asynchronous messaging such as text and media messages. However, these are not sufficient for the many needs that require, for example, a subtle, semicontinuous, and rich context communication, without interrupting the recipients. If two individuals wish to share a thought about each other, express emotions, or simply share an experience, there are very few means of communication appropriate for such situations. Mobile messaging applications such as SMS and MMS are experienced at a specific point in time rather than supporting a sustained connection between two people. Furthermore, these mobile messaging applications require the user to take several steps in order to access the content of messages. The home screen area is typically used to notify the user that new messages have been received. The recipient is then required to open each message. Thus, it is the recipients’ actions that determine when a message is displayed on the device, and without the recipients’ intervention the messages remain unopened by default. The user interaction associated with mobile messaging applications is invariably inflexible. Messages are typically received and stored in their particular ‘compartment’ in the file storage allocation associated with the messaging application. However, it is not possible to increase their visibility. In certain instances, the recipient may want some messages visible at all times or may want to have messages from a particular recipient automatically displayed. weConnect is a client-server application that enables users to communicate in a semi-persistent manner, providing a means for sharing experiences, emotions, and mediating intimacy. It allows individuals to easily merge personal information (images, text, and audio captured by the user) with general information and online resources (images/symbols of location, animation effects, and time zone information, etc.). In this manner they can convey a rich context about themselves and aggregated information from online services to another person in a personalised form. The main focus of weConnect can be regarded as facilitating asynchronous personal, peer-to-peer communication for sharing context and establishing remote presence. Related work, such as mobile messaging applications ‘SenseMS’ (Amin et al., 2005) and ‘ExMS’ (Persson, 2003), address the inadequacies of SMS for conveying emotional content based on one to one communication. Related research (Kindberg et al., 2005) investigating MMS usage indicates that people tend to share more affective content (based on mutual experience) than content based on functional purposes (arranging mutual tasks).

2. weConnect system description weConnect is intended for supporting one to one (or one to few), as opposed to one-to-many communications. The focus of this approach is to enable communicating individuals to share meaningful content based on mutual experience, for sharing context and for mediating intimacy. However, rather than focussing on mobile to mobile communication, a novel aspect of weConnect is that it enables the sender to ‘push’ combined personal media (images, animations) to a web server, allowing the recipient to ‘pull’ the content to be viewed via a ‘personal information space’, comprising, for example, desktop or laptop computer, mobile device, or small screen display. Figure 1 presents an overview of the weConnect system architecture.

1

Figure 1: Overview of weConnect system architecture

As highlighted in Figure 1, weConnect allows content to be created, sent and received via mobile and web-based applications. Figure 2 below shows a detailed example of the weConnect splash screen on the mobile client, highlighting a full screen view of the latest content received from a selected contact (e.g. image with scrolling text overlay). The coloured person icon at the top left of the screen denotes an active connection with a selected contact (the icon is greyed out when disconnected from weConnect).

Coloured person icon (denoting an active connection)

Figure 2: Example weConnect mobile client splash screen

In addition to the mobile client, content can also be created using the weConnect web-based form. After logging in, the weConnect web form allows content to be created for anyone included in the pre-defined contact drop down list. Images can be uploaded from a desktop computer, edited and sent to a person in the contact list. Text and animation overlays can also be added to images, and content can be previewed in a phone preview window before sending to a selected contact. Figure 3 shows an example of the weConnect web-based form.

2

Contact list drop down button

Apply changes button (send content)

Image preview window

Image added to image gallery Phone preview window

Further image options (copy to phone, edit & delete image)

Browse button

Upload button

Figure 3: weConnect web-based form

The weConnect desktop viewer allows received content to be displayed on the desktop computer. After logging in, the weConnect ‘Connects for’ window presents a contacts list. The list shows the available contacts, with each person’s name, and the date and time when the last content was sent (if only one connection is available then only one person’s details will be shown). Connection to a contact is made by clicking on the person’s icon to the right of the person’s name (see Figure 4, left).

Log out button

Person icon

Available contact (with friends’ name and date & time content last sent)

Figure 4: weConnect desktop viewer – ‘Connects for’ window (left) window showing received content with a red border (right)

After selecting a contact from the list, the content created by the selected contact (e.g., an image together with an animation or a text message) will appear in a window on the desktop. The window can then be moved on the desktop by selecting and dragging the window using the mouse. The window can be further customised by

3

adding a border from a pre-defined drop down list. Figure 4 (right) shows an example of the desktop viewer window with a red border selected.

3. Research questions and issues Some outstanding research questions and issues for weConnect can be formulated, notably: 1. What is the novelty of the application? The functional aspects of weConnect allow the sender to personalise message content (images, text, animations) for the purposes of self-presentation (e.g. establishing remote presence), mediating intimacy, and conveying context and mood. As previously indicated, related work such as SenseMS and ExMS adopt similar approaches in their design concepts based on mobile applications. However, the novel aspects of weConnect relates to its support for: 1) the semi-continuous presence of an image, 2) the unobtrusive interaction for the recipient (the recipient can passively view the content without having to respond), 3) the combination of both personal and contextual information for the sender, and 4) cross-platform operation, allowing the recipient to configure and view media in their personal information space (see Figure 1), based on their present locality or their preferences for viewing content. 2. What forms of communication could weConnect support? It is proposed that weConnect can potentially support and manage at least three different forms of communication, or ‘communication needs’ (Gebhardt, 2005), notably: 1) managing uncertainty and anxiety, 2) managing communication boundaries, and 3) managing face. While such communication needs are supported by existing messaging systems (SMS, MMS), weConnect offers a potentially richer communicative experience (conveying context, non-verbal aspects, emotional content) extending across different platforms. Table 2 illustrates how weConnect and other technologies can offer people several affordances to enable them to manage communication needs and related activities.

Communication needs Managing uncertainty and anxiety

Managing communication boundaries

Managing face

Media affordance

Technology

Providing additional information for communication (Kuvinen, 2003)

MMS, Video Conferencing, weConnect, mComm, SenseMS, Kontti

Sharing context (Amin et al. 2005; Cheverst, Fitton, Rouncefield 2004), Extending remote presence (Hoeflich & Roessler, 2002)

Babble, Media Space, Video Conferencing, weConnect, mComm, SenseMS, Kontti Mobile Phone, SMS, Push to Talk, IM, Media Space, weConnect, mComm, ExMS, SenseMS, Kontti

Managing recipriocity & exchange between partners (Kjeldskov et al., 2005)

Telephone, Mobile Phone, SMS, weConnect, SenseMS

Stimulating and mediating intimacy (Aronsonas, 1986; Kjeldskov, 2005, Dalsgaard et al., 2006) Communicating in an unobtrusive manner (Grinter & Palen, 2002)

Telephone, Mobile Phone, SMS, weConnect, SenseMS SMS, IM, weConnect, mComm, SenseMS, Kontti

Conditional messaging (Jung et al., 2005)

SMS, MMS, weConnect

Gift-giving (Taylor & Harper, 2003)

SMS, weConnect, SenseMS, ExMS

Table 2: Communication needs, media affordances and technology channels (adapted from Gebhardt, 2005)

4

3. What is the target audience for weConnect, who would benefit from using the system? Related work (Amin et al., 2005; Persson, 2003) implies that teens would be the main beneficiary and target group for weConnect, although research exploring the use of technology to mediate intimacy (Harper, 2003, Kjeldskov et al., 2005) suggests that family groups may equally benefit. However, arguably, any communicating individuals sharing a close social or emotional attachment could benefit from using weConnect for the purpose of mediating intimacy. 4. What are the user requirements and behaviours? While it has been previously indicated how prior research has been used to inform the requirements and design decisions for weConnect, there remain several outstanding questions regarding the behaviours of the potential users of weConnect: 

How do people currently convey context and emotional content to others? What devices and applications do they use for this purpose (email, IM, SMS, MMS, Skype)?



What forms and combinations of personalised message content (pictures, text, animations) do people choose when using weConnect for mediating intimacy, sharing context or conveying meaning to others?

4. weConnect user study Following the build and implementation of the weConnect application, and the associated research questions and issues previously defined, an exploratory user study was conducted with the aim of identifying: 

The practical usefulness of weConnect: How often do people connect and how often is content changed (indicative of the usefulness and requirement for application)?



The appeal of weConnect: How people rate weConnect and what terminology do they use to describe it?



The emerging usage scenarios for weConnect: What are the differences between segments of people (work colleagues, couples, families, friends) regarding the type of content they share with their intended recipients? And - What are the recipients’ preferences for where content is received (mobile or desktop) and what determines these preferences, e.g., type of content (personal information), convenience, locality, screen estate of the device?



How people use weConnect for feeling connected to others: What do they want (or intend) to convey when using weConnect (intimacy, gifting)? And - Do people use weConnect for expressing their identity to others when sending information? If so, is the content qualitatively different from those expressed in other messaging technologies?



How do people use different types of content: What type of content (images, text, animations) do people select in order to communicate shared meaning (context, experience, mediating intimacy) as opposed to functional communication (organisational, informational, etc.)? And - What forms of content (images, text, animations) specifically relates to conveying affect and gifting if any?

In addition, it is intended to identify any underlying patterns, trends, or novel uses of weConnect across both mobile and desktop platforms.

5

4.1 weConnect study predictions While the weConnect evaluation is essentially an exploratory study, it is possible to formulate some study predictions following observations arising from an expert walkthrough of the weConnect application. Specifically, it is predicted that: By using weConnect, participants may change their current messaging habits (IM/SMS/MMS) and scope (frequency/content) towards their study partner, e.g.: 1. When using Instant Messenger on the desktop, participants may change the frequency/content of their exchanges with their study partner 2. Participants may wish to propagate the weConnect content to other people in their social network (i.e. contacts other than those registered in the weConnect database) 3. Participants may wish to send weConnect content to a group (i.e. family members) rather than sending multiple messages to individuals

4.2 Design and method An in-situ user study was conducted to evaluate the weConnect mobile phone client, desktop viewer and web applications. For the study, a total of 15 participants were recruited, comprising 12 males and 3 females aged between 12 to 55 years. The participants collaborated as 7 pairs or groups, with each pair or group having established a close working or personal relationship and an established practice of texting (i.e. sending SMS and MMS messages). The participating pairs and groups were based on different user segmentations, comprising: 

Work colleagues (Pair 1) – consisted of Peter and Ryan, who have known each other for 13 years and both now work together as telecommunications software developers at a Suffolk-based company. Peter has used a mobile phone for 13 years, using it for calls, SMS and WAP. Ryan has used a mobile phone for 5 years, using it for calls and SMS. Both Peter and Ryan describe themselves as expert PC users.



Couple (Pair 2) – consisted of Alan and Dianne, who have known each other for 17 years and have lived together for 11 years. They both live and work in Cambridge and have two small daughters. Both Alan and Diane have used a mobile phone for 10 years, both use them for calls, SMS (no MMS) and taking pictures. Both Alan and Diane describe themselves as expert PC users.



Family group 1 – consisted of parent Greg and son Jake (aged 12) who live in Sussex. Greg divides his time working from home and in London. He has used a mobile phone for 7 years, using it for calls, SMS and occasionally MMS for personal use. Jake has used a mobile for 1 year, using it for calls, SMS and occasionally for MMS. Both Greg and Jake consider themselves to be experienced PC users.



Family group 2 – consisted of parent George with son Tim (aged 22) and daughter Val (aged 24). George lives and works in Suffolk, while Tim and Val both live and work in London. George has used a mobile for 6 years, mainly using it for work-related conference calls with some use of SMS and camera functions. Tim has also used a mobile for 6 years, using it for calls, SMS, camera and for web access. Val had used a mobile for 7 years, using it for calls, SMS, camera and downloading music. George and Tim describe themselves as expert PC users and Val describes herself as a proficient PC user.



Family group 3 – consisted of Georgina and her brother Finlay, who have lived together in Hertfordshire for 7 months. Finlay looks after Georgina’s baby daughter Jasmine during weekday office hours while Georgina is at work in Cambridge. Georgina has used a mobile phone for 10 years, using it mainly for

6

calls, and occasionally for SMS and games. Finlay has used a mobile for 7 years, but hasn’t owned a mobile for a year since his last one was stolen. He mainly uses his mobile for calls and SMS but dislikes using phones for other functions (e.g. camera and games). Both Georgina and Finlay consider themselves to be expert PC users. 

Friends (Pair 3) – consisted of Reece and Andrew, who both live and work in Cambridge and have known each other for 6 years. Reece has used a mobile phone for 10 years, using it mainly for calls, SMS, web browsing, and occasionally for MMS. Andrew has used a mobile phone for 10 years, using it for calls, SMS, and occasionally for MMS. Both Reece and Andrew describe themselves as expert PC users.



Friends (Pair 4) – consisted of James and Brandon, who both live and work in Cambridge and have known each other for 4 years. During the trial, James worked from home while Brandon travelled to Spain with friends. James has used a mobile phone for 11 years, using it for calls and SMS, but doesn’t use other functions (James considers other applications are typically too expensive or too slow to use). Brandon has used a mobile phone for 5 years, using it for calls and SMS. Both James and Brandon describe themselves as expert PC users.

Each pair or group were provided with the two Orange C500 Smartphones preloaded with the weConnect application, weConnect desktop viewer software and the weConnect web URL (due to connectivity and mobile network compatibility issues, the study focussed on Orange network users). All pairs and groups used the weConnect mobile and desktop applications for a period of one week. They were informed prior to participation that they would have access to their data generated during the study and were reassured regarding the protection and privacy of their data.

Semi-structured interviews The weConnect study comprised two semi-structured interviews. The first interview was conducted with each pair or group immediately prior to the weConnect trial, and the second interview was conducted with each pair or group at the end of the one week trial period.

Interview 1 At the start of the study period and prior to the trial, participants were interviewed with a view to understanding how and why they use text messaging for communicating with significant others (see interview 1 Part 1 questions at Table 3). A further set of questions were posed to participants to assess: °

Which devices and applications (if any) they currently use for conveying context and emotional content to others

°

What makes them feel connected

Participants were also asked to provide details regarding the frequency of their messaging practices (see interview 1 Part 2 questions at Table 4). The particular areas explored include a breakdown of the participants’ current messaging practice, including an analysis of the frequency and the content specifically relating to communicating context, affect, and shared meaning to significant others.

7

Question No. 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Interview 1 questions (Part 1) How long have you used a mobile/Smartphone? How would you rate your proficiency? Have you always used the phone for texting? If not, how long have you been texting (SMS, MMS) and what motivated to you to start using it? Which other applications do you mostly use on your mobile/Smartphone? How long have you used a PC or MAC? How would you rate your proficiency? Do you use IM? If so, how long have you been using it, where do you use it (PC, MAC or mobile), and what motivated to you to start using it? How long have you known your study partner? (partner, close friend) Do you live with your study partner? (If so, how long) How do you think your communication with them has changed over time? (use of different technologies, frequency of getting in touch, etc) Briefly describe some common reasons for texting your partner, a close friend or family member? (e.g., wanting to say something, reluctance to interrupt them with a call, staying in touch) Briefly describe your typical circumstances when texting your partner, a close friend or family member? (e.g., your whereabouts (home, work, travelling), alone or with people, any particular times of the day, etc.) Do you take photos using your mobile? (If yes, how many and what do you take pictures of? - If no, are you motivated/interested in taking photos with your phone?) Do you send photos using your mobile? (If yes, how many and who do you send them to? - If no, what are your reasons for not sending photos, e.g., function not supported on current phone, cost, etc.? Would you like to send photos using your phone?)

Table 3: Interview 1 questions (Part 1)

Question No. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.

17.

18.

19.

Interview 1 questions (Part 2) How many text messages (SMS & MMS) approximately do you send per week? How many text messages approx. (SMS & MMS) do you send per week for sharing your experiences with your partner, a close friend or family member? Are these mostly text or picture messages? How many text messages approx. (SMS & MMS) do you send per week for sharing how you’re feeling with your partner, a close friend or family member? Are these mostly text or picture messages? How many text messages approx. (SMS & MMS) do you send per week for sharing intimate or personal information with your partner, a close friend or family member? Are these mostly text or picture messages? What applications do you use for sharing your experiences with your partner, a close friend or family member (email, IM, Skype)? Would you consider that you use one application more than any other for this purpose? If yes, please state which one and explain your reasons why What applications do you use for sharing how you’re feeling with your partner, a close friend or family member (email, IM, Skype)? Would you consider that you use one application more than any other for this purpose? If yes, please state which one and explain your reasons why What applications do you use for sharing intimate or personal information with your partner, a close friend or family member (email, IM, Skype)? Would you consider that you use one application more than any other for this purpose? If yes, please state which one and explain your reasons why Do you often send cards, gifts (either by post or electronic form), music or video clips to your partner, a close friend or family member other than at special occasions? If so, what are your reasons for sending these?

Table 4: Interview 1 questions (Part 2)

At the end of the first interview, participants were given a notebook in which to record any particular usage scenarios for the weConnect mobile and web applications and to record any problems encountered during the study period. Participants were also provided with a set of written instructions illustrating the functionalities of the weConnect mobile and desktop applications. Participants were further informed of requirements for the purposes of the study e.g., that all text messages sent from personal mobiles relating to weConnect content should be retained during the study period (the material will be analysed during the second interview), and weConnect web applications should be used on Internet Explorer web browser only.

8

Interview 2 At the end of the one week trial period, a second interview was conducted with each pair or group. The second interview comprises 3 parts. The first part of the interview serves as an introduction to the main body of the interview session. In this part, participants were probed regarding their general impression of weConnect, including its appeal and its usefulness as an everyday application (see Table 5). In the second and main part of the interview, participants were asked to show a series of message content (images, photos, overlays or a combination of all three) as captured and created using weConnect (participants are requested not to show any private message content). At this stage, each participant was asked to provide feedback regarding each of the content they sent or received via weConnect during the study (see Table 6). In the third and final part, participants were asked to express their subjective views regarding the practicality and adoption of weConnect, including any limitations of weConnect and any ideas for additional functionality. Participants were also asked to consider whether using weConnect as an everyday application may influence the way they use their existing applications (see Table 7).

Question No. 1. 2. 3.

Interview 2 (Part 1) - ‘General impressions of weConnect’ What is your general impression of weConnect? (including any positive/negative aspects of weConnect?) How do you rate its overall appeal? Do you consider weConnect to be a useful everyday application?

Table 5: Interview 2 questions (Part 1) – ‘General impressions of weConnect’ Question No. 4. 5.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

Interview 2 (Part 2) – ‘Content sent or received using weConnect’ What does the content show, where did you keep it, and did you send or receive it? (If sent) Please briefly describe your reasons for sending the content. If you took a photo, please explain your reasons for taking it and describe the context in which you took it (or if an image was sent, why was the particular image selected)? (If sent) If you included an animation or text with your image, what was your reason for including it? (If sent) Please briefly describe your circumstances when you sent the content, e.g., you whereabouts (home, work, travelling), were you alone or with people, any particular time of the day, etc. (If received) Who sent the content to you, when and how did the person send it? (If received) What do you consider the content is supposed to convey? (If received) Did the sender include an animation or text? Can you guess as to the purpose of the animation/text? (If received) Where was the image/text/animation received and viewed (phone or PC)? Was there any particular reason for receiving it on the phone or PC? What was your general impression of viewing it on the phone or PC? (If received) Were you aware of any content sent to you during the study that you did not receive or view on the phone or PC? If so, how did you feel when you learned that you had missed this content? Please provide further details regarding the uses of the content (originally intended or not), including context of use, whether you shared it or saved it (and how)? (Ask after all content has been discussed) Any other content that you would like to share? (Ask after all content has been discussed) Did you send any text messages relating to weConnect content from your personal mobile during the study? If so, what was your reason for sending them?

Table 6: Interview 2 questions (Part 2) – ‘Content sent or received using weConnect’ Question No. 16. 17. 18. 19.

Interview 2 (Part 3) – ‘Practicality and adoption of weConnect’ What are the limitations of weConnect (if any)? Can you think of any additional functionality not featured in weConnect that you’d like to have? Do you think that using weConnect as an everyday application may influence the way that you use your existing applications (email, IM, SMS, MMS, Skype) or the way that you send cards or gifts? If so, please describe how Anything else that you would like to say?

Table 7: Interview 2 questions (Part 3) – ‘Practicality and adoption of weConnect’

9

5. Analysis and results This section presents the user study results including the qualitative findings based on the participants’ feedback collected during the interviews regarding the weConnect mobile, desktop viewer and web-based applications. The analysis of the two semi-structured interviews first involved transcribing the participants’ comments from the interview recordings. The comments transcribed from the second interview were grouped into emerging categories (see section 5.2).

5.1 Interview 1 feedback Using the feedback gathered during the first interview, frequencies of responses were used to gauge the participants’ experience, opinions, and their attitudes towards using technology for communicating context, affect, and shared meaning to significant others. All participants considered themselves to be expert or proficient mobile and PC users, while 10 of the 15 participants stated that they regularly use Instant Messenger (IM) for keeping in touch with their study partner, and other friends or work colleagues. Each pair and group further confirmed whether they use their mobiles for taking and sending photos, and gave a further indication of the frequency, and their reasons for sending SMS and MMS text messages. Table 8 below provides a summary breakdown of the participants’ preferences and frequencies for sending photos and SMS and MMS texts using their mobiles.

Pair/Group

Do you take photos using your mobile?

Do you send photos using your mobile?

How many SMS & MMS sent per week?

(Colleagues) Peter (Pair 1) Ryan (Couple) Alan (Pair 2) Dianne (Family 1) Greg Jake (Family 2) George Tim Val (Family 3) Georgina Finlay (Friends) Reece (Pair 3) Andrew (Friends) James (Pair 4) Brandon

Yes No (poor quality) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Rarely No (no camera) Yes Yes No (prefer camera) No (no camera)

Yes (MMS) No No (cost) No (cost) No (use PC) No (use PC) No (work SIM) No (cost) Yes (MMS) Rarely (MMS) No Yes Yes No (cost) No

18 SMS 2 MMS 20 SMS 2 SMS 2 SMS 15 SMS 2 MMS 10 SMS 30 SMS 50 SMS 100 SMS 1 MMS 1 SMS 40 SMS 92 SMS 8 MMS 60 SMS 6 MMS 7 SMS 80 SMS

How many SMS & MMS sent per week for sharing experiences? 0 0 1 or 2 1 or 2 0 0 A few (