Result: 'Collocation Blindness' in Partially Distributed Groups : Is There a Downside to Being Collocated?

Title:
'Collocation Blindness' in Partially Distributed Groups : Is There a Downside to Being Collocated?
Source:
CHI 2006 (interact, inform, inspire). :1313-1321
Publisher Information:
New York NY: ACM Press, 2006.
Publication Year:
2006
Physical Description:
print, 27 ref
Original Material:
INIST-CNRS
Document Type:
Conference Conference Paper
File Description:
text
Language:
English
Author Affiliations:
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, United States
Cornell University, United States
Draper Laboratory, United States
Rights:
Copyright 2008 INIST-CNRS
CC BY 4.0
Sauf mention contraire ci-dessus, le contenu de cette notice bibliographique peut être utilisé dans le cadre d’une licence CC BY 4.0 Inist-CNRS / Unless otherwise stated above, the content of this bibliographic record may be used under a CC BY 4.0 licence by Inist-CNRS / A menos que se haya señalado antes, el contenido de este registro bibliográfico puede ser utilizado al amparo de una licencia CC BY 4.0 Inist-CNRS
Notes:
Computer science; theoretical automation; systems
Accession Number:
edscal.20204036
Database:
PASCAL Archive

Further Information

Under what circumstances might a group member be better off as a long-distance participant rather than collocated? We ran a set of experiments to study how partially-distributed groups collaborate when skill sets are unequally distributed. Partially distributed groups are those where some collaborators work together in the same space (collocated) and some work remotely using computer-mediated communications. Previous experiments had shown that these groups tend to form semi-autonomous 'in-groups'. In this set of experiments the configuration was changed so that some player skills were located only in the collocated space, and some were located only remotely, creating local surplus of some skills and local scarcity of others in the collocated room. Players whose skills were locally in surplus performed significantly worse. They experienced 'collocation blindness' and failed to pay enough attention to collaborators outside of the room. In contrast, the remote players whose skills were scarce inside the collocated room did particularly well because they charged a high price for their skills.