Introduction

People are inherently social, technologies have been developed to enable people persist in being social when physically apart. In this chapter we focus on how people communicate and collaborate face-to-face and remotely with the goal of providing models, insights, and guidelines to inform the design of “social” technologies, including a diversity of communication technologies, conventional conversation mechanisms and computer-based conversations.

Being Social

A fundamental aspect of everyday life is being social, and that entails interactions with each other. While face-to-face conversions reminders central to many social interactions, the use of social media has been dramatically increased. The almost universal adoption of social media has resulted in most people now being connected in multiple ways, e.g., LinkedIn, Facebook… The way people contact, who to connect to, and how they maintain social networks and ties have irrevocably changed. Social media, social computing have also transformed how people work together, e.g., shared calendar, collaboration tools and platforms.

A key question raised by the universal adoption of social media and social computing tools is that how it has affected people’s ability to connect, work, and interact with others? Have the norms and other rules for face-to-face interactions been adopted in social media technologies, or have new norms emerged? e.g., whether conventional rules and etiquette are also applicable to online social behaviour? Or, have new conversational mechanisms evolved, e.g., do people greet in the same way? Do people take turns when online chatting in the way they do at face-to-face? How do they choose which technologies to use for different tasks? Answering these question can help us understand how these tools support and inform new designs.

Most people prefer texts rather than phone calls when planning and coordinating social activities, though they may switch to phone calls at different stages. However, conversations about what to do, when to do, and who to invite can be a cost, because some people may get left off or not reply, switch between different apps or threads, or some people may reply late, changes on the plan, and so on. This is compounded by the fact that people don't want to commit until the last minute, especially for teenagers. This can be frustrating for the initiators.

A growing concern raised within society is how much time people spend looking at their phones, and it consequences on people’s well-being. A report shows that people spend a day a week online averagely in the UK, many of them cannot go for long without checking their phones. Sherry Turtle bemoans the negative these impacts and how it is affecting everyday conversations. She points out that people are preferring texts rather than taking to each other as it is easier and requires less effort, and as adults talk less, children talk less likewise, which in turn reduces the opportunity to learn how to empathise. She augurs that while online communications has its place, it’s time to reclaim conversation and the joy of spontaneously talking to each other.

On the other hand, several technologies have been designed to encourage social interaction to good effect, e.g., smart speakers, providing support for multiple users taking part at the same time. Social interaction may further encouraged by the affordance of a smart speaker, especially its physical presence in the shared location affords joint use. This differs from voice assistants on smartphones that support individual use.

Face-to-Face Conversations

Talking is something effortless and comes naturally to most people, and yet holding a conversation is a highly skilled collaborative achievement. In this section, we examine what makes up a conversation by understanding how conversations start, progress and finish, which can help design chatbots, and voice assistants and help researchers know how natural/comfortable it is and the extent to which it is important to follow conventional human conversation mechanisms.

Mutual greetings often happen at the beginning and a dialogue ensues with questions, and replies…, then someone may decide to close the conversation by giving implicit or explicit cues, and the other may choose to acknowledge the cur or ignore it. Either way, the first one may give an explicit signal, the conversant will be closed with a farewell ritual. But this is different for online chatting, where people tend to open a conversation by stating directly what they want to talk about and close the conversation by stopping replying once they have the answer.

Conversational techniques can also help to increase the likelihood of getting a response to an email when people are now overwhelmed by tons of emails these days. A report suggests that the choice of opening and ending a conversation will affect the likelihood, e.g., common phrases like ‘hey’, and ‘hi’ are more likely to get responses than formal phrases like ‘Dear’, and ‘Greetings’. And emails ending with ‘thank you’ are found to have the highest response rate.

Conversational mechanisms enable people to coordinate their talks, allowing them to know how to start or stop. Throughout a conversation, turn-taking rules also enable people to know when to listen, speak, and stop again to allow others to speak. Sacks et al. described 3 rules for conversation analysis:

1. The current speaker chooses the next speaker by asking a question, inviting an opinion, or making a request
2. Another person decides to start speaking
3. The current speaker continues talking

To facilitate rule following, people use various ways of indicating how long they are going to talk, e.g., begin by stating the number of topics, explicitly request a change in speaker, or other cues including lowering voice, back channelling (uh-huh, mmm), body orientation, gaze, or gestures…

Another way to coordinate conversations is through adjacency pairs, which suggest that the first part sets up an expectation of what is to come next and directs the way of what will come next. e.g., A may ask a question to which B will responds appropriately:

A: Shall we meet at 8:00?

B: Um, can we make it a bit later, say 8:30?

For the most part, people are not aware of following conversational mechanism and don't know hot to articulate how they carry on a conversation. e.g., People may interrupt the current speaker; a listener may not take up a cue from a speaker and continue to say nothing, until someone else picks up the conversation. Other breakdowns can arise when someone says something ambiguous and the interlocutor misinterprets it. In such situations, they will overcome the misunderstanding by using repair mechanism. Consider the following:

A: Can you tell me the way to get to the Multiplex Ranger cinema?

B: Yes, you go down here for two blocks and then take a right (pointing to the right), proceed until you get to the light, and then it’s on the left.

A: Oh, so I go along here for a couple of blocks and then take a right, and the cinema is at the light (pointing ahead of him)?

B: No, you go down this street for a couple of blocks (gesturing more vigorously than before to the street to the right of him while emphasising the word this).

A: Ahhhh! I thought you meant that one: so it’s this one (pointing in the same direction as the other person).

B: Uh-hum, yes, that’s right: this one.

Detecting breakdown in conversations requires that the speaker and the listener both pay attention to what the other says (or doesn't say). Once they understand the nature of the failure, they will repair it by the speaker repeats the words, using a stronger voice intonation and gestures. Listeners can also signal when they don't understand or want further clarification by using various tokens like ‘what’, ‘Huh?’, together with a puzzled look. e.g., one may say ‘I want it’ to the partner, but the partner does not understand and may reply with a token or ask explicitly. So nonverbal communication also plays an important role in augmenting face-to-face conversation, involving facial expressions, back channelling, voice intonation, gesturing, and other body languages.

Taking turns also provides opportunities for the listener to initiate repair or request clarification or for the speaker to detect that there is a problem, the listener will usually wait for the next turn before interrupting the speaker to give the speaker the chance to clarify.

Remote Conversations

Many technologies have been developed to support synchronous remote conversations, e.g., videophones. A range of ‘media spaces’ became the subject of experimentation whose goal was to see whether it was possible for people, distributed over space and time zones, could communicate and interact with one another as if they were physically present. An example of ‘media spaces’ is videoconferencing, where two lounge areas were connected via a picture window to see a room of people roughly the same size as themselves, one study showed that many conversations that took place between the remote conversant were indistinguishable from face-to-face interactions, except for speaking louder and talking about the system constantly. Another study showed that when people use videoconferencing, people tend to project themselves more, take longer conversational turns, and interrupt each other less.

Since the availability of cheap webcams and cameras embedded in phones and laptops, modern platforms emerged and enabled new ways of videoconferencing. Technologies have been used to improve the communication experience, e.g., indications of the person who is currently speaking, improvements on video and sound qualities…

Another way of describing the development of remote conversations is the degree of telepresence, e.g., instead of sitting in front of a screen through a fixed camera, robots built with telepresence in mind can enable people to attend events and communicate with others by controlling them remotely. Such robots are also being investigated to determine whether they can help people with developmental difficulties visit places remotely.

Co-presence

Co-presence supports people in their activities when interacting in the same physical space, helping them to collaborate more effectively. Technologies have been developed to enable more than one person to use them simultaneously, e.g., Smartboards, which uses multitouch, and Kinect, which uses gesture and object recognition. To see how effective they are, it is important to consider the coordination and awareness mechanisms people use in face-to-face interactions and how these have been adapted or replaced.

Physical Coordination

People will issue commands and let others know the progress when collaborating, e.g., nonverbal communications like nods, shakes, glances…. For time-critical and routinised collaborative where it is difficult to hear others, people tend to use gestures, e.g., waving, and halting hand movement. The use of physical objects can also facilitate coordination, e.g., the act of holding up or waving a physical object is effective at commanding attention and increasing awareness.

Awareness

Awareness involves knowing who is around, what is happening, and who is talking with whom. A specific kind of awareness is peripheral awareness, which refers to a person’s ability to maintain and constantly update a sense of what is happening in the physical and social context. e.g., noticing where people are in a good or bad mood by the way they are talking, and how fast the drinks are consumed. Another form is situational awareness, which refers to being aware of what is happening around your to understand how information, events, and your actions will affect ongoing and future events. This is important in technology-rich working environments like air traffic control, where it’s necessary to track abreast of changing information.

Strategies for coordination are also developed when people are working closely, and this is especially true for interdependent works, where the outcome of one person's activity is needed for others to complete their tasks. e.g., performers in a show will constantly monitor others’ behaviour to coordinate their performance efficiently. The metaphorical expression close-knit teams exemplifies this way.

Shared Interfaces

This subsection explores the impact of shareable technologies, like whiteboards, large touch screens, and multitouch tables, on group collaboration. These technologies, compared to single-user interfaces, offer more dynamic ways for co-located groups to interact with digital content, potentially leading to more inclusive and balanced participation. Research indicates that interfaces allowing multiple forms of input, such as physical tokens, can encourage quieter group members to contribute more equitably.

Additionally, the use of real-time feedback, such as LEDs on tabletops to indicate speaking turns, has been shown to affect group dynamics. This approach, exemplified by the Reflect Table, provides visual cues about participation levels, influencing members to adjust their contributions for more balanced group interaction.

Social Engagement

Social engagement involves voluntary, unpaid participation in social group activities, often through social exchange. The Internet has significantly facilitated various forms of social engagement. For example, GoodGym connects runners with isolated older people, combining fitness with helping others in chores and social interaction. Similarly, the conservation volunteers' website brings people together for conservation activities, promoting social cohesion.

The Internet has also revolutionised the way people connect over common interests. A notable instance is the widespread sharing of popular content, like Ellen DeGeneres' star-studded selfie at the Oscars, which became the most retweeted photo in 2014. Social media platforms like Twitter have transformed how people connect and share experiences, especially during unexpected events or disasters. Users rapidly disseminate information, becoming 'digital volunteers' by sharing real-time updates and images, often before official media coverage.

Twitter has proven effective for immediate communication during emergencies, providing first responders and the public with crucial information. However, the reliability of such user-generated content can be problematic, as it may fuel rumours or overload streams with outdated or incorrect information. Despite these challenges, the role of social media in fostering social engagement and rapid information dissemination is undeniable.

Summary

Human beings are fundamentally social, relying on collaboration, coordination, and communication in various aspects of life. This chapter explores the essential elements of sociality, particularly communication and collaboration. It delves into the social mechanisms employed in different conversational settings, both face-to-face and remotely. The chapter also discusses various collaborative and telepresence technologies designed to support and enhance these social mechanisms, focusing on key interaction design concerns.

Key points include:

• Social Interaction: It's a central part of everyday life.
• Evolution of Social Mechanisms: These have developed both in face-to-face and remote contexts to aid conversation, coordination, and awareness.
• Importance of Talk: Managing conversation is crucial for coordinating social interactions.
• Remote Communication Technologies: Various technologies have been created to enable remote communication.
• Awareness in Collaboration: Being aware of others' activities and making one's own activities known are vital for effective collaboration and socializing.
• Impact of Social Media: Social media platforms have significantly altered how people maintain connections and manage their social lives.