1. Computer-Mediated Communication
Hyperpersonal Effect and Visual/Aural interfaces for CMC

2. Hyperpersonal communication
Receivers overattribute from limited cues
Assume similarity based on group affiliation
Senders maintain tight control over cues
Selective self-presentation — Little “given off” in text CMC
Bottom line: Exceptionally favorable perception in the face of limited information
Filling in the blanks optimistically.
“How senders select, receivers magnify, channels promote, and feedback increases enhanced and selective communication behaviors in CMC. Online communicators may exploit the capabilities of text-based, nonvisual interaction to form levels of affinity that would be unexpected in parallel offline interactions.”
Other early ideas: Social Presence (more cues = more presence)
Social Information Processing (SIP) affiliation motives induce impressions; users adapt efforts to present and acquire social info based on available medium. It takes time, so CMC is slow.
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

3. Computer-Mediated Communication“
The sensorial parsimony of plain text tends to entice users into engaging their imaginations to fill in missing details while, comparatively speaking, the richness of stimuli in fancy [systems] has an opposite tendency, pushing users’ imaginations into a more passive role.
— Curtis (1992) ”
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

4. Computer-Mediated Communication
Long-term, no photos
Social affinity
Long-term, photos
Short-term, photos
Supported for intimacy/affection and social attractiveness, but not physical attractiveness.
Short-term, no photos
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

5. Computer-Mediated Communication“
The study of CMC effects is not best served by blanket statements about technology main effects on social, psychological, and interpersonal processes, nor by proclamations that online relationships are less rewarding than FTF ones. Rather, qualities of CMC are … more often the product of interesting and predictable interactions of several mutual influences than main effects of media.
— Walther et al. (2001) ”
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

6. Computer-Mediated Communication
Faces
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

7. Computer-Mediated Communication
What are faces good for?
Conveying, among other things:
Individual identity
Social identity
Expression
Gaze
By means of:
Structure
Dynamics
Decorations
Source: galante.com
Structure: head shape, size/placement of features, lines/texture of skin, color/quantity of hair: inferences about personality, race, gender, age.
Dynamics: gaze direction, pupil dilation
Decoration: Fashion, group affiliation, social status
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

8. Computer-Mediated Communication
Ekman (1999) Ekman, Friesen, & Ellsworth (1972)
(and many others)
Basic emotions
Anger
Disgust
Fear
Joy
Sadness
Surprise
Characteristics of basic emotions
1. Distinctive universal signals
2. Distinctive physiology
3. Automatic appraisal
4. Distinctive universals in antecedent events
5. Distinctive appearance developmentally
6. Presence in other primates
7. Quick onset
8. Brief duration
9. Unbidden occurrence
10. Distinctive thoughts, memories images
11. Distinctive subjective experience
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

9. Computer-Mediated Communication
Facial muscles
Action units
Facial action coding system (Ekman & Friesen originally)
From top to bottom: Inner Brow Raiser, Outer Brow Raiser, Brow Lowerer, Cheek Raiser, Upper Lid Raiser, Lid Tightener, Nose Wrinkler
The goal was to create a reliable means for skilled human scorers to determine the category or categories in which to fit each facial behavior.
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

10. Computer-Mediated Communication
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

11. Computer-Mediated Communication
Representing the face: 
“Being close may be worse.”
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

12. Computer-Mediated Communication
Ever-2 Muse by Korean Institute of Industrial Technology — entertainer robot
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

13. Computer-Mediated Communication
The “Uncanny Valley”
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

14. Computer-Mediated Communication
Alex Smolen’s comment: facial recognition of social primates
“Thatcher illusion” : local changes in facial features are hardly noticeable when face is inverted.
What might this tell us?
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

15. Designing with faces and bodies
We read meaning in lots of things, but especially human forms!
There is no such thing as neutral.
If you’re going to use faces (or anything socially salient) in a design, consider:
Appropriate semantics
Appropriate precision
One of largest problems in digital reproduction is believability and context.
Prototypes of facial expressions are routinely noticed as unbelievable when applied to situations.
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

16. Computer-Mediated Communication
Avatars: if minimal info is provided, a minimal message should be sent. Too complex a message based on the receipt of too little information. (Click “smile” – but what kind of smile? Directed at whom? Etc)
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

17. Computer-Mediated Communication
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

18. Computer-Mediated Communication
Eyes
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

19. Computer-Mediated Communication
From: “Unique morphology of the human eye and its adaptive meaning: comparative studies on external morphology of the primate eye”
WHR: width to height ratio of eye outline
SSI: exposed sclera size index
Kobayashi & Kohshima 2001
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

20. Computer-Mediated Communication
(1) the exposed white sclera is
void of any pigmentation, (2) humans possess the largest ratio of
exposed sclera in the eye outline, and (3) the eye outline is extraordinarily
elongated in the horizontal direction.
Eye of nonhuman primates is an adaptation to camouflage
the gaze direction against other individuals and/or predators.
The white sclera of the human eye is an adaptation to enhance the gaze
signal.
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication
Kobayashi & Kohshima 2001

21. Computer-Mediated Communication
Video conferencing
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

22. The gaze angle problem, or…
Why so glum?
Video conferencing — the level of realism allows slight deviations from expectations to have serious consequences. (sort of like uncanny valley)
Source:
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

23. Computer-Mediated Communication
Donath: speakers look at listeners 30-40% of the time, listeners at speakers 60-70% of the time. Gaze may be used to indicate agreement or attempt to gain a turn. Averted gaze: concentration, or lack of attention.
Source:
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

24. Computer-Mediated Communication
Yang & Zhang 2004
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

25. Computer-Mediated Communication
Source: D. Nguyen
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

26. Computer-Mediated Communication
Cameras
Projectors
MultiView
Display
Source: D. Nguyen
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

27. Visual social interfaces
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

28. Computer-Mediated Communication
Babble social proxy
Babble developed by Tom Erickson, late 1990’s
Position of individuals marked as circles, layout denoted activity.
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

29. Computer-Mediated Communication
Social translucence: To design digital systems that support coherent behavior by making participants and their activities visible to one another (Erickson and Kellogg)
Visibility: make social information apparent
Awareness: knowing based on what you see
Accountability: knowing that I know you know
Why? To recreate a “social physics.”
Why not “social transparency”?
Tom Erickson and Wendy Kellogg:"design digital systems that support coherent behavior by making participants and their activities visible to one another"
Tension between privacy and visibility. The need to allow for interpretation of ambiguous information, and to allow for deception. How do systems promote social norms? Should they? This is ultimately a design decision that must be made in context.
The *physical and social physics* that we take for granted in the offline world have to be *explicitly implemented* online, and the grand scope and details of that implementation have profound implications for how users can interact in the space.
Translucence vs transparency: the need for plausible deniability. The need to feign attention, e.g., by clicking the babble proxy.
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

30. Computer-Mediated Communication
Chat Circles 2
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

31. Auditory interfaces (We have no “earlids”)
Hearing speech can interfere with other kinds of processing. What about peripheral awareness? Data “auralization”?
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

32. Computer-Mediated Communication
Talking in Circles
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication

33. Designing visual social interfaces
Create affordances with social translucence
Use rich media deliberately, when warranted
Represent humans and their faces carefully
Be ambiguous: users can interpret just fine
Reflect users’ actions back to them
Let the big picture emerge from details
Consider whether customization is worth it
A bit of a cheat sheet, drawing on Erickson, Erickson & Kellogg, Donath, and a few extra thoughts…
9/11/2018
Computer-Mediated Communication