A case study of the Use of Avatars in the Collaborative Process
This report outlines the processes used in the research, design and implementation of a user study examining the effects of using avatars in collaborative work. Preliminary research was carried out to expand knowledge and secondary research findings led to the development of research questions exploring the user experience of using avatars instead of blank screens and research methods such as interviews which were in turn utilized in the structuring and implementation of a user study. This study examined using Avatars instead of blank screens in the video conferencing tool, Microsoft Teams. The results of the user studies performed showed that user experience was generally improved when using avatars instead of blank screens as replacement for live videos in the Microsoft Teams application.
To provide a scope to the secondary study, there were key issues that required further elaboration. The questions that needed to be answered were:
• What is collaboration?
• What are the most popular collaborative video conferencing software and what features make them the best?
• What is a 3D Avatar and which software has 3D/Avatar functionalities?
-
Collaboration is an integral part of education and works to foster productivity and advancement. Factors that promote the collaborative process are usually the need to save money, grow availability, foster intellectual communications between individuals, divide labour and allow for cross-sectoral cooperation One can describe collaboration as the process in which independent agents mutually interact formally or informally while congruently forming rules and giving a form to their relationship and deciding on how to solve issues presented to them. The corona virus pandemic cemented the need for collaborative software.
-
E-collaboration (Collaborative Software) can be defined as the fostering of collaboration using electronic technology among individuals. The biggest e-collaborative video conferencing software are:
• Microsoft Teams
• Zoom
• Skype
• Google Hangout
Microsoft Teams, Google Hangout, Coviu, Doxy.me, and Thera platforms were examined, and Microsoft teams and Google Hangout were seen to have the most functionality (Chat, Calls, Video call, group video meeting, screen share, healthcare based, supports OS and platforms, extra security layer – invitation/password)
-
An avatar refers to a two- or three-dimensional image representing a person.
Avatars have been integrated to represent customer service personnel on online shopping sites as well as in a stand-in for interactive messages and voice notes exchanged between individuals.
Avatars can be divided into three (3) main forms:
a) Abstract: A cartoonish or fictional image or representation is used to represent the user.
b) Naturalistic: Avatars are humanoid in form but are reduced in the level of detail.
c) Realist: These are made to accurately represent the user as much as possible.
The use of 3D avatars could greatly affect the perception of users when accounting for flow and realizing of the presence of users.
User Study
Problem and Problem Statement
Is there a way to design video conferencing avatars to foster a productive video conferencing session? Should this feature be realized, would there be an effect in applying such a feature rather than resorting to the iconic blank screen presented by the chosen video conferencing tool, Microsoft Teams?
Research Question
What is the effect of having an avatar instead of a blank screen in computer-mediated video communication? This research question seeks to examine the user experience when the blank screen in Microsoft Teams is replaced by an interactive 3D Avatar. From this question, we narrowed down the scope of the research to use:
• Software: Microsoft teams
• Avatar: Contain naturalist, realistic and abstract depiction of the researcher.
Hypothesis
Using 3D real-time Avatars improves the user experience of using collaborative software than the use of blank profiles.
Timeline
2-3 weeks
Target Group
This study was conducted using a group of ten (10) university students. This number was selected as it was optimal for a comprehensive analysis. The use of university students as a target group was to ensure that most participants had access to the software in question and were also of the required age of consent.
Tools Selected
Consent Form: This was a form explaining the study and the risks and acquiring permission from participants.
Background questionnaire: This provided information on the participants.
Task: This was the basis used to examine the avatar versus the blank screen. It encompassed ten (10) pub questions that needed to be answered
Interview Questions (Qualitative): Questions asked after the performance of the task.
Questionnaires: This provides quantitative feedback right after the test.
Video compilation of avatar and blank screen pre-recorded.
Location and Sessions
The study took place primarily online as most participants found it most convenient. Approximated 60 minutes were modified after the pilot study to be 25 minutes. A pre-recorded video of the avatar involved the use of as much animation and movement as the Animoji software allowed implementing head movements, blinking, smiling and nodding. This was crucial to later examining how animated the participants would prefer the avatar to be.
The study was designed to be of a within-group structure in that each participant would be exposed to both independent variables being the avatar screen and the blank screen. The dependent variable being studied was the overall experience to the exposure of the screens. The questions asked were generic pub quiz questions.
Questions were randomly selected from the internet and the order of exposure either first to the blank screen or to the avatar was determined based on the participant number where the odd numbers were exposed to the Avatar first and the even numbers were exposed to the blank screen first.
