User`s guide

2.2 Human Factors in Videoconferencing Systems
In 1990, Fish et al. created the VideoWindow system (Fish 1990). This used a wide-screen projector
and multiple cameras and microphones to transmit the video and audio between two locations.
Fish’s team used two common rooms on two floors of a building. He studied the use of the
VideoWindow system for three months, recording the transactions through the system.
He found that informal communication occurred much less through the VideoWindow than
through face-to-face communication. Survey responses commonly reported that the limited camera
field-of-view and the position and direction of the microphones created a situation where it was
unnatural for informal communication to occur.
The idea that if a person A can see person B, then person B can see person A is not carried over
to the VideoWindow system, and in group videoconferencing systems in general. Also, the position
and direction of the microphones also caused people to speak unnaturally, in many cases speaking
louder than normal.
The VideoWindow system also did not allow for people to carry out private conversations. If you
want to say something to someone privately, you just move closer to the person and speak quietly.
This is not possible in the VideoWindow system because of the microphone and speaker positions.
It is also much easier to avoid eye-contact through the VideoWindow system. In reality, if you
wish to avoid conversation with someone, you can avoid eye-contact. The VideoWindow system
makes it much easier to do this, just by getting out of the camera’s field of view. Also, there is not
the compulsion to speak to someone through the system.
With many videoconferencing systems, privacy is an important issue for most users. Two features
commonly used to deal with privacy include reciprocity (node A can view node B if and only if node
B can view node A), and the ability to disable the video system or to display a “busy” message.
Some systems may also contain a list of all users active on the system (e.g. Cruiser). Privacy becomes
less of an issue as the technology becomes more widespread (Kraut 1994, Fish 1992), and as users
adjust to the system.
New users are often apprehensive about communicating to others through videoconferencing sys-
tems, because they feel that they may be interrupting other people (Kraut 1994). They tend to
use it to communicate with people they already know well (for example, in their department), and
then only at times that they think are “safe”. As with privacy issues, with time, users adjust and
intrusiveness becomes less of an issue. People develop a sense of how to use the system by observing
how others use it.
Group-based videoconferencing systems are used more for informal conversations, so that two
people working on the same project are less likely to discuss their work through the system than
they would face-to-face (Cool 1992, Fish 1993). This is mainly due to the location of these systems
and their impersonal nature. On the other hand, two groups (for example, business meetings) can
be easily carried out over these systems. Privacy is also an issue here, since reciprocity does not
necessarily apply with group systems (e.g. VideoWindow).
People can sit and watch a debate on television, or have a lengthy face-to-face conversation, but
speaking to and watching people through a videoconferencing system seems different (Inoue 1995).
Inoue et al. suggested that video and audio quality and resolution were not the only important
factors in constructing a videoconferencing system, and that camera angles were also important.
3