do bystanders and dialog participants differ in preferences for telecommunications channels l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Do Bystanders and Dialog Participants Differ in Preferences for Telecommunications Channels? PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Do Bystanders and Dialog Participants Differ in Preferences for Telecommunications Channels?

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 23

Do Bystanders and Dialog Participants Differ in Preferences for Telecommunications Channels? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 326 Views
  • Uploaded on

Do Bystanders and Dialog Participants Differ in Preferences for Telecommunications Channels? Why? -- The Effects of Noise and Delay -- Nigel Ward Anais G. Rivera Alejandro Vega University of Texas at El Paso The Mystery Mobile telephone conversations are often banned

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Do Bystanders and Dialog Participants Differ in Preferences for Telecommunications Channels?' - Pat_Xavi


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
do bystanders and dialog participants differ in preferences for telecommunications channels

Do Bystanders and Dialog Participants Differ in Preferences for Telecommunications Channels?

Why?

-- The Effects of Noise and Delay --

Nigel Ward

Anais G. Rivera

Alejandro Vega

University of Texas at El Paso

the mystery
The Mystery

Mobile telephone conversations are often banned

because they can be annoying to bystanders.

But why are they more annoying than face-to-face conversations?

  • Is it the volume? Perhaps in part, but cell phone conversations are more annoying even when no louder than face-to-face conversations (Monk et al. 2004a)
  • Is it the lack of an audible interlocutor, inducing a psychological “need to listen”? Perhaps in part, but this doesn’t explain the annoyance (Monk et al. 2004b)
is it the channel
Is it the Channel?

Channel properties affect user perceptions.

The E-model can predict these, for infrastructure design purposes.

Transmission Rating Factor (ITU-T Rec G.107)

R = Ro – Is –Id –Ie-eff + A

  • Ro = signal-to-noise ratio
  • Is = simultaneous impairment
  • Id = delay impairment factor
  • Ie-eff = equipment impairment factor (e.g. codec)
  • A = advantage factor

But what about bystander preferences?

potential significance

NO B>70

PHONES!

Potential Significance

Hypothesis 1:

For telecommunication channels, bystanders preferences differ from users preferences

If true, there may be a technological fix to the problem

Today: In a Possible Future:

perceptions of delay
Perceptions of Delay

We know that delay affects talkers’ perceptions

how line delay affects conversation dynamics
How Line Delay Affects Conversation Dynamics

(Emling & Mitchell 1964)

  • Likely 1st Order Effects:
  • more awkward silences
  • more overlaps
  • Likely 2nd Order Effects:
  • more explicit
  • turn-taking cues
slide7

Likely Effects on Bystanders

channel

properties

handset

properties

different

situation

at remote end

lack of audible

interlocutor

  • delay
  • noise
  • echo
  • lack of
  • sidetone
  • low volume
  • incongruous
  • speaking styles
  • incongruous
  • topic
  • lack of shared
  • awareness

cognitive

effects

changed

speaking style

  • uncertainty
  • about receipt
  • frustration
  • cognitive load
  • loud
  • exaggerated
  • prosody
  • etc.

negative

impressions

of talker

involuntary

listening

  • bossy
  • show-off
  • insensitive
  • etc.

negative

attitudes to

cell phones

feeling of

embarrassment

annoyance

hypothesis 2
Hypothesis 2

Hypothesis:

Bystanders dislike channel delay more than do talkers

where we measure “more” relative to a standard impairment: codec quality

experiment design
Experiment Design

Talkers’

Perception

Bystanders’

Perception

High Noise

Low Delay

(Cn)

GSM-FR

150 ms

good

good

Low Noise

High Delay

(Cd)

G.711

350 ms

good

less good

T Δ = TCn - TCd

B Δ = BCn - BCd

Hypothesis 2:

compared to talkers, bystanders dislike delay more

i.e. T Δ < B Δ, i.e. T Δ - B Δ < 0

unfortunately not supported

by Wilcoxon sign test, chi-square, or matched-pairs t-test

software hardware configuration

extra delay (CD)

or extra noise (CN)

Software/Hardware Configuration
  • channels emulated on Linux machines
  • talkers in different rooms

recorder

procedures
Procedures

Two Talkers

Two to Eight Bystanders

  • welcome
  • dialog with Cn or Cd
  • questionnaire
  • dialog with Cd or Cn
  • questionnaire
  • debrief
  • welcome
  • overhear
  • questionnaire
  • overhear
  • questionnaire
  • debrief

usually with same stimuli, different judges

sometimes with same judges, different stimuli

(when talkers were later used as bystanders)

sometimes with same judges, same stimuli

(when talkers later listened to recordings of themselves)

experiment conditions 1
Experiment Conditions (1)

Distance from Talker to Bystanders

  • > 4 meters
  • ~ 2 meters
  • ~ 0.5 meters

Distractors

  • pizza and friends
  • magazines
  • none (paying attention)

Dialog Content Cn Cd

  • multi-digit number exchange
  • free dialog
  • single-digit number exchange
experiment conditions 2
Experiment Conditions (2)

Presentation

  • live
  • recorded, played over speakers
  • matched-content extracts, headphones

Subjects

  • naive students
  • experts

Survey Format

  • forced choice
  • 4 choices
  • 11 point scales
results
Results

TΔ = talker preference re channel quality (Cn – Cd)

BΔ = bystander preference re less-annoying (Cn – Cd)

results15
Results

On the last experiment:

Subjects’ preferences for Cn over Cd,

as talkers and as bystanders

summary
Summary

The Mystery Remains

Summary results for Hypothesis 2:

  • Across 59 dialog stimulus-pairs, in various conditions

- bystanders seemed to dislike Cn more than did talkers,

contrary to hypothesis 2

- however the difference was small and not consistent

(averaging 1.42 vs 1.47 on a scale from 0 to 3)

  • Even under unrealistically exaggerated conditions,

line delay does not consistently impact bystanders

Summary Results for Hypothesis 1:

  • No evidence that bystanders and dialog participants differ in preferences
do bystanders and dialog participants differ in preferences for telecommunications channels17

Do Bystanders and Dialog Participants Differ in Preferences for Telecommunications Channels?

-- The Effects of Noise and Delay --

Nigel Ward

Anais G. Rivera

Alejandro Vega

University of Texas at El Paso

do bystanders and dialog participants differ in preferences for telecommunications channels18

Do Bystanders and Dialog Participants Differ in Preferences for Telecommunications Channels?

Why?

-- The Effects of Noise and Delay --

Nigel Ward

Anais G. Rivera

Alejandro Vega

University of Texas at El Paso

slide20

T

10

10

excellent

excellent

8

8

good

good

6

6

fair

fair

4

4

poor

poor

2

2

bad

bad

0

0

Dialog-Based Evaluation of Mobile Phone Infrastructure

Phase 1

A. Your opinion of the connection you have just been using.

(Please place a line crossing the axis at the appropriate point.)

first

dialog

second

dialog

B. What differences did you notice between the two connections?

date ___________

session ________

subject A B

recording# 1 _________

recording# 2 _________

C. What do you think affected your ratings of the two connections?

slide21

B

10

10

excellent

excellent

8

8

good

good

6

6

fair

fair

4

4

poor

poor

2

2

bad

bad

0

0

Dialog-Based Evaluation of Mobile Phone Infrastructure

Phase 2

A. Sometimes conversations can be annoying to bystanders, independent of the content, due to the way the the speaker was talking. Considering the potential for annoyance due to the speaking style, please give your opinion of the sample.

(Please place a line crossing the axis at the appropriate point.)

first

dialog

second

dialog

B. What differences did you notice between the two samples?

date ___________

session ______

subject A B

recording# 1 _________

recording# 2 _________

C. What do you think affected your ratings of the two samples?

slide22

R

10

10

excellent

excellent

8

8

good

good

6

6

fair

fair

4

4

poor

poor

2

2

bad

bad

0

0

Dialog-Based Evaluation of Mobile Phone Infrastructure

Phase 3

A. Sometimes conversations can be annoying to bystanders, independent of the content, due to the way the the speaker was talking. Considering the potential for annoyance due to the speaking style, please give your opinion of the sample.

(Please place a line crossing the axis at the appropriate point.)

first

dialog

second

dialog

B. What differences did you notice between the two samples?

date ___________

session ______

subject A B

recording# 1 _________

recording# 2 _________

C. What do you think affected your ratings of the two samples?