Catchbob experiment 6
Today was the 6th experiment with CatchBob. We now have: 4 groups without the location awareness tool and 2 groups with the tool. That means 6 groups then 18 participants. I still need to have 2 or 3 more groups with the tool to do some basic statistics. Then I will have some insights about individual behavior towards the catchbob environment. Of course I have plenty of data. The general pattern is that groups with the location awareness tool are slower. I don't know if the distance is significant. I have to specify which data could be analysed individualy and in groups.
Individual data: nasa tlx/number of refresh/number of messages/number of zone searched Group Data: time/path/backtracking/overlap
The general feeling after this experiment (and the others of course) is that:
- the task is too simple
- the coordination between the partner is a bit weak, especially at the end when doing the triangle that circle Bob at the end
- the end is quite frustrating since people don't really know how it ends
- the location accuracy is sometimes bad then it's misleading. I would just say that this can happen in real situations, especially when you're in the wood using a GPS, it's often bad
What should we do? well it's a pain to change one more time all the stuff around but it seems that we need it. The most important thing is the task I think. I would like to keep a balance between the task we have already and something more complicated. The main problem here is the ending condition, the exploratory part is OK but the end sucks. Here are few ideas to refine the task:
- in the ending condition, players should be dispersed on the field and not to close (so that the collaboration is coordinated through the interface)
- the small triangle thing is dumb (not precise and the coordination is too weak), should be have more complex form like: an large equilateral triangle? a straight line? (one player is close to the object and the others should stand on a straight line
- a mobile bob
- I don't want to change the task to much, because (i) there will be a catchbob 2 anyway (ii) it should not be too complicated. That's why I want to keep it simple, just a little bit trickier and less frustrating.
Anyway, whether we choose the mobile bob or another form with dispersed users on the field, it will foster more coordination among the group because they will have either to reshape what they should do, and communicate more, walk a bit more... I like the mobile bob idea (the position of the virtual artifact changes one or two times) because it's a nice way to force the group to change/reshape/re-stat its strategy. Besides, to meet this end, they will have to communicate WITH the tool.