I think territoriality is an interesting discovery, particularly because I think it would hold across cultures (with more or less "flexibility"). I noticed that for instance, Canadians have a clear distinction of whose food belongs to whom, whereas a latino friend I recently met in Kingston described food the following way: "it's everyone's food, it just happens to be on your plate". I think this also holds for all sorts of interactions, we define a space that belongs to us due to proximity. I don't think this is restricted to tabletops, but also applies to any physical interaction. One could also see that if many users all have tablets, it is rare for people to go and interact on someone else's tablet unless they are actually sharing it.
However, to me, this principle totally dies in a groupware tabletop system, or a groupware system in general. As seen on Three's Company, laying the contents in different territory versus having the same space both have advantages and disadvantages. Yet, I think it is important to consider that when one is alone using a tabletop, one thinks he/she is using the whole space for interaction due to the absence of physicality.
Overall I think territoriality is a great way for understanding personal information vs. public information. Items that are close to me, belong to me, and areas in the public space can be dragged by someone into their own personal space. Now, I wonder if all the proxemic relations from Edward Hall would still apply for territoriality. I think this would be an interesting thing to explore.
No comments:
Post a Comment