Derek Chung
Big Mouth
Communication software that mediates online discussion to let voices be heard more equitably
http://www.derekchung.org/itp/bigmouth
Classes
Persuasive Technologies: Designing the Human
Persuasive Technologies: Designing the Human
We have all been in discussions where one or a few members of the group dominated the conversation, while others felt left out. Group discussions, whether in the public sphere, or academic and business settings, are usually intended to disseminate knowledge, survey opinions and reach consensus on matters relevant to the group. New electronic communication mediums, from conference calls, instant messaging and Web 2.0 online discussions offer the means to modify meeting dynamics, but so far they have often amplified existing behavioral patterns.
American culture tends to value speech highly, and those who are the most vocal are generally more respected, perceived as more intelligent, and have a disproportionate impact on the group decisions. However, there is a wide range of individual and cultural variation in the amount that people speak, whether due to introversion or shyness, politeness, language difficulties, or other factors. However, no correlation has been shown between amount of speech and knowledge, competence or intelligence, leading one to ask if there are other ways to mediate discussions to allow for a more equitable distribution of input, and to increase the overall quality of the discussion content through the inclusion of diverse perspectives.
Big Mouth is an interface for online discussions. The conversation space is reconceptualized so that the time or space each person uses is a limited resource. Users’ messages will appear next to their icon each time they send a message, and the message will gradually shrink, fade and move towards the center. If a user speaks too often, their words will overlap and be illegible, so it encourages them to slow down, wait, listen and allow others to speak. The conversation space is now more representative of a “public space” or the “public sphere,” and the users’ contributions to it (and whether they are exceeding their share) are readily visible.
Big Mouth exposes the dynamics of group conversation. For those who may normally participate less, or who may feel limited within a particular group, it hopes to reduce that frustration as well as provide the satisfaction of being heard.
Background
American and other Western cultures tend to value speech highly, and up to a point, those who are the most vocal are generally more respected, are perceived as more intelligent, and have a disproportionate impact on the group decisions, in effect rewarding aggressiveness in speech. However, there is a wide range of individual and cultural variation in the amount that people speak, whether due to introversion or shyness, politeness, language difficulties, or other factors. However, no correlation has been shown between amount of speech or communication, and knowledge, competence or intelligence , leading one to ask if there are other ways to mediate discussions to allow for a more equitable distribution of input, and to increase the overall quality of the discussion content through the inclusion of diverse perspectives.
Communication in Western society has developed from the European-American conception of the self and its more individualistic orientation (this is also generally more descriptive of men than women) The contrast with the attitude of traditional Chinese culture, which valued silence and listening, is illustrated by a quote from Lao Tzu from the Tao Te Ching, “Those who know do not talk. Those who talk do not know.” While Asian cultures may no longer adhere strictly to traditional principles, and neither perspective is more “correct,” many cultures (and individuals within cultures) find value in the act of restraint of simply listening.
In this project, discussion is reimagined such that the time or space each person uses is a limited resource, to be allocated fairly. This requires a change of the mindset of participants, and consciousness of how much time each has and how much others have. Rather than being perceived as a restriction on those who are used to speaking freely, this change needs to be seen as a way to solicit and value the contributions of all present. At the same time, any solution should not and cannot coerce everyone to participate completely equally, and should merely provide an environment that encourages all to speak and to support different communication styles and behaviors.
There have been other techniques designed to address this problem. For example, the “talking stick” practice originated with Native Americans as a means of giving the right to talk to one person at a time and making it harder for one person to dominate the conversation. Formally run meetings, such as Congressional hearings, have a moderator who grants “the floor” to individuals under rules agreed to by the group. However, these practices are rarely used in the vast majority of discussions, which occur in a much more informal manner.
Audience
Big Mouth will be designed for general use by businesses and organizations which conduct meetings over internet voice systems and group IM. The decision to use Big Mouth will be made by meeting organizers who wish to have the more diverse and equitable input that is encouraged by the software.
User Scenario
The interface concept is optimized for small to medium groups, from about 3 to 8 people. The notion of sharing discussion is somewhat less important for pairs of people. It also makes more sense for a discussion around a real issue, rather than something that is more of a presentation by one member, or very informal discussions which may not have a specific goal.
Implementation
The client software is based on the open source SparkWeb IM client, with the main chat interface rewritten according to the project design and concept. The software is written in ActionScript and runs in the browser as a Flash movie. Each user's client communicates over the internet to a server running the OpenFire Jabber server dedicated to this project.
American culture tends to value speech highly, and those who are the most vocal are generally more respected, perceived as more intelligent, and have a disproportionate impact on the group decisions. However, there is a wide range of individual and cultural variation in the amount that people speak, whether due to introversion or shyness, politeness, language difficulties, or other factors. However, no correlation has been shown between amount of speech and knowledge, competence or intelligence, leading one to ask if there are other ways to mediate discussions to allow for a more equitable distribution of input, and to increase the overall quality of the discussion content through the inclusion of diverse perspectives.
Big Mouth is an interface for online discussions. The conversation space is reconceptualized so that the time or space each person uses is a limited resource. Users’ messages will appear next to their icon each time they send a message, and the message will gradually shrink, fade and move towards the center. If a user speaks too often, their words will overlap and be illegible, so it encourages them to slow down, wait, listen and allow others to speak. The conversation space is now more representative of a “public space” or the “public sphere,” and the users’ contributions to it (and whether they are exceeding their share) are readily visible.
Big Mouth exposes the dynamics of group conversation. For those who may normally participate less, or who may feel limited within a particular group, it hopes to reduce that frustration as well as provide the satisfaction of being heard.
Background
American and other Western cultures tend to value speech highly, and up to a point, those who are the most vocal are generally more respected, are perceived as more intelligent, and have a disproportionate impact on the group decisions, in effect rewarding aggressiveness in speech. However, there is a wide range of individual and cultural variation in the amount that people speak, whether due to introversion or shyness, politeness, language difficulties, or other factors. However, no correlation has been shown between amount of speech or communication, and knowledge, competence or intelligence , leading one to ask if there are other ways to mediate discussions to allow for a more equitable distribution of input, and to increase the overall quality of the discussion content through the inclusion of diverse perspectives.
Communication in Western society has developed from the European-American conception of the self and its more individualistic orientation (this is also generally more descriptive of men than women) The contrast with the attitude of traditional Chinese culture, which valued silence and listening, is illustrated by a quote from Lao Tzu from the Tao Te Ching, “Those who know do not talk. Those who talk do not know.” While Asian cultures may no longer adhere strictly to traditional principles, and neither perspective is more “correct,” many cultures (and individuals within cultures) find value in the act of restraint of simply listening.
In this project, discussion is reimagined such that the time or space each person uses is a limited resource, to be allocated fairly. This requires a change of the mindset of participants, and consciousness of how much time each has and how much others have. Rather than being perceived as a restriction on those who are used to speaking freely, this change needs to be seen as a way to solicit and value the contributions of all present. At the same time, any solution should not and cannot coerce everyone to participate completely equally, and should merely provide an environment that encourages all to speak and to support different communication styles and behaviors.
There have been other techniques designed to address this problem. For example, the “talking stick” practice originated with Native Americans as a means of giving the right to talk to one person at a time and making it harder for one person to dominate the conversation. Formally run meetings, such as Congressional hearings, have a moderator who grants “the floor” to individuals under rules agreed to by the group. However, these practices are rarely used in the vast majority of discussions, which occur in a much more informal manner.
Audience
Big Mouth will be designed for general use by businesses and organizations which conduct meetings over internet voice systems and group IM. The decision to use Big Mouth will be made by meeting organizers who wish to have the more diverse and equitable input that is encouraged by the software.
User Scenario
The interface concept is optimized for small to medium groups, from about 3 to 8 people. The notion of sharing discussion is somewhat less important for pairs of people. It also makes more sense for a discussion around a real issue, rather than something that is more of a presentation by one member, or very informal discussions which may not have a specific goal.
Implementation
The client software is based on the open source SparkWeb IM client, with the main chat interface rewritten according to the project design and concept. The software is written in ActionScript and runs in the browser as a Flash movie. Each user's client communicates over the internet to a server running the OpenFire Jabber server dedicated to this project.