Communicating and Learning in "Virtual Seminars":
The Uses of Spatial Metaphors in Interface Desig
Stephan Schwan
(German Institute for Research on Distance Education
at the University of Tübingen, Germany
Stephan_Schwan@diff.uni-tuebingen.de) Friedrich W. Hesse
(German Institute for Research on Distance Education
at the University of Tübingen, Germany
Friedrich.Hesse@uni-tuebingen.de)Abstract: The use of computer conferences as "Virtual
Seminars" has become a convenient way to allow spatially separated
participants to interact under the purpose of acquiring specific
knowledge in the area of distance education. In order to facilitate
orientation, to indicate social meanings, and to structure the
communicative processes, two different types of spatial metaphors have
been applied in interface design of these telematic settings:
large-scale metaphors depicting extended geographical areas
(campus-sites, buildings) and small-scale metaphors depicitng
rooms. Their adequateness crucially depends on the correspondence
between the real world domain and software domain. Possible obstacles
for this match stem from a lack of providing interactivity, from
cluttering the interface with pseudorealistic details and from the
specifities of the asynchronous and text-based communication modes. Key Words: Telematics, Computer Conferencing, Virtual
Seminar, Interface Design, Metaphor
1 Introduction
Traditional forms of distance education are dominated by phases of
isolated learning with text-based materials in combination with few
face-to-face meetings. This type of distance education may widely lead
to isolation amongst the learners, which can, however, be partly
overcome by new forms of computer-based telecommunications, in
particular computer conferences [Feldmann 1986], [Bikson and Eveland
1990], [Phillips 1990]. They offer the participants the chance to come
into contact with each other and with their tutors on a regular basis
without the need for meetings - which are costly. Thus, the primary
advantage of such conferences lies not so much in the unidirectional
dissemination of learning materials, but in the elaboration of already
acquired knowledge by means of intensive interaction with a group of
peers and tutors [Davie 1989]. Page 503
Compared to traditional forms of distance education, computer
conferences allow a number of psychological aspects to be taken into
closer consideration, and this in turn facilitates a deeper
elaboration of already acquired knowledge [Harasim 1990], [Kaye 1992],
[Collis 1993], [Hiltz and Turoff 1993]: - Assignments and the evaluation thereof can be exchanged directly
between learner and tutor (= vertical communication).
- Feedback concerning the actual state of the learning process can
be given in a more contingent manner.
- Problems and questions arising during learning can be put forward
by the learner and answered directly by the tutor.
- The horizontal communication between the learners is also
facilitated. It includes various forms of collaborative learning as
well as the exchange and discussion of information and the solution of
problems.
- The task-oriented learning process can be enriched by social
exchange and more informal communication.
These properties of computer conferences show strong parallels with
real-world classroom teaching and real-world university seminars
without the necessity of bringing the learners together spatially and
temporally. In a broad sense, computer conferences can thus be seen as
a kind of "virtual seminar", which encompasses a number of learning
possibilities of real-world teaching in an asynchronous and dislocated
manner [Hiltz 1992].
2 How to Set Up a "Virtual Seminar" by Computer Conferencing
A necessary precondition for its successful implementation is the
careful planning and structuring of the computer conference. Empirical
evidence shows that conferences need well-prepared conference
moderators, a set of acknowledged communication rules, a number of
learning-relevant goals, the guided application of
knowledge-acquisition techniques and a software which provides tools
to easily navigate and communicate and to process information. Because of the existence of well-established structuring principles in
real-world learning settings, a promising starting point would be to
model the overall structure of a "virtual seminar" accordingly. For
example, moderators could act in a manner which is similar to that of
teachers in seminars, e.g. regulating the communication flow by
steering questions and summaries and motivating students through
positive feedback. Also, special parts of the conference could be
devoted to the exchange of more informal messages, which function
similarly to real-world "coffee breaks" and establish a feeling of
social presence, togetherness and group identity. In summary, this
concept of a "virtual seminar" has at least two major advantages: it
allows the recurrence of already well established principles for the
design of real-world learning Page 504
settings and it gives the possibility of constructing an integrated
and coherent scenario of a computerized communication-based learning
environment. The aspect of coherence can be further exploited if its underlying
structure is made explicit to the learners. This can be accomplished
through the utilization of a visual metaphor in the design of the
interface structure of the conference-software. In the area of
traditional human-computer interface design, the use of real-world
metaphors has a successful and long-standing tradition. Wellknown
examples are the desktop metaphor of the Apple MacIntosh Interface or
the calculating sheet metaphor of Visicalc or Excell. The idea behind
these software programs is to provide the user with an interface that
is structured according to a real-world domain with which he is
familiar. Thus, already existing knowledge is activated which the user
can transfer and readily apply to the new software. From a cognitive science point of view, providing the user with an
interface metaphor has a number of advantages [Carroll et al. 1988],
[Hutchins et al. 1986]: - it speeds up the learning process of software usage
- it allows the user to anticipate possible options of task
accomplishment (e.g. the icon of an waste paper basket suggests the
possibility of deletion)
- it allows the user to generate a functional mental model of the
software which in turn leads to the generation of valid assumptions
about the behaviour of that software
- it also allows the user to formulate hypotheses about possible
causes of and repair mechanisms for errors
Additionally, for the field of computer-mediated communication,
certain possible advantages of "classroom" and "campus" metaphors can
be assumed: - by visibly establishing a virtual classroom, a feeling of social
presence und belonging to a specific group could be enhanced
- the participants could transfer and apply familiar communication
rules and interaction patterns to the conference, leading to more
regulated behaviours
Despite present technical problems, a growing number of conferencing
software has been designed on the basis of graphically displayed
real-world metaphors. Apart from the "traditional" desktop metaphor,
of which FirstClass® is a typical example, the majority of these
programs is based on a spatial metaphor including campus-like areas
and classrooms. Typical examples are VMCO [Acker 1989], "Thought Box"
[Alexander and Lincoln 1989] and [Alexander 1992], CyCo [Benford et
al. 1993], EDUBA [Duenas 1995], or CO-LEARN [Derycke et al. 1995]. Comparable developments can also be found in the context of
multi-purpose "habitats", which were originally developed as
multi-player online virtual environments [Morningstar and Farmer
1990]. Meanwhile, they are extended to more Page 505
serious applications in the context of collaborative work or knowledge
acquistion, in order to provide a "social virtual reality" which
allows multiple participants to interact and communicate in
pseudo-spatial surroundings [Curtis and Nichols 1993]. Examples are
the "Virtual Academy" based on the ExploreNet software [Moshell and
Hughes 1995], Diamond Parc [Rich et al. 1994] or "Cybercampus", based
on the Interspace software. The underlying design philosophy of
habitats is to enhance the immersiveness of the system through
maximizing the realism of the virtual communication setting. A number
of these systems are also providing advanced technologies of user
control mechanisms (e.g. body position sensing technologies) and video
and audio input-output facilities, thus giving the user a feeling of
"telepresence" [Steuer 1992]. Thus, computer conferencing systems as well as habitats make use of
spatial metaphors in its interface designs. They confront the user
with a three-dimensional layout which is populated by (stable or
animated) objects and persons, assuming that he can readily apply his
real-world knowlegde about scenes and topological relations to
understand the functionality of the software and to behave
accordingly.
3 Types of Spatial Metaphors
The spatial metaphors that the mentioned software systems employ can
be classified into two basic types, namely those depicting large-scale
spatial areas and those showing small-scale areas. The large-scale area metaphor utilizes the concept of a larger
geographical site comprising of a number of distinguishable places
with different functionalities. Examples are campus-sites (with
different buildings, like lecture-halls, cafeterias, libraries) or
large buildings (with different rooms, like entrance halls,
seminar-rooms etc.). In the "real world", the topography of
large-scale areas primarily serves the function of providing
convenient transitions between the different locations of the
site. Similar, the purpose of large-scale metaphors in interface
design is to visualize the complex structure of computer conferences
and to allow the user to easily switch between their different
functional parts. To achieve this, the spatial visualization has to fullfill two major
requirements. First, it helps the user to generate a kind of
"cognitive map", which facilitates orientation and navigation between
the numerous modules or subunits of the computer conference. Thus, the
visual specification of their topological relations allows the user to
determine where he actually is, where the different places of the site
(representing subunits of the conference) are located and how he can
reach them. Based on the findings of psychological research on
orientation in geographical settings, the interface should include
equivalents of salient and easily recognizable "landmarks", and
provide map-like overviews and introductory "guided tours" [Downs and
Stea 1982], [Murray 1992]. Page 506
Second, besides facilitating orientation, an equally important
function of spatial metaphors could be to convey relevant "social
meanings" through the location and visual appearence of the different
places they depict [Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton 1981],
[Stokols and Shumaker 1981]. In a sense, characteristics of buildings
or places form a culturally defined code, which indicates their
importance, purpose, and accessibility and thus helps the participants
to decide which of the places they should visit to accomplish their
actual goals. For example, in real settings important places are
typically located at the center of the site, occupy more space then
less important places, and can be reached directly from almost
everywhere. Additionally, through "architectural features" places or
buildings often allow inferences about their purposes (cafeterias look
different from libraries) and they can also indicate their
accessibility (open doors or lit windows indicate accessibility,
lowered shutters indicate inaccessibility). To date, the majority of software products designed for
telecommunicational purposes primarily exploits the orientational uses
of large-scale spatial metaphors, whereas its function as carriers of
social meaning has not yet been adressed in a systematic way. Similar,
even if applying large-scale metaphors, only few interfaces make use
of the second type of spatial metaphor, namely the visual depiction of
small-scale spatial arrangements within specific locations. This
"room"-metaphor rests on the assumption that real-world settings and
interactions are spatially orga- nized and therefore distances and
arrangements of persons and objects provide orientational aids and
convey social meanings. Again, small-scale spatial metaphors can fullfill a number of
different functions within the context of interface design. First, the
vizualization of a room can be used to enumerate the stable
characteristics of the setting, i.e. its purposes, the number of
participants, and its available tools. Typically, this is accomplished
through depicting each of the participants and tools as a
distinguishable icon and by placing these icons simply in front of a
"wallpaper" showing a pictorial depiction of the room. Second, the room-metaphor can also be used to indicate the inherent
social implications of the spatial arrangements. Normally, spatial
relationships show a close correspondence to the social and personal
relationships in groups. Certain roles and their associated
behavioural norms are often "coded" via spatial positions in a room
(e.g. the person at the head of the table holds the role of the
chairman, who leads the dicussion) [Goffman 1967], [Wicker
1984]. Additionally, spatial proximity of persons and their spatial
orientation towards each other often reveal detailed information about
their personal relationships and their willingness to communicate
[Hall 1959], [Argyle 1975]. Typical examples are round-table
arrangements for discussion groups or one-speaker-many-listener
configurations of seats in lecture-halls. Finally, a further purpose of small-scale spatial metaphors is to
provide a means for structuring communication processes, which is best
exemplified by the work of Page 507
Benford [Benford et al. 1993]. In their model, each participant can be
characterized by two space-related attributes: the focus of a person
represents a subspace within which a person focusses his attention and
the complementary nimbus determines the spatial area in which the
person is noticable. In a given "virtual room" where a com- puter
conference takes place, the interplay of nimbus and focus determines
for each participant which of the other group members he is aware of,
which contributions he notices, which of the other group members is
aware of him and which of the others notices his
contributions. Through virtually moving in this room, these aspects
can be continously changed, resulting in different coalitions,
subgroups and interaction patterns. In sum, in its most elaborate version the small-scale spatial metaphor
can be seen as an attempt to enhance the "social imageability" of the
telematic setting, i.e. its "capacity to evoke vivid and collectively
held social meanings among the occupants and users of a place"
[Stokols and Shumaker 1981]. This enhanced social imageability can be
expected to have two consequences. First, it should evoke a feeling of
social presence and of belonging to the conference group [Short et al.
1977], [Spears and Lea 1992]. Second, as the work of Benford [Benford
et al. 1993] shows, it can provide a convenient way to implicitly
implement a number of communication rules without the necessity of
stating them explicitly. From a psychological point of view, this
could reduce the amount of cognitive load (fewer communication rules
are to be remembered), lessen the feeling of being too constrained in
communicative behaviour and also help to structure the conference
according to prespecified norms.
4 Adequateness of Spatial Metaphors
Though the use of metaphors in the field of computer conferences has a
number of potential benefits, possible shortcomings also have to be
taken into account. They stem from the fact that the adequateness of a
given metaphor for the functionality of a specific software program
depends crucially on the exact correspondence between the real world
domain and the software domain in terms of both its conceptual
elements and their structural and functional interdependencies. Any
discrepancies between source and target domain can lead to serious
misconceptions and usage errors [Carroll et al. 1988], [Hutchins et
al. 1986], [Nardi and Zarmer 1993]. Such discrepancies can be caused
by three different sources, namely by a lack of interactivity, by a
"wallpaper-realism" which clutters the display with nonfunctional and
pseudorealistic details, and by the inherent structural discrepancies
to real-world settings stemming from the specific modes of
communication found within telematic settings. First, in real-life settings visual appearances of persons and objects
as well as their distance and orientation directly "afford" certain
behavioral opportunities and restrict others, and they allow persons
to act upon these affordances in a contingent way [Gibson 1979]. Thus,
to prevent misconceptions of spatial metaphors in telematic Page 508
interfaces, these metaphors have to be coupled with a degree of
interactivity that allows the users to behave in correspondence with
the depicted visible features and topological relations. For example,
if one of the participants of a telematic setting is actually using a
specific tool (e.g. browsing a database), this person-tool
relationship should be depicted accordingly, especially if it hinders
both person or tool from other interactions. Second, the notion of a "fit" between properties of real world domain
and software domain implies that only those real world features should
be depicted that have a direct structural or functional counterpart
within the software. As [Derycke et al. 1995] have pointed out,
cluttering the interface with irrelevant or nonfunctional visual
details in order to achieve a greater sense of "realism" can confuse
users and lead to errors and cognitive overload. Finally, in the case of computer conferencing important differences to
real-world learning settings result from a number of unique medial
properties of computer-mediated communication [Harasim 1990]: In
contrast to face-to-face communication, the members of computer
conferences are spatially separated and interact in a text-based and
asynchronous way. These attributes cause both new structures of
interaction episodes and also drastically altered types of
communicative behaviour. For example, the enhanced temporal flexibility of asynchronous
communication leads to a significant increase in the time that is
required to complete a discussion topic [Levin et al. 1990]. To reduce
the overall discussion time, most users therefore compose messages in
which a number of topics are discussed simultaneously. This leads not
only to altered message contents (e.g. a higher percentage of
conditional statements), but also to a different communication
structure with a lot of messages containing cross-references and
"multiple threads", which has no parallel in face-to-
face-communication [Black et al. 1983]. Thus, the applicability of the
room metaphor for this type of asynchronous conferencing can be
seriously questioned, because it implicitly assumes a single-topic
communication structure. To stick to the metaphor, the introduction of
a kind of "multiple personality" would be necessary, with the ability
to be present simultaneously at different locations in the "virtual
room", thus being able to consider and contribute to multiple topics
all at the same time. A related problem arises from the conjunction of asynchronity with
written communication. To be asynchronously retrievable, the
conference messages have to be stored. The accumulation of these
messages leads to the availability of an elaborated text-based
conference "history". Therefore, apart from the synchronous structure,
consisting of the interrelations of the conference members, computer
conferences show a second diachronical structure consisting of the
temporal and conceptual relation between the conference messages,
which is absent in face-to-face educational settings. This opens new
possibilities of argument referencing, message browsing and
information processing not available in traditional forms of
real-world teaching [Mackay 1988], [Gissurardottir 1993]. At the same
time, it offers the Page 509
possiblity of applying the spatial metaphor in a completely different
way, namely to visualize the temporal structure of the conference in a
hypertext-like form with messages as interlinked nodes [Nilan 1992].
5 Conclusion
In sum, the last examples show that the applicability of small-scale
classroom metaphors can only be partial, because computer conferences
differ from real-world educational settings in a number of attributes,
the most important being in their asynchroneity, the spatial
separation of the participants and their primarily text-based
communication mode. This incompleteness of the match between
real-world learning settings and the conference interface may produce
a number of drawbacks. Most important, the conference members could
erroneously restrict themselves to the functionality of the
real-world settings without noticing the advanced possibilities and
the altered necessities of this new medium (e.g. utilizing information
processing capabilities). This could lead to a serious impairment of
the efficiency and effectiveness of knowledge acquisition and
elaboration via conferencing [Eastmond 1994]. On the other hand, as
already mentioned, adequately selected metaphors could enhance the
feeling of being present in a social (not technical) setting and
facilitate processes of orientation and coordination between the
learners. Despite these uncertainties concerning the applicability of real-world
metaphors in the field of computer conferencing, and despite the
availability of a number of prototypes [Acker 1989], [Alexander and
Lincoln 1989], [Alexander 1992], [Benford et al. 1993], [Derycke et
al. 1995], [Duenas 1995], direct empirical comparisons of their
presence and absence or of the applicability of different metaphors
are virtually inexistent. One exception is a study conducted by [Ahern
1993]. In a comparison between a text-based and a hypertext-like
graphic interface, he found that the users of the graphic interface
spent more time at the terminal and exchanged more messages, but
showed no differences in satisfaction scores and in course grades. As
long as no other empirical investigations have been conducted, the
generalizability of these findings remains an open question. Further,
because of the utilization of a graphic interface with hypertext-like
visualization, aspects of spatial metaphors were not considered during
the study. Due to the increasing power of networks and hardware and in line with
advances in technologies aimed at "virtual realities", an intensified
interest in graphic interfaces and the underlying metaphors must be
expected. Therefore, an urgent need exists for theoretically and
empirically analyzing the cognitive, motivational and social
implications of the selection and application of real-world metaphors
in the field of computer-mediated communication systems for learning
purposes. The following questions mark a first starting point for this
line of research: Page 510
- Which analogies to real-world educational settings do participants
of computer conferences spontanously apply in the absence of an
explicitly designed interface metaphor?
- Which functionalities do users associate with specific metaphors
and which "breakdowns" occur in the use of the conferencing software
due to their erroneously applying these functionalities to the
conferencing software in a generalized way?
- What is the impact of real-world metaphors on the present use of
new features of conferencing software?
- Which metaphors lead to greater satisfaction, to a greater sense
of social presence, to better orientation, to a reduced cognitive load
and/or to a substantial improvement in elaborating already acquired
knowledge?
To empirically address these issues, a combination of laboratory and
field-oriented research seems to be the most feasible procedure.
References
[Acker 1989] Acker, S.R.: "Designing communication systems for human
systems: Values and assumptions of 'Socially Open Architecture'; In
J.A. Anderson (ed.): "Communication Yearbook 12" ; pp. 498-532; Sage,
Newbury (1989).
[Ahern 1993] Ahern, T.C.: "The effect of a graphic interface on
participation, interaction and student achievement in a
computer-mediated small-group discussion"; Journal of Educational
Computing Research, 9 (1993), 535-548.
[Alexander 1992] Alexander, G.: "Designing human interfaces for
collaborative learning"; In A.R. Kaye (ed.): "Collaborative learning
through computer conferencing"; pp. 201-210; Springer, Berlin (1992)
[Alexander and Lincoln 1989] Alexander, G.; Lincoln, C.: "The thought
box: A computer-based communication system to support distance
learning"; In R. Mason; A. Kaye (eds.): "Mindweave"; pp. 86-100;
Pergamon, Oxford (1989).
[Argyle 1975] Argyle, M.: "Bodily communication"; Methuen, London (1975).
[Benford et al. 1993] Benford, S.; Bullock, A.; Cook, N.; Harvey, P.;
Ingram, R.; Lee, O.: "From rooms to cyberspace: models of interaction
in large virtual computer spaces"; Interacting with Computers, 5
(1993), 217-237.
[Bikson and Eveland 1990] Bikson, T.K.; Eveland, J.D.: "The interplay
of work group structures and computer support"; In J. Galegher;
R.E. Kraut; C. Egido (eds.): "Intellectual teamwork. Social and
technological foundations of cooperative work"; pp. 245-290; Erlbaum,
Hillsdale N.J. (1990)
[Black et al. 1983] Black, S.D.; Levin, J.A.; Mehan, H.; Quinn, C.N.:
"Real and non-real time interaction: Unraveling multiple threads of
discourse"; Discourse Processes, 6 (1983), 69-75.
[Carroll et al. 1988] Carroll, J.M.; Mack, R.L.; Kellog, W.:
"Interface metaphors and user interface design"; In M. Helander (ed.):
"Handbook of human-computer interaction"; pp. 67-85; North-Holland,
Amsterdam (1988)
[Collis 1993] Collis, B.: "Telecommunications applications in
education: a research taxonomy"; Australian Educational Computing,
(1993), 1-11.
Page 511
[Curtis and Nichols 1993] Curtis, P.; Nichols, D.A.: "MUDs grow up:
Social virtual reality in the real world "; (1993); available at
ftp://ftp.parc.xerox.com/pup/moo/papers
[Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton 1981] Csikszentmihalyi, M.;
Rochberg-Halton, E.: "The meaning of things: Domestic symbols and the
self"; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1981).
[Davie 1989] Davie, L.: "Facilitation techniques for the on-line
tutor"; In R. Mason; A. Kaye (eds.): "Mindweave"; pp. 74-85; Pergamon,
Oxford (1989)
[Derycke et al. 1995] Derycke, A.C.; Smith, C.; Hemery, L.: "Metaphors
and interactions in virtual environments for open and distance
education"; In H. Maurer (ed.): "Proceedings of ED-Media 95";
pp. 181-186; AACE, Graz (1995).
[Duenas 1995] Duenas, G.S.: "EDUBA - Applications for EDUcation on
Wide Band Communications Network"; In P. Held; W.F. Kugemann (eds.):
"Telematics for Education and Training"; pp. 396-401; IOS Press,
Amsterdam (1995)
[Eastmond 1994] Eastmond, D.V.: "Adult distance study through computer
conferencing"; Distance Education, 15 (1994), 128-152.
[Feldmann 1986] Feldmann, M.: "Constraints on communication and
electronic messaging"; Proceedings of the conference for
computer-supported cooperative work; pp. 73-90; ACM, New York (1986).
[Gibson 1979] Gibson, J.J..: "The ecological approach to visual
perception"; Houghton Mifflin, Boston (1979).
[Gissurardottir 1993] Gissurardottir, S.: "Generative learning
strategies in computer mediated communication"; In G. Davies;
B. Samways (eds.): "Teleteaching"; pp. 287-296; Elsevier (1993)
[Goffman 1967] Goffman, I.: "Interaction ritual. Essays on
face-to-face behavior"; anchor books, New York (1967).
[Hall 1959] Hall, E.T.: "The silent language"; Doubleday, New York
(1959)
[Harasim 1990] Harasim, L.M.: "Online education: An environment for
collaboration and intellectual amplification" In L.M. Harasim (ed.):
"Online Education", pp. 39-64; Praeger, New York (1990).
[Hiltz 1992] Hiltz, S.R.: "The virtual classroom: Software for
collaborative learning"; In E. Barrett (ed.): "Sociomedia:
Multimedia, hypermedia, and the social construction of knowledge";
pp. 347-368; MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1992).
[Hiltz and Turoff 1993] Hiltz, S.R.; Turoff, M.: "The network nation:
Human communication via computer"; MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1993)
[Hutchins et al. 1986] Hutchins, E.L.; Hollan, J.D.; Norman, D.:
"Direct manipulation interfaces"; In D.A.Norman; S. Draper (eds.):
"User centered system design"; pp. 87-124; Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1986).
[Kaye 1992] Kaye, A.: "Learning together apart"; In A.R. Kaye (ed.):
"Collaborative learning through computer conferencing"; pp.1-24;
Springer, Berlin (1992).
[Levin et al. 1990] Levin, J.A.; Kim, H.; Riel, M.M.: "Analyzing
instructional interactions on electronic message networks"; In
L.M. Harasim (ed.): "Online education"; pp. 185-213; Praeger, New York
(1990).
[Mackay 1988] Mackay, W. E.: "Diversity in the use of electronic mail:
a preliminary inquiry"; ACM Transactions on Office Information
Systems, 6 (1988), 380-397.
[Morningstar and Farmer 1990] Morningstar, C.; Farmer, F.R.: "The
lessons of Lucasfilm's Habitat" In M. Benedikt (ed.): "Cyberspace: The
first steps" MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1990). also available at
ftp://ftp.parc.xerox.com/pup/moo/papers Page 512
[Murray 1992] Murray, J.H.: "Restructuring space, time, story, and
text in advanced multimedia learning environments"; In E. Barrett
(ed.): "Sociomedia: Multimedia, hypermedia, and the social
construction of knowledge", pp. 319-345; MIT Press, Cambridge,
Mass. (1992).
[Nardi and Zarmer 1993] Nardi, B.A.; Zarmer, C.L.: "Beyond models and
metaphors: Visual formalisms in user interface design"; Journal of
Visual Languages and Computing, 4 (1993), 5-33.
[Nilan 1992] Nilan, M.S.: "Cognitive space: Using virtual reality for
large information resource managment problems"; Journal of
Communication, 42 (1992), 115-135.
[Phillips 1990] Phillips, C.: "Making friends in the 'electronic
student lounge'" Distance Education, 11 (1990), 320-333.
[Rich et al. 1994] Rich, C.; Waters, R.C.; Strohecker, C.; Schabes,
Y.; Freeman, W.T.; Torrance, M.C.; Golding; A.R.; Roth, M.:
"Demonstration of an interactive multimedia environment"; IEEE
Computer, 27, 12, (1994), 15-22.
[Short et al. 1976] Short, J.; Williams, E.; Christie, B.: "The social
psychology of telecommunications"; Wiley, London (1976).
[Spears and Lea 1992] Spears, R.; Lea. M.: "Social influence and the
influence of the social in computer-mediated communication"; In M. Lea
(ed.): "Contexts of computer-mediated communication; pp. 30-65; New
York (1992)
[Steuer 1992] Steuer, J.: "Defining virtual reality: Dimensions
determining telepresence"; Journal of Communication, 42, 4, (1992),
73-93.
[Stokols and Shumaker 1981] Stokols, D.; Shumaker, S.A.: "People in
places: A transactional view of settings"; In J.H. Harvey (ed.):
"Cognition, social behavior, and the environment"; pp.441-488;
Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J. (1981).
[Wicker 1984] Wicker, A.W.: "An introduction to ecological
psychology"; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1984).
Acknowledgements: Parts of this article were presented before at a workshop about
"University level distance education in Europe: assessment and
perspectives" on occasion of Fernuniversität's (Hagen) 20th
anniversary. Page 513
|