Peter Scupelli
Personal Homepage:
http://www.peterscupelli.comCurrent place of employment:
Human-Computer Interaction Institute at Carnegie Mellon UniversityPreviously trained in architecture and interaction design, my research focuses on information technology and physical environments that support inter-group collaboration. I am interested in both qualitative and quantitative reseach methods. For example, with a field study in the surgery department of a hospital I am studying the use of shared information artifacts used to coordinate among teams of anesthesiologists, surgeons and operating room nurses during emergency induced surgery schedule changes. In the laboratory, I am studying with controlled experiments the role of team member awareness on individual attention allocation choices on multi-project, multi-group collaboration. I am working with Dr. Sara Kiesler and Dr. Susan Fussell in the Human-Computer Interaction Institute at Carnegie Mellon University.
.
Publications by Peter Scupelli (bibliography)
Scupelli, Peter, Fussell, Susan R., Kiesler, Sara, Quinones, Pablo and Kusbit, Gail (2007): Juggling Work Among Multiple Projects and Partner. In: HICSS 2007 - 40th Hawaii International International Conference on Systems Science 3-6 January, 2007, Waikoloa, Big Island, HI, USA. p. 77.
Ren, Yuqing, Kiesler, Sara, Fussell, Susan R. and Scupelli, Peter (2007): Trajectories in Multiple Group Coordination: A Field Study of Hospital Operating Suites. In: HICSS 2007 - 40th Hawaii International International Conference on Systems Science 3-6 January, 2007, Waikoloa, Big Island, HI, USA. p. 138.
Tan, Desney S., Gergle, Darren, Scupelli, Peter and Pausch, Randy (2006): Physically large displays improve performance on spatial tasks. In ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 13 (1) pp. 71-99.
“Large wall-sized displays are becoming prevalent. Although researchers have articulated qualitative benefits of group work on large displays, little work has been done to quantify the benefits for individual users. In this article we present four experiments comparing the performance of users working on a large projected wall display to that of users working on a standard desktop monitor. In these experiments, we held the visual angle constant by adjusting the viewing distance to each of the displays. Results from the first two experiments suggest that physically large displays, even when viewed at identical visual angles as smaller ones, help users perform better on mental rotation tasks. We show through the experiments how these results may be attributed, at least in part, to large displays immersing users within the problem space and biasing them into using more efficient cognitive strategies. In the latter two experiments, we extend these results, showing the presence of these effects with more complex tasks, such as 3D navigation and mental map formation and memory. Results further show that the effects of physical display size are independent of other factors that may induce immersion, such as interactivity and mental aids within the virtual environments. We conclude with a general discussion of the findings and possibilities for future work.”
© All rights reserved Tan et al. and/or ACM Press
Scupelli, Peter, Kiesler, Sara, Fussell, Susan R. and Chen, Congrui (2005): Project view IM: a tool for juggling multiple projects and teams. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2005 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2005. pp. 1773-1776.
“Previous research suggests working on multiple projects may lead to stress and misallocation of attention. A modest redesign of Instant Messenger (IM) could help team members juggle multiple projects and teams. This paper describes the implementation of this redesign--an IM plug-in called Project View IM (PVIM). PVIM uses automatic project status logging to show active project-related files and team members. In a preliminary evaluation experiment, participants working collaboratively with different partners on two projects found PVIM and IM to be equally usable and informative but PVIM participants reported less workload stress. We discuss future work to iterate the design and measure allocation of attention and task performance.”
© All rights reserved Scupelli et al. and/or ACM Press
Fussell, Susan R., Kiesler, Sara, Setlock, Leslie D. and Scupelli, Peter (2004): Effects of instant messaging on the management of multiple project trajectories. In: Dykstra-Erickson, Elizabeth and Tscheligi, Manfred (eds.) Proceedings of ACM CHI 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems April 24-29, 2004, Vienna, Austria. pp. 191-198.
“We present a study of the effects of instant messaging (IM) on individuals' management of work across multiple collaborative projects. Groups of four participants completed four web design tasks. Each participant worked on two tasks, each task with a different partner who was either co-located or remote, connected via IM. In one condition, each participant had one co-located and one remote partner. In a second condition, both partners were remote. We examined communication, division of labor, and task performance as a function of condition. The results indicated that nearly all participants divided their time unequally between projects, but less unequally in the remote/remote condition. In the co-located/remote condition, participants favored the task with the co-located partner. The results show that the effects of IM differ depending on people's multiple tasks are distributed across space. We propose a new IM interface that promotes awareness of multiple collaborators on multiple tasks.”
© All rights reserved Fussell et al. and/or ACM Press
Tan, Desney S., Gergle, Darren, Scupelli, Peter and Pausch, Randy (2004): Physically large displays improve path integration in 3D virtual navigation tasks. In: Dykstra-Erickson, Elizabeth and Tscheligi, Manfred (eds.) Proceedings of ACM CHI 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems April 24-29, 2004, Vienna, Austria. pp. 439-446.
“Previous results have shown that users perform better on spatial orientation tasks involving static 2D scenes when working on physically large displays as compared to small ones. This was found to be true even when the displays presented the same images at equivalent visual angles. Further investigation has suggested that large displays may provide a greater sense of presence, which biases users into adopting more efficient strategies to perform tasks. In this work, we extend those findings, demonstrating that users are more effective at performing 3D virtual navigation tasks on large displays. We also show that even though interacting with the environment affects performance, effects induced by interactivity are independent of those induced by physical display size. Together, these findings allow us to derive guidelines for the design and presentation of interactive 3D environments on physically large displays.”
© All rights reserved Tan et al. and/or ACM Press
Tan, Desney S., Gergle, Darren, Scupelli, Peter and Pausch, Randy (2003): With similar visual angles, larger displays improve spatial performance. In: Cockton, Gilbert and Korhonen, Panu (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 2003 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 5-10, 2003, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA. pp. 217-224.
Jennings, Pamela and Scupelli, Peter (2003): Constructed Narratives: Using Play to Breakdown Social. In: Proceedings of IFIP INTERACT03: Human-Computer Interaction 2003, Zurich, Switzerland. p. 1013.
Show this list on your homepage
User-contributed publications
Here is a list of publications that have been submitted by the author himself/herself or a website visitor:
Scupelli, P., Kiesler, S., & Fussell, S. R., (in press) Using Isovist Views to Study Placement of Large Displays in Natural Settings. CHI ’07 Work-in-progress.
Scupelli, P., Fussell, S. R. Kiesler, S., Quinones, P., & Kusbit, G. (2007). Juggling work among multiple projects and partners. Proceedings of HICSS 2007.
Ren Y., Kiesler, S., Fussell, S. R., & Scupelli, P. (2007). Supporting large-scale collaboration in critical environments. Proceedings of HICSS 2007.
Tan, D.S., Gergle, D., Scupelli, P., Pausch, R. Physically Large Displays Improve Performance on Spatial Tasks. (2006) ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 13(1), pp. 71-99.
Scupelli,P., Kiesler, S., Fussell, S.R. & Chen, C., (2005) Project view IM: a tool for juggling multiple projects and teams. CHI Extended Abstracts 2005: pp.1773-1776.
Jennings P., Scupelli P., (2003). “Constructed Narratives: Using Play to Breakdown Social Barriers,” Interactive Experience Forum in the proceedings of Interact 2003 conference, Zurich, Switzerland.
Knowledge wants to be free !
We have decided to give away world-class educational materials
because we believe that universal access to high quality education is key to the building
of peace, sustainable social and economic development, and intercultural dialogue.
To calculate just have much we have saved you, our wonderful readers, we compare our free encyclopedia to two
books we love:
$110: Human-Computer Interaction by Dix et al (a great textbook but without video interviews)
$116: Shneiderman's Designing the User Interface
(a great textbook but without video interviews).
As you are reading our encyclopedia on your iPad/tablet (and saving a few trees), we estimate that the price would be $90 if sold as an eBook.
With that number, we can calculate how much money we have saved our readers, based on calculating the number of readers.
How we calculate readership
Because of our online and tablet/iPad approach to publishing, we are able to precisely measure reading behaviour across hundreds of parameters in realtime: Anything from reading
speed, drop-off points in the text, reader demographics, and much more.
Based on our server logs and the Google Analytics API,
we calculate the number of readers as described in the calculation method below.
A reader is not the same as a simple pageview and a reader is not the same as a
website visitor (as described in our calculation method below).
We calculate readership for two types of readers:
- Readers that have read our whole encyclopedia, much the same way you read a printed book
- Readers that have reader an individual chapter
Calcalution method: How we define a reader
- First we use the Google Analytics API to get a report of the number of unique human visitors to a chapter/page. Google runs its business on ads and thus completely relies on the ability to distinguish between a human visitor and an automated request. If not, you could earn millions on automating clicks on Google Ads.
- We then compare that number to our Apache webserver logs, which report the much higher number of actual visits to a chapter/page (both human and automated). We calculate the difference in percent, which we call an "exaggeration factor", which we use in step 6 below.
- With a large part of the visitors excluded, we further exclude any visitor who:
- has not remained on the page for at least 3 minutes (this factor is calculated by recording visit durations of 1000 randomly selected visitors) or has not printed the page (i.e. has not visited the printerfriendly version of the chapter/page)
- has not scrolled the page (this factor is calculated by recording scroll movements on 1000 randomly selected visitors)
- We then further exclude "double readers", i.e. readers who read a portion of a chapter and then returns in,
say, a week or a month to read the rest.
Although this person's reading activity spans multiple server sessions, the person is only counted as a single reader.
We categorize a "double reader" as a visitor who:
- visits a page, or multiple pages, across multiple server sessions
- qualifies to be defined as a reader, cf step 1-3 above, in all server sessions
- uses the same originating IP address
- We then subtract 5% from the final number to counter-balance a last remaining factor, namely the situation where one reader reads a chapter on his/her tablet
using a WiFi connection (and counted as one reader) but then picks up his other tablet using a 3G dongle
(with another IP address) and re-reads some of the chapter. That will equal two readers, not one. We have no way
of calculating how many times this situation arises, but to be on the safe side we subtract 5%
from the final number.
- We then take half of the "exaggeration factor" from step 2 and substract from the final number. We do this for no rational reason. We do it only as a further measure to be certain that our number of readers is not inflated.
- To qualify as a reader who has read our whole encyclopedia - much the same way you read a printed book - that person must have qualified as a reader (cf. 1-6 above) of at least 80% of the encyclopedia chapters.
As a result, we have eliminated everything from automated requests to the more casual visitors. That leaves us with what we can safely call readers.
Changes to this page (author)
24 Feb 2010: Enabled abstracts to be shown on Peter Scupelli's author page.13 Jun 2009: Author was edited 13 Jun 2009: Author was edited
22 Aug 2008: Page was edited
15 Aug 2008: Updated the picture of Peter Scupelli
15 Aug 2008: Updated the picture of Peter Scupelli
24 Jul 2007: Author was edited
24 Jul 2007: Author was edited
29 Jun 2007: Author was edited
28 Apr 2003: Added the author to the bibliography
Page Information
Page maintainer:
The Editorial TeamHow to cite/reference this page
URL: http://www.interaction-design.org/references/authors/peter_scupelli.html
