Influencing Participation in Group Brainstorming Through Ambient Intelligence

REFERENCES

• Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bachour, K., Kaplan, F., & Dillenbourg, P. (2010). An interactive table for supporting participation balance in face-to-face collaborative learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 3, 203–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakker, S., van den Hoven, E., & Eggen, B. (2012). Acting by hand: Informing interaction design for the periphery of people’s attention. Interacting with Computers, 24, 119–130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balaam, M., Fitzpatrick, G., Good, J., & Harris, E. (2011). Enhancing interactional synchrony with an ambient display. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 867–876.
   Google Scholar
• Baruah, J., & Paulus, P. B. (2009). Enhancing group creativity: The search for synergy. In M. Neale, B. Mannix, & J. A. Goncalo (Eds.), Creativity in groups ( pp. 29–56). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
   Google Scholar
• Bergstrom, T., & Karahalios, K. (2009). Social mirrors as social signals: Transforming audio into graphics. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 29(5), 22–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns, G. (1995). The secrets of team facilitation. Training and Development, 49, 46–52.
   Google Scholar
• Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497–509.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiMicco, J. M., Hollenbach, K. J., Pandolfo, A., & Bender, W. (2007). The impact of increased awareness while face-to-face. Human–Computer Interaction, 22, 47–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2011). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Gatica-Perez, D. (2009). Automatic nonverbal analysis of social interaction in small groups: A review. Image Vision Computing, 27, 1775–1787.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hallgren, K. A. (2012). Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: An overview and tutorial. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 8, 23–34.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hassenzahl, M. (2001). The effect of perceived hedonic quality on product appealingness. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 13, 481–499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hekler, E. B., Klasnja, P., Froehlich, J. E., & Buman, M. P. (2013). Mind the theoretical gap: Interpreting, Using, and developing behavioral theory in HCI research. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 3307–3316.
   Google Scholar
• Hirsh, J. B., Kang, S. K., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2012). Personalized persuasion tailoring persuasive appeals to recipients’ personality traits. Psychological Science, 23, 578–581.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaptein, M., & Eckles, D. (2010). Selecting effective means to any end: Futures and ethics of persuasion profiling. In T. Ploug, P. Hasle, & H. Oinas-Kukkonen (Eds.), Persuasive Technology (pp. 82–93). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kaptein, M. C., Markopoulos, P., Ruyter, B. de, & Aarts, E. (2010). Persuasion in ambient intelligence. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 1, 43–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerr, N. L., & Tindale, R. S. (2004). Group performance and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 623–655.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, T., Hinds, P., & Pentland, A. (2012). Awareness as an antidote to distance: Making distributed groups cooperative and consistent. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 1237–1246.
   Google Scholar
• Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., Jochems, W., & van Buuren, H. (2007). Measuring perceived sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Computers & Education, 49, 176–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, M. K., Kiesler, S., & Forlizzi, J. (2011). Mining behavioral economics to design Persuasive technology for healthy choices. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 325–334.
   Google Scholar
• Merrill, D., Kalanithi, J., & Maes, P. (2007). Siftables: Towards sensor network user interfaces. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction, 75–78.
   Google Scholar
• Nakajima, T., & Lehdonvirta, V. (2011). Designing motivation using persuasive ambient mirrors. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17, 107–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative thinking. New York, NY: Scribner.
   Google Scholar
• Ohta, T., & Tanaka, J. (2012). Pinch: An interface that relates applications on multiple touch-screen by “pinching” gesture. In A. Nijholt, T. Romão, & D. Reidsma (Eds.), Advances in computer entertainment (pp. 320–335). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Oinas-Kukkonen, H., & Harjumaa, M. (2009). Persuasive systems design: Key issues, process model, and system features. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 24, Article 28.
   Google Scholar
• Paulus, P. B., Putman, V. L., Dugosh, K. L., Dzindolet, M. T., & Coskun, H. (2002). Social and cognitive influences in group brainstorming: Predicting production gains and losses. European Review of Social Psychology, 12, 299–325.
   Google Scholar
• Pentland, A. (Sandy). (2010). Honest signals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Perloff, R. M. (2003). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the 21st century. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Pousman, Z., & Stasko, J. (2006). A taxonomy of ambient information systems: Four patterns of design. Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, 67–74.
   Google Scholar
• Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 203–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, Y., Hazlewood, W. R., Marshall, P., Dalton, N., & Hertrich, S. (2010). Ambient influence: Can twinkly lights lure and abstract representations trigger behavioral change? Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, 261–270.
   Google Scholar
• Schiavo, G., Cappelletti, A., Mencarini, E., Stock, O., & Zancanaro, M. (2014). Overt or subtle? Supporting group conversations with automatically targeted directives. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, 225–234.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, A. (2000). Implicit human computer interaction through context. Personal Technologies, 4, 191–199.
   Google Scholar
• Searle, J. R. (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 5, 1–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tausch, S., Hausen, D., Kosan, I., Raltchev, A., & Hussmann, H. (2014). Groupgarden: Supporting Brainstorming Through a Metaphorical Group Mirror on Table or Wall. Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human–Computer Interaction, 541–550.
   Google Scholar
• Terken, J., & Sturm, J. (2010). Multimodal support for social dynamics in co-located meetings. Personal Ubiquitous Computing, 14, 703–714.
   Google Scholar
• Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Vertegaal, R., Slagter, R., van der Veer, G., & Nijholt, A. (2001). Eye gaze patterns in conversations: There is more to conversational agents than meets the eyes. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 301–308.
   Google Scholar
• Weiser, M., & Brown, J. S. (1996). Designing calm technology. PowerGrid Journal, 1, 75–85.
   Google Scholar
• Zancanaro, M., Stock, O., Tomasini, D., & Pianesi, F. (2011). A socially aware persuasive system for supporting conversations at the museum café. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, 395–398.
   Google Scholar