Science of Emotion and Sensibility (감성과학)

Korean Society for Emotion and Sensibility (한국감성과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Influence of Task Orientation and Preferred Self-View Size on Self-View Preference: Testing the Moderated Mediating Effect of Social Anxiety

과업지향정도 및 선호하는 화면크기가 비디오 피드백 기능 선호도에 미치는 영향: 사회불안의 조절된 매개효과 검증

  • Received : 2022.04.30
  • Accepted : 2022.06.21
  • Published : 2022.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

With the increase of video conferencing users and the development of technology, the situations where video conferencing is used and the layout of video conferencing interfaces are diversifying. Social anxiety affects video conferencing communication and is closely related to the self-view function, which is characteristic of video conferencing. The self-view function is part of the video conferencing interface that provides a small preview of one's own camera feed. Self-view is known to degrade work performance and cause fatigue; however, it is set as the default function on video conferencing software in a way that users generally prefer. This study used an online survey to study the effect of task orientation, preferred self-view size, and social anxiety on video feedback preference. Participants responded to questions assessing work orientation, social anxiety level, preferred self-view size, and self-view preference. The results showed that preferred self-view size mediates task orientation and video feedback preference. There was no significant difference in the mediating effect of the preferred self-view size according to the degree of social anxiety. These results offer insights into the interactions between users and video conferencing software and provide information that can be useful for designing video conferencing interfaces.

화상회의 시스템 사용자 증가 및 기술 발전으로 인해, 화상회의 사용맥락과 화상회의 인터페이스 레이아웃이 다양해졌다. 사회불안은 화상회의 소통상황에도 영향을 주는데, 대면소통과 구별되는 요소인 비디오 피드백과 밀접한 관련성이 있는 것으로 나타났다. 비디오 피드백은 상대방에게 보이는 본인의 모습을 화상회의 시스템 인터페이스에 표시해주는 기능이다. 비디오 피드백은 업무 성과를 저해하고 피로감을 유발하는 것으로 알려졌으나, 화상회의 시스템에서 기본 기능으로 설정되어 있고 사용자들에게 보편적으로 선호된다. 본 연구는 과업지향정도, 비디오 피드백 화면크기, 사회불안이 비디오 피드백 선호도에 미치는 영향을 보기 위해 실시되었다. 연구는 온라인 설문으로 진행되었고, 설문 참가자는 화상회의 중 과업지향정도, 사회불안수준, 선호하는 비디오 피드백 화면크기, 비디오 피드백 기능 선호도를 평가하는 문항에 응답하였다. 연구 결과, 비디오 피드백 화면크기는 과업지향정도와 비디오 피드백 선호도를 매개하는 것으로 나타났다. 구체적으로 과업지향정도가 높을수록 작은 비디오 피드백 화면크기를 선호하였고, 이는 비디오 피드백 선호도 감소로 이어졌다. 한편, 사회불안수준에 따른 비디오 피드백 화면크기의 매개효과 차이는 유의미하지 않았다. 이러한 결과는 사용자와 화상회의 시스템의 상호작용에 대한 이해에 도움을 주어 화상회의 시스템 디자인에 활용될 수 있는 정보를 제공한다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2019년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(NRF-2019S1A5C2A03083499).

References

  1. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC.
  2. Bailenson, J. N. (2021). Nonverbal overload: A theoretical argument for the causes of Zoom fatigue. Technology, Mind, and Behavior, 2(1). DOI: 10.1037/tmb0000030
  3. Bary, E. (2020). Zoom, Microsoft Teams usage are rocketing during coronavirus pandemic. new data show. MarketWatch. Retrieved from https://www.marketwatch.com/ story/zoom-microsoft-cloud-usageare-rocketing-during-coronavirus-pandemic-newdata-show-2020-03-30
  4. Bass, B. M. (1960). Leadership, psychology, and organizational behavior, New York: Harper Brothers.
  5. Bleakley, A., Rough, D., Edwards, J., Doyle, P., Dumbleton, O., Clark, L., Rintel, S., Wade, V., & Cowan, B. R. (2022). Bridging social distance during social distancing: exploring social talk and remote collegiality in video conferencing. Human-Computer Interaction, 37(5), 404-432. DOI: 10.1080/07370024.2021.1994859
  6. Brynjolfsson, E., Horton, J. J., Ozimek, A., Rock, D., Sharma, G., & TuYe, H. Y. (2020). COVID-19 and remote work: An early look at US data (No. w27344). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  7. Christensen, H., Guastella, A. J., Mackinnon, A. J., Griffiths, K. M., Eagleson, C., Batterham, P. J., Kalia, K., Kenardy, J., Bennett, K., & Hickie, I. B. (2010). Protocol for a randomised controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of an online e-health application compared to attention placebo or sertraline in the treatment of generalised anxiety disorder. Trials, 11(1), 1-8. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-11-48
  8. Coupland, J., Coupland, N., & Robinson, J. D. (1992). "How are you?": Negotiating phatic communion1. Language in Society, 21(2), 207-230. DOI: 10.1017/S0047404500015268
  9. Crawford, A. M. & Manassis, K. (2011). Anxiety, social skills, friendship quality, and peer victimization: An integrated model. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 25(7), 924-931. DOI: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2011.05.005
  10. De Vasconcelos Filho, J. E., Inkpen, K. M., & Czerwinski, M. (2009). Image, appearance and vanity in the use of media spaces and video conference systems. In Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on Supporting group work, 253-262. DOI: 10.1145/1531674.1531712
  11. Dillard, J. P., Solomon, D. H., & Palmer, M. T. (1999). Structuring the concept of relational communication. Communications Monographs, 66(1), 49-65. DOI: 10.1080/03637759909376462
  12. Doorley, J. D., Volgenau, K. M., Kelso, K. C., Kashdan, T. B., & Shackman, A. J. (2020). Do people with elevated social anxiety respond differently to digital and face-to-face communications? Two daily diary studies with null effects. Journal of Affective Disorders, 276, 859-865. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.07.069
  13. Fish, R. S., Kraut, R. E., Root, R. W., & Rice, R. E. (1992). Evaluating video as a technology for informal communication. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, 37-48. DOI: 10.1145/142750.142755
  14. Fresco, D. M., Coles, M. E., Heimberg, R. G., Liebowitz, M. R., Hami, S., Stein, M. B., & Goetz, D. (2001). The Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale: A comparison of the psychometric properties of self-report and clinician-administered formats. Psychological Medicine, 31(6), 1025-1035. DOI: 10.1017/S0033291701004056
  15. Grayson, D. & Anderson, A. (2002). Perceptions of proximity in video conferencing. In CHI'02 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 596-597. DOI: 10.1145/506443.506501
  16. Guo, Z., D'ambra, J., Turner, T., & Zhang, H. (2009). Improving the effectiveness of virtual teams: A comparison of video-conferencing and face-to-face communication in China. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 52(1), 1-16. DOI: 10.1109/TPC.2008.2012284
  17. Hadavas, C. (2020). Tired of seeing your own face on zoom? Hide it. Slate. Retrieved from https://slate.com/technology/2020/04/how-to-hide-face-zoom.html
  18. Hassell, M. D. & Cotton, J. L. (2017). Some things are better left unseen: Toward more effective communication and team performance in video-mediated interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 200-208. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2017. 03.039
  19. Hayes, A. F. (2015). An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50(1), 1-22. DOI: 10.1080/00273171.2014. 962683
  20. Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, New York: Guilford publications.
  21. Hope, D. A. & Heimberg, R. G. (1988). Public and private self-consciousness and social phobia. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(4), 626-639. DOI: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5204_3
  22. Hudson, S. E. & Smith, I. (1996). Techniques for addressing fundamental privacy and disruption tradeoffs in awareness support systems. In Proceedings of the 1996 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, 248-257.
  23. Kim, H. Y., Kim, B., Kim, J., Shin, H., & Kim, J. (2016). Impact of immediacy and self-monitoring on positive emotion and sense of community of user: Focusing on social interactive video platform. Science of Emotion and Sensibility, 19(2), 3-18. DOI: 10.14695/KJSOS.2016.19.2.3
  24. Kuhn, K. M. (2022). The constant mirror: Self-view and attitudes to virtual meetings. Computers in Human Behavior, 128, 107110. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2021.107110
  25. Leary, M. R. & Kowalski, R. M. (1997). Social anxiety, New York: Guilford Press.
  26. Liebowitz, M. R. & Pharmacopsychiatry, M. P. (1987). Social phobia, New York: Guilford Publications.
  27. McAdams, D. P. & Powers, J. (1981). Themes of intimacy in behavior and thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(3), 573. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.40.3.573
  28. Miller, M. K., Johannes Dechant, M., & Mandryk, R. L. (2021). Meeting you, seeing me: The role of social anxiety, visual feedback, and interface layout in a get-to-know-you task via video chat. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-14. DOI:10.1145/3411764.3445664
  29. Miller, M. K., Mandryk, R. L., Birk, M. V., Depping, A. E., & Patel, T. (2017). Through the looking glass: The effects of feedback on self-awareness and conversational behaviour during video chat. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 5271-5283. DOI:10.1145/3025453.3025548
  30. Mitchell, A. S., Baker, M. G., Wu, C., Samadani, R., & Gelb, D. (2010). How do I look? An evaluation of visual framing feedback in desktop video conferencing. Tech. Rep. HPL-2010-175, HP labs, 2010, Retrieved from https://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2010/HPL-2010-175.pdf
  31. Morris, B. (2020). Seven rules of Zoom meeting etiquette from the pros. Wall Street Journal, online edition. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/seven-rules-of-zoom-meeting-etiquette-from-the-pros-11594551601
  32. Neustaedter, C. & Greenberg, S. (2012). Intimacy in long-distance relationships over video chat. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 753-762. DOI:10.1145/2207676.2207785
  33. Preacher, K. J. & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. DOI:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
  34. Rockmann, K. W. & Pratt, M. G. (2015). Contagious offsite work and the lonely office: The unintended consequences of distributed work. Academy of Management Discoveries, 1(2), 150-164. DOI:10.5465/amd.2014.0016
  35. Schinoff, B. S., Ashforth, B. E., & Corley, K. G. (2020). Virtually (in) separable: The centrality of relational cadence in the formation of virtual multiplex relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 63(5), 1395-1424. DOI: 10.5465/amj.2018.0466
  36. Sheth, & Jagdish, M. (1976). Buyer-Seller Interaction: A Conceptual Framework. Proceedings of the Association for Consumer Research. Cincinnati, OH: Association for Consumer Research, 382-386.
  37. Straus, S. G., Miles, J. A., & Levesque, L. L. (2001). The effects of videoconference, telephone, and face-to-face media on interviewer and applicant judgments in employment interviews. Journal of Management, 27(3), 363-381. DOI: 10.1177/014920630102700308
  38. Tian, Q. (2013). Social anxiety, motivation, selfdisclosure, and computer-mediated friendship: A path analysis of the social interaction in the blogosphere. Communication Research, 40(2), 237-260. DOI:10.1177/0093650211420137
  39. Wegge, J. (2006). Communication via videoconference: Emotional and cognitive consequences of affective personality dispositions, seeing one's own picture, and disturbing events. Human-Computer Interaction, 21(3), 273-318. DOI: 10.1207/s15327051hci2103_1
  40. Weisman, O., Aderka, I. M., Marom, S., Hermesh, H., & Gilboa-Schechtman, E. (2011). Social rank and affiliation in social anxiety disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 49(6-7), 399-405. DOI:10.1016/j.brat.2011.03.010