Page 244 - Culture Technology Communication

Preserving Communication Context 227

participants might be uncomfortable. Therefore, we would
like the media to provide users with some control over the
virtual interpersonal distance. We are planning to provide
an option of indirect drawing using a wireless tablet or pen-
based personal computer for that purpose. (Ishii, Kobayashi
and Grudin 1993, 371–72)

While the NTT Human Interface Labs team was disbanded be-
fore they were able to pursue this research direction, the concern for
interpersonal distance was picked up and further explored by an-
other research group in our next case, MAJIC.

MAJIC (Matsushita Lab, Keio University)

Our second case is a system developed at the Matsushita Lab in the
Instrumentation and Engineering Department of Keio University, a
prestigious private university located near Tokyo. MAJIC illustrates
many research themes characteristic of Japanese CSCW. To a large
extent, it builds on earlier Japanese work at NTT on eye contact and
gaze awareness, adding a multiparticipant dimension and a more
explicit focus on the surrounding environment. This relationship to
earlier work is both professional and personal. In addition to the bib-
liographic citations in published papers, one of the designers told me
specifically that he was influenced by Dr. Ishii’s work on gaze aware-
ness. Furthermore, one of the Clearboard designers was his sempai
(upperclassman) at Keio University. The MAJIC team explains
clearly why they feel this line of inquiry is important:
When we have discussions in face-to-face situations and peo-
ple approve of a statement, we can tell by their attitude,
tone, eye movements, gestures and so forth, whether or not
they approve wholeheartedly. It is difficult, on the other
hand, to estimate how strongly they approve when we read
only the minutes without attending a meeting. Hence, one of
the purposes and/or advantages of face-to-face meetings is
that all of the participants are aware of the speaker’s intent
and the other listeners’ reactions based on both verbal and
nonverbal communication. (Okada et al. 1994, 385)

As in TeamWorkStation, there are multiple references to the im-
portance of context, orientation to the other (how what you say is
being received), and a focus on interpretation of intention rather
than surface meaning. The key design issues of MAJIC were defined