------ =_NextPart_001_01BDF941.9CE6FB09
Content-Type: text/plain
Do you know of any studies that support that? When the number of
participants grows, I would think it would be even more important to
have full-duplex so that the whole meeting can hear when somebody makes
a sound indicating they want to speak next.
Lisa
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arthur S. Hitomi [SMTP:ahitomi@zola.ICS.uci.edu]
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 1998 1:07 AM
> To: Lisa Lippert (Dusseault) (Exchange)
> Cc: 'gbolcer@XeNT.ics.UCI.edu'; FoRK@xent.ICS.uci.edu
> Subject: Re: Voice Economics
>
> Full-duplex in a one-to-one conversation maybe desirable, but in group
> conversations you can see how half duplex can actually help regulate
> conversations in these situations, esp as the number grows.
>
> Would you want to play Jeopordy without a buzzer? :)
>
>
> Art
>
>
> In message <BFF90FB6CF66D111BF4F0000F840DB850539DC62@LASSIE>, "Lisa
> Lippert (Dusseau
> >Studies of how people communicate show that overlapping (full-duplex)
> is
> >necessary. I'm pretty sure it was in Deborah Tannen's book "You Just
> >Don't Understand" that I read about this. It's a good book; Tannen's
> a
> >sociolinguist, not a pop psychologist.
> >
> >http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0345372050/forkrecommendedrA/
> >
> >Anyway, studies have shown that much of the meta-communication that
> goes
> >on in a conversation goes on during those short periods where voice
> >overlaps. Let's say you're explaining a difficult concept to me over
> a
> >half-duplex connection. How do you know when to stop explaining?
> How
> >do you know when to go into more detail? You could just go on and on
> --
> >how could I say "OK I understand that concept, but what about this?"
> In
> >a full-duplex voice-only conversation, I would sprinkle an
> encouraging
> >"mm-hmm" or discouraging "uhh...", while you are talking, as a cue to
> >you to know whether I am understanding.
------ =_NextPart_001_01BDF941.9CE6FB09
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
Do you know of any = studies that support that? When the number of participants grows, = I would think it would be even more important to have full-duplex so = that the whole meeting can hear when somebody makes a sound indicating = they want to speak next.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: Arthur S. Hitomi =
[SMTP:ahitomi@zola.ICS.uci.edu]
Sent: Friday, October 16, 1998 1:07 AM
To: Lisa Lippert (Dusseault) (Exchange)
Cc: 'gbolcer@XeNT.ics.UCI.edu'; FoRK@xent.ICS.uci.edu
Subject: =
Re: Voice Economics
Full-duplex in a one-to-one =
conversation maybe desirable, but in group
conversations you can see how half =
duplex can actually help regulate
conversations in these situations, =
esp as the number grows.
Would you want to play Jeopordy = without a buzzer? :)
Art
In message =
<BFF90FB6CF66D111BF4F0000F840DB850539DC62@LASSIE>, "Lisa =
Lippert (Dusseau
>Studies of how people communicate =
show that overlapping (full-duplex) is
>necessary. I'm pretty sure =
it was in Deborah Tannen's book "You Just
>Don't Understand" that I =
read about this. It's a good book; Tannen's a
>sociolinguist, not a pop =
psychologist.
>
>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0345372050/fork=
recommendedrA/
>
>Anyway, studies have shown that =
much of the meta-communication that goes
>on in a conversation goes on =
during those short periods where voice
>overlaps. Let's say you're =
explaining a difficult concept to me over a
>half-duplex connection. How =
do you know when to stop explaining? How
>do you know when to go into more =
detail? You could just go on and on --
>how could I say "OK I =
understand that concept, but what about this?" In
>a full-duplex voice-only =
conversation, I would sprinkle an encouraging
>"mm-hmm" or =
discouraging "uhh...", while you are talking, as a cue =
to
>you to know whether I am =
understanding.