Using the iCat as Avatar in Remote Meetings

  • Dirk Heylen
  • Mannes Poel
  • Anton Nijholt
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5398)


We compared two ways of remote participation in a meeting. One in which a video-connection existed between the remote participant and the collocated participants and one in which the remote participant was represented by an iCat. We asked the participants to rate the conversations on various dimensions. The remote participants tended to prefer the meetings with the iCat whereas the co-located participants preferred the video connection on most dimensions.


Facial Expression ICAT Condition Head Orientation Video Condition Computer Mediate Communication 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Clark, H.H.: Using Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Clayes, E.L., Anderson, A.H.: Real faces and robot faces: The effects of representation on computer mediated communication. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65(6), 480–496 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Duncan, S.: Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 23, 283–292 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Garau, M., Slater, M., Bee, S., Sassa, M.A.: The Impact of eye-gaze on communication using avatars. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 309–316 (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goodwin, C.: Conversational organisation, Interaction between Speakers and Hearers. Academic Press, New York (1981)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Isaacs, E.A., Tang, J.C.: What video can and can’t do for collaborations: a case study. In: Proceedings of the first ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pp. 199–206 (1993)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nowak, K., Biocca, F.: The effect of the Agency and Anthropomorphism on Users’ sense of Telepresence, Copresence and Social Presence in Virtual Environments. Presence 12(5) (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sellen, A.J.: Remote Conversations: the effects of mediating talk with technology. Human-Computer Interaction 10, 401–444 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Whittaker, S.: Theories and Methods in Mediated Communication. In: Graesser, A., Gernsbacher, M., Goldman, S. (eds.) The Handbook of Discourse Processes, pp. 243–286. Erlbaum, NJ (2002); Richardson, D.C., Dale, R.: Grounding dialogue: eye movments reveal the coordination of attention during conversation and the effects of common ground, COGSCY 2006 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhao, S.: Towards a Taxonomy of Copresence. Presence 12(5), 445–455 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dirk Heylen
    • 1
  • Mannes Poel
    • 1
  • Anton Nijholt
    • 1
  1. 1.Human Media InteractionUniversity of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations