Proceedings: GI 1997

The Effect of Turn-Taking Protocols on Children’s Learning in Mouse-Driven Collaborative Environments

Kori Inkpen, Joanna McGrenere, Kellogg Booth, Maria Klawe

Proceedings of Graphics Interface '97: Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada, 21 - 23 May 1997, 138-145

DOI 10.20380/GI1997.16

  • BibTeX

    @inproceedings{IMBK-gi97,
      title = {The Effect of Turn-Taking Protocols on Children's Learning in Mouse-Driven Collaborative Environments},
      author = {Kori Inkpen and Joanna McGrenere and Kellogg S. Booth and Maria Klawe}, 
      booktitle = {Proceedings of the Graphics Interface 1997 Conference, May 21-23, 1997, Kelowna, BC, Canada},
      year = {1997},
      month = {May},
      pages = {138--145},
      url = {http://graphicsinterface.org/wp-content/uploads/gi1997-16.pdf}
    }
    

Abstract

This study compared the influence of turn-taking protocols on children's behaviour and learning when they used either one shared mouse or two individual mice in a collaborative problem-solving environment. The two-mouse case was investigated for both a give protocol, in which the child with control of the game voluntarily relinquished control, and a take protocol, in which the child without control of the game preemptively acquired control. Children in the study took part in two sessions. In the first collaborative session, children played a problem solving puzzle game with a partner using one of the three protocols (one- mouse shared, two-mouse give, or two-mouse take). This was followed by a second solo session in which each child played the game alone. The results of the study revealed that the choice of turn-taking protocol can have a significant affect on children's learning and behaviour in a collaborative problem-solving environment. For boys, the protocol affected their access to the mouse, which in turn affected their learning: a significant correlation was found between the amount of time each boy had control of the mouse in the collaborative session and the number of puzzles that same boy could solve in a subsequent solo session. In the two-mouse take condition boys exhibited a more equal division of mouse control than did boys using either of the other two protocols.