Jeni Paay

Jesper Kjeldskov
email: jesper@cs.aau.dk

Mikael B Skov

Kenton O'hara
email: kenton@gwork.org

F-formations in Cooking Together: A Digital Ethnography using YouTube

Keywords: Cooking, F-formation, proxemics, digital ethnography, YouTube

Cooking together is an important part of our lives. We cook with others not only to create a meal, but also to enhance our relationships. But how does this role of communal cooking translate into modern society where families and friends are increasingly separated physically and connected primarily online? Motivated by this question we have embraced research into the design of future networked cooking spaces. The first step has been to understand how people use physical space while cooking together. Through a digital ethnography on YouTube videos, we have analyzed the spatial configurations of people, food and technology based on Kendon's notions of spacing and orientation. Our main contribution is the identification of known F-formations as well as new formations taking place during social cooking. Based on this we suggest that given the presence of formations in the kitchen different from those found during activities that are mainly conversational, simply installing traditional videoconferencing systems in people's kitchens will not suffice in facilitating the interactions taking place there. Instead, designers need to rethink the positioning and use of cameras and displays.

Introduction

Recently, the kitchen has become a focus for HCI research. Cooking together is an important part of our lives. We cook with friends, families, colleagues and strangers to share not only the experience of creating a meal, but in the spirit of commensality, as a social event where we enhance our relationships with others through shared stories, relating daily happenings and discovering new ideas about food preparation from each other. Given this role of food and the kitchen as a place for social interaction, it is important to understand the role computer technology might play in this contextnow and in the future [START_REF] Grimes | Celebratory Technology: New Directions for Food Research in HCI[END_REF]. But how does this role of communal cooking translate into modern society where families and friends are increasingly separated physically and connected primarily online?

Motivated by this question, we have embraced research into on future cooking spaces that enable people to have meaningful and positive social food experiences while cooking together, but in different places. As with environments for the work domain [START_REF] O'hara | Blended interaction spaces for distributed team collaboration[END_REF], future kitchen environments may integrate designs that provide geographically distributed people with the experience of cooking with remote family and friends using their respective kitchens as one shared digitally "blended" cooking space. This, we believe, would give people the opportunity to interact socially with close ones living in another place as an integrated part of their daily lives and household routines, which are important aspects of keeping distant relatives and friends connected [START_REF] Nardi | Why we blog[END_REF]. Fundamental to this, we think it is important that people sharing a blended cooking space experience the same essential qualities that make collocated human-food interaction meaningful. Subscribing, as we do, to the view that kitchens are "sites where meaning is produced, as well as meals" [START_REF] Bell | Designing technology for domestic spaces: A Kitchen Manifesto[END_REF] has some profound consequences for the way one does HCI research in this domain. Firstly, it becomes more about people and their interactions in and around the kitchen, rather than just about building new technology to assist kitchen tasks. Secondly, if we wish to design compelling and meaningful new technologies that might enrich these interactions, we need to study people's practices in the kitchen and unravel and understand the richness of social interactions and experiences that happen there while cooking together.

In this paper, we explore how people arrange themselves spatially while cooking together with a "remote viewer" sharing the experience, and how new methodologies may be devised for studying this empirically. Specifically, we seek to better understand the activity of shared cooking: people's interactions with co-present others, with the physical kitchen layout, with cooking artifacts, and with remote viewers watching on video. As a source of data for this study we have turned to the vast amount of usergenerated digital video material available on YouTube depicting people cooking together in private kitchens and wanting to share this social experience with an outside audience through the Internet. Analyzing this video material can be viewed as a form of "digital ethnography" [START_REF] Masten | Digital Ethnography: The next wave in understanding consumer experience[END_REF] where the phenomena of interest are not observed firsthand but are mediated through digital data. This approach, we believe, has great potential for informing interaction design by giving us insight into human behavior and activity in real world settings, such as private and domestic life, that are inherently difficult to reach with traditional ethnographic techniques.

The paper is structured as follows. First we provide a background of related work in two areas: HCI in the kitchen, and analysis of human spatial configurations. We then turn our attention to the specific digital ethnography of cooking together that we have carried out, describing its methodological motivations and challenges and the details of the observational and analytical procedures followed. This is followed by a detailed account of our findings, describing and illustrating the formations identified in the videos, and the activities observed for creating and sustaining them. In the discussion section we take a step back from our empirical findings and reflect on their significance and implications. As the methodology used in our study is also of some novelty to the CHI community we also reflect on this approach to studying phenom-ena in domestic settings for the purpose of interaction design. Finally, we conclude on our work and outline plans for further work towards informing design.

Background and related work

Our research draws on two areas of related work: 1) HCI in the kitchen, and 2) theories about how people organize themselves in physical space.

HCI in the kitchen

A number of research efforts have begun exploring digital technologies in the support of cooking. These have included Cooks Collage [START_REF] Tran | Cook's Collage: Deja Vu Display for a Home Kitchen[END_REF], CookingNavi [START_REF] Hamada | Cooking Navi: Assistant for Daily Cooking[END_REF], Cooking with the Elements [START_REF] Bonanni | Cooking with the Elements: Intuitive Immersive Interfaces for Augmented Reality Environments[END_REF], The Living Cookbook [START_REF] Terrenghi | Kitchen Stories: sharing recipes with the Living Cookbook[END_REF], Not Enough Cooks in the Kitchen [START_REF] De Runa | Not Enough Cooks in the Kitchen[END_REF], CounterActive [START_REF] Ju | CounterActive: An Interactive Cookbook for the Kitchen Counter[END_REF], Kitchen Album [START_REF] Lagomarsino | Kitchen album: concept based on progressive user research[END_REF], and PersonalChef [START_REF] Mennicken | First-Person Cooking: A Dual-Perspective Interactive Kitchen Counter[END_REF]. These technologies vary in terms of how they approach cooking and requirements. For some, the approach has been to support the functional aspects of cooking and overcoming various difficulties with it (e.g. [START_REF] Tran | Cook's Collage: Deja Vu Display for a Home Kitchen[END_REF] and [START_REF] Hamada | Cooking Navi: Assistant for Daily Cooking[END_REF]). For others attention has been on the social meanings and practices of cooking.

According to Grimes and Harper [START_REF] Grimes | Celebratory Technology: New Directions for Food Research in HCI[END_REF], research on HCI in the context of kitchens has for the most part neglected technology design that focuses on the social experiences that we have with each other in the context of cooking and eating. Instead, the overwhelming trend has been to design "corrective technology" applications that act as a remedy for perceived problems that people have with planning, preparing and consuming food [START_REF] Grimes | Celebratory Technology: New Directions for Food Research in HCI[END_REF]. As an alternative, Grimes and Harper advocate a focus on what they call "celebratory technology" -technology that gives us positive, delightful, pleasurable and exciting experiences with food -as a potential new research and design space in HCI. Likewise, in their kitchen manifesto, Bell and Kaye [START_REF] Bell | Designing technology for domestic spaces: A Kitchen Manifesto[END_REF] advocate a kitchen/technology relationship that draws on and learns from the rich cultural history of the kitchen as a place for living and above all, a focus on those who experience the space, rather than the resident technologies. The manifesto calls for a focus on experience over efficiency and an understanding of the use of objects in the kitchen context.

Exemplifying this line of thought, research on HCI in the kitchen has recently and increasingly turned its attention to the social meanings and practices of cooking in which the kitchens are viewed as "sites where meaning is produced, as well as meals" [START_REF] Bell | Designing technology for domestic spaces: A Kitchen Manifesto[END_REF]. For example, sharing recipes as a social act (e.g. [START_REF] Terrenghi | Kitchen Stories: sharing recipes with the Living Cookbook[END_REF]) or providing mentoring support for friends and family while they learn to cook (e.g. [START_REF] De Runa | Not Enough Cooks in the Kitchen[END_REF]).

In The Living Cookbook [START_REF] Terrenghi | Kitchen Stories: sharing recipes with the Living Cookbook[END_REF], people's cooking experiences are recorded and shared in an interactive digital medium containing video and annotated audio that others may play back later. The agenda is to enable people to share cooking experiences, to educate others in cooking practice, and to suggest a sense of presence and sociability in the cooking activity. The role of technology in this design is to support intimacy, communication, education, fun and creativity in the cooking experience. It also allows people to strengthen cultural and social connections with others, and to stimulate cross-cultural as well as cross-generational interaction.

In Not Enough Cooks in the Kitchen [START_REF] De Runa | Not Enough Cooks in the Kitchen[END_REF], video conferencing and video archiving are used to facilitate collaborative cooking experiences, and to receive, record and keep cooking tips from remote friends and family. The main purpose is the teaching and learning of cooking skills by providing a medium for experienced cooks to share their knowledge with novices and giving them valuable life skills and digital keepsakes of the experience. Designed to replace phone calls and emails between family and friends when trying to learn how to cook, it caters for much more of the richness of collocated cooking, and makes cooking with remote partners a socially enjoyable experience.

Similar to these examples, our focus here is concerned with the shared experience of cooking, and using technology for bringing people across different households together socially in shared spaces for cooking. But in order to meaningfully inform technology design that are both useful and sensitive to the social and physical context that they are to operate in, we need to understand better people's daily practices in these spaces [START_REF] Bell | Designing technology for domestic spaces: A Kitchen Manifesto[END_REF].

Proxemics and F-formations

As discussed by Rogers [START_REF] Rogers | HCI Theory: Classical, Modern, and Contemporary[END_REF], a number of theories from other disciplines, new or relatively unknown to the field of HCI, are currently making their way into our field. Some of these, she argues, represent "the beginnings of a 'turn to space'", including schematic frameworks for modeling people's interactions with each other in physical space, such as proxemics and F-formations. Developed for analyzing social interactions outside the technology domain, these theories and frameworks have recently proved to be highly valuable in relation to interaction design as this domain broadens itself out to embrace the challenges of digital ecologies and pervasive and ubiquitous computing environments.

Proxemics covers a topic concerned with peoples' use of their immediate physical space in their interaction and communication with each other. It was originally developed by Edward Hall, a cultural anthropologist, in the early 1960s [START_REF] Hall | The Hidden Dimension[END_REF], but has recently gained renewed momentum in HCI as a framework for also describing and understanding people's interaction with devices and displays around them. In brief, Hall proposed that (in the USA) four interpersonal distances govern social interaction: intimate (0-0.46m), personal (0.46-1.22m), social (1.22-3.66m) and public (>3.66m). In the context of HCI this provides a useful framework for analyzing and designing interactive technology. Examples of this include Obata and Sasaki' virtual visiting system [START_REF] Obata | Office Walker: a virtual visiting system based on proxemics[END_REF] and Heaton's case studies of social interaction in virtual workspaces [START_REF] Heaton | Preserving Communication Context: Virtual Workspace And Interpersonal Space In Japanese CSCW[END_REF] in a CSCW context, and more recently in a more general interaction design context, the works of Greenberg and colleagues on Proxemic Interactions [START_REF] Greenberg | Proxemic interactions: the new ubicomp?[END_REF].

F-formations is a part of a conceptual framework about people's interpersonal spacing and orientation developed by Adam Kendon, a leading researcher in the study of gesture, in the late 1970s [START_REF] Kendon | Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters[END_REF] [START_REF] Kendon | Spacing and orientation in co-present interaction[END_REF]. The notion of F-formations helps explain how people arrange themselves spatially with respect to others, and to artifacts in different kinds of social interactions and collaborations and can also be used to explore the influence of physical environment on the interpersonal interactions taking place there.

It was developed by Kendon in response to previous studies in proxemics in order to draw attention to the fact that "participants in occasions of interactions of all sorts may enter together into a cooperative relationship to sustain, through time, a more or less constant pattern of spatial orientational arrangement" [Kendon 2012, personal communication]. Briefly described, in an F-formation system individuals have a spaced called a transactional segment, which is the space where they focus attention and manipulate artifacts. This space is defined in relationship to their lower body, and changes in size depending on the kind of activity people are doing. An F-formation is formed when the transactional segments of two or more people overlap and create a shared inner space, where the shared activity of those people occurs. This is called the o-space [START_REF] Kendon | Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters[END_REF] or the use-space [START_REF] Kendon | Spacing and orientation in co-present interaction[END_REF]. In the latter Kendon gives a series of concrete examples of different types of F-formations in interpersonal communication, such as the L-shaped formation of people standing orthogonal to each other, the vis-à-vis formation of facing each other directly, the side-by-side formations of facing the same direction, and the semi-circular formation of more than two people side-by side curving inwards to speak to each other. [START_REF] Marshall | Using F-formations to analyse spatial patterns of interaction in physical environments[END_REF] use the F-formation system for analyzing social interactions between visitors and staff in an information center for tourists. They show how the presence or absence of Fformations can explain the relationship between co-located interactions and the physical environment, and how this may inform technology design. Mentis et al. [START_REF] Mentis | Interaction proxemics and image use in neurosurgery[END_REF] conduct a similar analysis but in the context of work practices in neurosurgery theatres. This leads to insight about the spatial organization of shared work practices in this specific setting, and to understanding design implications for touchless interaction with medical technology. Other uses of F-formations in HCI include investigating the spatial relationships between humans and service robots during cooperative tasks [START_REF] Huettenrauch | Investigating Spatial Relationships in Human-Robot Interaction[END_REF], and detecting F-formations from video footage for analysing social interactive behaviour in crowded environments [START_REF] Hung | Detecting F-formations as Dominant Sets[END_REF].

Spatial organization in the kitchen. Our concerns with the spatial organisation of behavior in the context of shared cooking lies in the fact that architectural design of kitchen spaces, like other spaces [START_REF] Marshall | Using F-formations to analyse spatial patterns of interaction in physical environments[END_REF], structure the kinds of interactions and social activities that are enacted within them. People also adapt their activity patterns in respect to artifacts and others they are interacting with, and the very activity of cook-ing influences the ways in which human interaction is spatially organized in the kitchen. Working side by side at a kitchen bench, for example, influences how people communicate as opposed to working at opposite sides of a kitchen island. Facing a video camera during the interaction adds yet another level of complexity, not only to local communication, but also to the viewers' perceived distance from the cook, which affects the intimacy of the interaction. Issues such as eye gaze and field of view can all affect the nature of the interaction. How these physical aspects contribute to shaping the experience people have when cooking together is what we have aimed to study and understand.

A digital ethnography of cooking together

Our focus in this paper is on people cooking together and particularly on how they arrange themselves spatially while cooking together. As other studies have done, our approach draws on data from YouTube (e.g. [START_REF] Blythe | Critical Methods and User Generated Content: the iPhone on YouTube[END_REF] [3] [START_REF] Harley | Creating a conversational context through video blogging[END_REF] [31]) using it both as a source for video and as "a community that serves as a platform for communication and interaction" [START_REF] Rotman | The 'WeTube' in YouTube -creating an online community through video sharing[END_REF].

Using YouTube as data source

An important task for HCI researchers interested in the design of new domestic technologies is to observe and make sense of people's daily practices, so that these can meaningfully inform design and seed innovation [START_REF] Bell | Designing technology for domestic spaces: A Kitchen Manifesto[END_REF]. While this may sound simple, it actually presents a significant challenge within the context of people's homes, including their kitchens. As the movie "Kitchen Stories" [START_REF] Hamer | Kitchen Stories (Salmer fra kjøkkenet)[END_REF] so charmingly illustrates, it is not always ideal, or even desirable, to do traditional direct observation in people's homes. This is also confirmed by research, like Crabtree and Rodden [START_REF] Crabtree | Domestic Routines and Design for the Home[END_REF], concluding that although the home is relatively easy to access, such direct observation inevitably disrupts the ordinary flow of household activities and can cause people to alter their ordinary behavior. In response to these challenges, research into the domestic domain has to a large extent turned to methods of self-reporting for obtaining insight into people's daily lives with minimal interference. This has been done through various techniques and data collection media, such as cultural probes (e.g. [START_REF] Gaver | Design: Cultural probes[END_REF]), technology probes (e.g. [START_REF] Hutchinson | Technology probes: inspiring design for and with families[END_REF]), and diaries (e.g. [START_REF] Palen | When home base is not a place: parents' use of mobile telephones[END_REF]). As an alternative approach, using YouTube as a data source represents a form of "digital ethnography" [START_REF] Masten | Digital Ethnography: The next wave in understanding consumer experience[END_REF]. In digital ethnography, researchers immerse themselves in the digital world rather than physical and make use of digital data, such as written words, images, audio files, video and online communities, about the phenomenon of interest, which is often available in vast amounts today.

If chosen carefully, Blythe and Cairns argue that YouTube potentially provides several interesting avenues of inquiry as a digital on-line data source [START_REF] Blythe | Critical Methods and User Generated Content: the iPhone on YouTube[END_REF]. Using You-Tube for studying cooking together potentially gives us insight on human behavior and activity in real world settings that are inherently difficult to study using traditional ethnographical technique. As people voluntarily and enthusiastically share a variety of different cooking situations with others on YouTube, we chose this as our data source, with "purposeful sampling" [30, p. 230], for a digital ethnography of how people cook together and share this activity digitally with others. In this way, we were able to rapidly gain access to a breadth of information about a variety of people in different generations, cultures and situations documenting their own experiences of "cooking together" (figure 2). In studying the YouTube videos of people cooking together, our focus was on understanding the social aspects of cooking. In particular, we were interested in how people coordinate the activity, how they organize themselves spatially in respect to physical space and each other, the role of the food in this shared experience, and in particular how they include (or don't include) the viewer of the video in the interaction.

Analysis

Using the keyword phrase "cooking together", 169 videos were found on YouTube through a search on 15th November 2010. After discarding duplicates and unrelated videos (e.g. a song with the words "cooking together" in the lyrics), a final set of 61 videos of people cooking together remained. Inspired by Blythe and Cairns [START_REF] Blythe | Tenori-On Stage: YouTube As Performance Space[END_REF] [3], we conducted a qualitative content analysis of the 61 videos. This resulted in inductive development of the following categories: family life, family cooking, celebrities cooking, amateur cooking show, professional cooking show, documentary, educational and advertising. Family life videos typically show people cooking together either in their own homes or outdoors with family or friends. The focus is on the people, their conversations and interactions -showing everyday life in the context of food preparation. There is little or no emphasis on what is being cooked. Family cooking videos have family members either taking on the roles of co-cooks, or parents and grandparents involving children in the cooking activity and teaching them how to participate. They are typically located in the family kitchen and sharing cooking techniques with each other is important but actual recipes are seldom elaborated to the viewer. Celebrities cooking differs from a cooking show, in that the celebrities are giving the viewer a "snapshot of their ordinary lives" in the context of cooking. These videos often include a background story about the celebrities public life interwoven with the activity of creating food. Amateur cooking show videos have the format of a professional television cooking show, with introduction, recipes, techniques and helpful hints, but are created by ordinary people from their home kitchens. They appear to be created specifically for YouTube where production company approval is not necessary to become the host of your own show. Professional cooking show videos are often versions of a show that runs on an established television or cable network. These shows have professional chefs and cooking celebrities, typically filmed in a television studio kitchen. Documentary videos are similar in some ways to the family life videos, in that there is story unfolding within the food context but in the documentry, people are sharing experiences or historical events with the viewing audience while cooking. Educational videos are usually made by a specific educational institution for disemination of cooking skills, to specific learning groups. Advertising videos, although often showing people cooking together, do so with the intention of attracting customers to cooking schools, public cooking events and hotels with special cooking weekends.

Secondly, the 61 videos were analyzed from the perspective of Kendon's Fformation system [18] [19]. In this analysis we looked for the following F-formations (for two people) L-shaped (standing orthogonal), vis-à-vis (facing) and side-by-side; and (for groups of three or more people) circular, rectangular, semi-circular and linear arrangements. We also identified spatial patterns of interaction between people, artifacts, spaces and the camera (viewer perspective) to give us insight into how people were sharing activities and interacting with others and artifacts in respect to the kitchen's physical layout. For this, we used Kendon's diagramming practice for recording F-formations [START_REF] Kendon | Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters[END_REF] to "transcribe" the videos, recording patterns of behavior by creating a series of maps (figure 3) of the physical kitchen layout, showing the arrangements and movements of people and cameras within that space. Each map is time stamped (t), representing elapsed video time, and records a newly established position of individuals. People are shown as numbered ovals with two lines extending to show their transactional segment, and hence where they intersect to create an F-formation. Previous positions (dotted) and paths of movement through spaces are represented, as are artifacts currently being used. We also documented the virtual position of the camera (black square) and the field of view (dotted lines) from that position. This made it possible to identify the viewer's participation in any Fformations. Each person's current activity, the focus of the current camera shot, and the general field of view as a description (e.g., half of kitchen bench top in view) were also noted. These maps were then analyzed to identify the following: the F-formation between co-located cooks (F-f); the F-formation between us (the viewer) and the cooks (F-f(c)); the distance between cooks (Pdist); and the perceived distance between us (the viewer) and the cook (Cdist) using distance classifications of Hall [START_REF] Hall | The Hidden Dimension[END_REF]. For example, in figure 3, F-f=spooning, Pdist=intimate. This coding was then studied to identify spatial patterns supporting social connections.

Findings

In the following, we outline key findings from our analysis based on the spatial patterns unfolded in the videos. We identified patterns that aligned with the F-formations as described and illustrated by Kendon [START_REF] Kendon | Spacing and orientation in co-present interaction[END_REF]. In addition to this, we also identified a number of new patterns not described in previous work.

In our analysis we identified a total of 1592 scenes in the 61 videos (a scene being defined as a move to a new person formation or a new camera position). No discernable formation was found in 663 scenes. The remaining 929 scenes involved two or more cooks in different formations and were analyzed and coded in detail.

Known F-formations

In the analysis we identified patterns of interaction between cooks that aligned with Kendon's F-formations and were noticeably important for the shared cooking interaction. We identified the following four formations: Side-by-side, L-shaped, vis-à-vis, and semi-circular. Not surprisingly, we found no circular or rectangular formations as they would normally only occur for free-standing groups [START_REF] Marshall | Using F-formations to analyse spatial patterns of interaction in physical environments[END_REF]. The following are examples of these four formations as they were instantiated in the activity of cooking together in their own kitchens, drawn from the sample YouTube videos.

The L-shaped formation. Kendon describes the L-shaped formation as participants standing orthogonal to each other [START_REF] Kendon | Spacing and orientation in co-present interaction[END_REF]. This formation was also extensively used in the videos and was observed in 235 scenes across 43 videos. The L-shaped formation typically forms at the corner of a bench, table or stove-top, where cooks are positioned on two connected sides facing toward a central cooking task on which they are focused. Because this particular formation makes a very intimate shared central activity space, it often facilitates cooks working together on the same cooking task. One cook may be demonstrating a technique, either food preparation at a bench top or stirring food in a pot at a cook top, while the others watch. Alternatively, it is a good configuration for passing a task backwards and forwards between participants. In the situation of working with small children, the child can also be placed sitting on the bench top, so that they can see clearly and participate equally from that position in the food preparation (see figure 4). The Side-by-Side formation. The side-by-side formation occurred in 218 scenes. It was the single most used formation, and was observed in 46 videos. Side-by-side formation occurred in the kitchen when two or more cooks worked along one side of a shared bench or stove top. They may be working on a shared task, but more usually we observed that the cooks in side-by-side formation were working on concurrent but independent tasks (figure 5, bottom left). Another situation when this occurs is during instruction where one or more of the participants may be watching the main cook demonstrate a technique (figure 5, top left).

With the added dimension of the camera in the interaction, the cooks may just be standing or sitting side be side and addressing the camera directly, hence facing the same direction while having a conversation and including the viewer. The use of sideby-side is not surprising as this formation illustrates people "that are jointly concerned about something in their immediate environment" [START_REF] Kendon | Spacing and orientation in co-present interaction[END_REF]. In the kitchen, food acts as this "something" in the immediate environment and the kitchen layout (e.g. benches, table-tops) would sometimes support or enforce this formation.

Side-by-side

Semi-circular Vis-à-vis Fig. 5. Different YouTube scenes illustrating three F-formations.

The Vis-à-Vis formation. Vis-à-vis formations (where people arrange themselves face to face) were less common than the two previously illustrated formations. We identified vis-à-vis formations in 63 scenes from 25 videos. The layout of the kitchen certainly had an impact on how the vis-à-vis formation presented itself. The kitchen island design or a centrally placed kitchen table or cook-top with opposite sides accessible for working encourages this formation in food preparation. Cooks stand opposite each other while working on their cooking tasks and converse with each other face-to-face. In the scene in figure 5 (top middle), a father and his daughter work cooperatively on a shared task of shaping zucchini fritters. In the kitchen designs we observed, the width of the table or bench mostly precluded working on a shared task, but cooks could work cooperatively, in that one might be reading the recipe, while the other carries out the instructions (figure 5, bottom middle).

The Semi-circular formation. The semi-circular formation only happens in groups of more than two. In our sample videos, we identified 65 scenes from 16 videos involving three cooks. For these three cooks to form a semi-circle, they would generally be gathered around a shared task being carried out in a central shared space. The configuration is semi-circular in shape, that is, one side of the circle is open. This open side in the cooking together context was sometimes a consequence of the kitchen layout. This happened when people gathered around a stove or when younger children were placed sitting on the bench top arranged around the food preparation area (figure 5, top right). In other instances, it appears that people in the kitchen have left one side of the circle open to give the camera a view of their activity (figure 5, bottom right).

New Formations

While we identified 581 spatial-orientational arrangements that could be described using the known formations from Kendon's work [START_REF] Kendon | Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters[END_REF] [19], we also found 348 scenes that did not fit with this system. By analyzing these 348 scenes of different spatialorientational arrangements further, we have identified and named four additional types of formations according to their conversational characteristics. We have named these: wide V-shaped, Spooning, Z-shaped, and reverse L-shaped (figure 6). The following are examples of these four formations as they were instantiated in the activity of cooking together.

The wide V-shaped formation. The wide V-shaped formation is something that is peculiar to cooks positioned at a long bench top, where they are conversing or working closely together on a single task. We identified this formation in 163 scenes in 38 videos. In this formation, rather than having a side-by-side configuration, where they face forward, working in their own section of bench, they tilt their bodies slightly so that they are facing each other a bit more, but still actively engaging with an activity on the bench, or in the shared space between them. As an example, the two participants in figure 8 are having a conversation and the physical layout of the bench enforces this formation. Another example of a wide V-shaped formation was found when a father illustrates and instructs a child on how to cook.

We further noticed that if the wide V-shape becomes too acute then the participants lose connection with the bench and their cooking activity. There is a continuum of angles between the side-by-side and the L-shape formations but because of the way people work in kitchens and the popular and functional kitchen design of long bench spaces, cooking scenes often involved this very specific formation. The Spooning formation. The spooning formation describes an intimate interaction important in showing and sharing progress while cooking together. We identified 80 spooning scenes in 31 of the 61 videos. When "spooning" in a kitchen, one cook would typically approach another cook from behind to assist and to see what they are doing. This could be in front of a stovetop, or kitchen bench. This means that they are facing the same direction and share the same immediate space in front of them both. From this position they can assist each other in a difficult task (figure 8, top left) or show details of their current activity, such as setting the oven temperature, to each other (figure 8, bottom left). Sometimes this happens because there is only a small amount of space in which to show the second cook what the first is doing, such as when the first cook is working in a corner of the kitchen, or at a narrow sink.

The Z-shaped formation. The Z-shaped formation describes the interaction between two people cooking together while standing side-by-side but facing opposite directions. This formation was found in 57 scenes from 21 of the videos. Interaction takes place either by talking away from the other person, each person facing and talking forward, or by turning one's head towards the other while the torso and hands remain directed towards "ones' own work space". This is a configuration that would seldom happen in a conversational context, but is quite a comfortable way of interacting in the cooking together context. For example, a participant sitting on the bench top while talking to or interacting with the cook who is working at the same bench top (figure 8, bottom middle). Further, we saw this formation when cooks pass each other in the constrained environment of the kitchen, while keeping each other updated on current activity or simply continuing their conversation while moving between the variety of tasks and artifacts involved in preparing food (figure 8, top middle).

The reverse L-shaped formation. The reverse L-shaped configuration is another configuration peculiar to the cooking environment. In this configuration, two cooks have their bodies in an L-shaped configuration, but they are facing away from each other. We identified this formation 48 times in 21 videos. In an L-shaped formation, cooks are evidently working on different tasks, but they are coordinating, cooperating and conversing as an integral part of the production of food. Kitchen layout plays a significant role in facilitating this formation, because it is sustained by working at a bench top, stove top or sink that places the two cooks in this position. Figure 8 (right) illustrates two different kitchens and two different examples of reverse L-shaped formations. In the bottom picture, the two cooks are standing in the corner of the kitchen, enforcing an L-shape, but in reverse. As it is quite usual in kitchen design to have benches along the walls of a square room, there are inevitably corners in which two bench-tops meet. Here, two cooks can be working at right angles to each other, while talking over their shoulders to each other, or leaning over to check each other's progress (figure 8, bottom right). Alternatively a central kitchen island makes it possible for one cook to work there, while the other works at a orthogonal bench behind them (figure 8, top right). Again the two cooks continue to converse and cooperate from this position periodically rotating their heads to visually engage with one another.

Discussion and conclusions

In this paper we have explored the experience of how people cook together with a particular emphasis on how they share these experiences through the use of a video camera. More specifically we were concerned with the ways that people oriented towards each other and a range of cooking artefacts in the context of these shared experiences and how such configurations were organized with respect to particular architectural features of the kitchen space. In adopting such analytic concerns, our aim was to provide a resource for thinking about how such activities might be enabled in distributed contexts. That is, by understanding some of the ways that people configure themselves both with respect to features of the local environment and other remote actors and audiences, how might we exploit these features in the configuration of distributed cooking experiences.

One of the ways that we have chosen to explore these concerns, and that forms the particular focus of the current paper, is through an analysis of a rather unusual data resource. This data resource consisted of corpus of existing YouTube videos created and posted by people documenting their various forms of shared cooking experiences. What is intriguing about such a resource is that it provides a view into a wide range of kitchen environments and cooking experiences, revealing both insights into local configuration patterns, but also some particular ways that people choose to organize and present themselves and their environment to a remote audience as mediated by a video camera. While the primary focus of the paper is with what is revealed about the shared cooking experience under such video mediated circumstances, a secondary concern is with some reflections on this unusual methodological approach.

Spatial Arrangements in Cooking Together

Drawing inspiration from Kendon's F-formation framework for understanding spatial configurations in social interactions, what was apparent from our video analysis was that there were a wide range of spatial configurations adopted by people in the context of sharing their cooking experiences. While some of these were of the vis-à-vis variety that one might typically associate with a standard videoconference model, what was of significance was the number of other configurations identified. Of these, we observed the use of three configurations that aligned closely with those identified in Kendon's original set of conversational arrangements, namely side-by-side, L-shaped, and semi-circular. But the analysis also revealed the use of four additional patterns at play in these contexts, namely wide V-shape, spooning, Z-shape and reverse L-shape. While the successful adoption of these varied different spatial configurations is of interest in itself, what is of particular concern is why such patterns are in evidence in these cooking experiences. That is, what is it about the activities that constitute these experiences and what is it about the environmental contexts that elicit these patterns? Firstly, kitchens are not free-form neutral spaces in which the collaborators can configure themselves without constraint. Rather, we see how people configure themselves with respect to particular physical features of the kitchen layout (e.g. benches, stoves, tables) as they engage in various cooking activities. As an example, several cooks from our videos formed L-shaped formations at the corner of a bench or stovetop where they would be positioned on two connected sides facing toward a central shared cooking task. It was the physical kitchen layout that encouraged the cooks to stand in the L-shaped pattern. Similarly, the side-by-side formations observed were generally due to a straight length of bench, which influenced their positioning, as they stood against it, next to each other. These physical constraints will shift and change in the ongoing trajectory of the cooking. Such constraints in the local environment, then, will be an important consideration for us in the context of potential distributed arrangements for these activities, in particular as they are accommodated over time.

Secondly, what we see in these new and varied forms of spatial configurations are a broader set of collaborative goals and activities and wider set of roles and ways in which people choose to participate. For example, people may work together on a task, they might perform separate activities in parallel, one might be showing others how to cook through visual demonstration or by guiding hands on-learning from behind. For some, the cooking is a focal point of the interaction, for others, it is an incidental part of being together -a context in which social interaction and conversation are managed even when attention is focused elsewhere. What we see in the analysis is how some of the particular spatial arrangements we observed were, in part, contingent on these activity characteristics wide, e.g. V-shaped formation (when two cooks are working at a long top bench) or spooning when teaching through hands-on learning.

The implications for design from these insights are subtle but important. Our study exemplified that cooking together is a somewhat complex activity and that installing a simple videoconference system in the kitchen will not cater for the rich social interactions taking place around food preparation that makes it a meaningful and positive experience. The identification of new formations when cooking together has inspired us to rethink the kinds of positioning, images and audio that need to be supported if we are to create a blended cooking experience for people distributed geographically.

In terms of camera and screen positions in kitchens, we are inspired to move away from the traditional fixed wide-angle and stovetop views towards more dynamic and intimate views supporting the shared cooking experiences that we observed. In particular, the Spooning formation draws us to consider technology configurations capable of reproducing close-up over-the-shoulder views to provide the intimate and informative aspect seen by the person behind. From the reverse L and Z-formations we noticed that in kitchens preparation and social interaction are interwoven, not discrete activities, and that although the cooking activity and kitchen architecture may draw cooks away from typical conversational formations, cooks continue talking to each other, even when facing opposing directions.

These observations indicate that any technology supporting the flow of activity and conversation could not do so from a single vantage point if it is to reproduce the intimacy of the person-to-person interaction. Audio sampling would need to take into account current body and head positioning of cooks, and a constant digital feed of images of the food, the cooks or both may not even be necessary. At the same time, we can see that moving about, working on different cooking tasks and swiveling your head to engage with the other person works well in particular patterns within the kitchen space. The implication being that given a particular spatial kitchen design it should be possible to predict locations for screens to provide an effective blended cooking experience. These are design implications that we will explore in the future, and that we encourage others to consider too.

Digital Ethnography for Design

Methodologically we have explored a "digital ethnography" approach to gaining insight into activities in everyday life in people's private homes through user-created videos posted on YouTube. While this is not the first study in HCI research to do so, we still think it is worth reflecting a bit on this approach to empirical studies in domestic settings for the purpose of informing interaction design. Two things one could criticize the YouTube approach to ethnography for are that 1) it might not provide a representative picture of the behavior of the general population, and 2) the presence of the camera may cause people to behave differently than they normally would. These are valid concerns and certainly warrant further thinking. They are, however, not new concerns pertaining only to the use of YouTube videos, but known issues in empirical research for domestic computing. Our perspective on the subject is that in order to make reasonable judgment about methodological appropriateness one needs to consider the purpose of the study. From this perspective, many empirical user studies in HCI research differ considerably from empirical studies of people in, for example, sociology and anthropology, where ethnography has its origins. In contrast, HCI researchers might not be aiming at theory about people and society as such, but instead "just" be interested in informing and inspiring interesting and novel interaction design. In this case, traditional ethnography might be a hindrance rather than an enabler of innovation. To deliberately focus on "extreme" users rather than mainstream (the IDEO approach) can sometimes be more useful for design. In our experience from this study, we found that using YouTube as our data source enabled us to gain understanding and inspiration valuable for future design. We were able to observe a broad cohort of people doing interesting social interaction in their kitchens beyond what we possibly could have achieved in a similar time frame by going into the field. Furthermore we were able to do purposeful sampling [START_REF] Patton | Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods[END_REF] and focus on particular observations and emergent themes as the study evolved.

In terms of the camera influencing people's behavior it was our clear impression that this was not a threat to validity. On the contrary, the obvious presence of the camera sometimes actually added to the insight gained, as people would be using it actively in communicating with the remote viewers -something in itself of great importance when interested in supporting distributed social cooking. One could say that the presence of cameras in people's kitchens was so overt that it was almost covert.

Designing Technologies for Cooking Together

The implications for design from these insights are subtle but important. Our study exemplified that cooking together is a somewhat complex activity and that installing a simple videoconference system in the kitchen will not cater for the rich social interactions taking place around food preparation that makes it a meaningful and positive experience. The identification of new formations when cooking together has inspired us to rethink the kinds of positioning, images and audio that need to be supported if we are to create a blended cooking experience for people distributed geographically.

In terms of camera and screen positions in kitchens, we are inspired to move away from the traditional fixed wide-angle and stovetop views towards more dynamic and intimate views. In particular, the Spooning formation draws us to consider technology configurations capable of reproducing close-up over-the-shoulder views to provide the aspect seen by the person behind. From the reverse L and Z-formations we noticed that cooking and conversations are interwoven, not discrete activities, and that although the cooking activity and kitchen architecture may draw cooks away from typical conversational formations, they continue talking to each other, even when facing opposing directions. These observations indicate that any technology supporting the flow of activity and conversation could not do so from a single vantage point if it is to reproduce the intimacy of the person-to-person interaction. Audio sampling would need to take into account current body and head positioning of cooks, and a constant digital feed of images of the food, the cooks or both may not even be necessary. At the same time, we can see that moving about, working on different cooking tasks and swiveling your head to engage with the other person works well in particular patterns within the kitchen space. The implication being that given a particular spatial kitchen design it should be possible to predict locations for screens to provide an effective blended cooking experience. These are design implications that we will explore in the future, and that we encourage others to consider too.

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1. Schematic examples of different F-formations: (a) side-by-side, (b) L-shaped, (c) vis-á-vis, (d) semi-circular

Fig. 2 .

 2 Fig. 2. YouTube video of "cooking together"

Fig. 3 .

 3 Fig. 3. F-formation Map of YouTube Video 57

Fig. 4 .

 4 Fig. 4. A YouTube scene illustrating a L-shaped formation with three cooks

Fig. 6 .

 6 Fig. 6. Schematic examples of new formations: (a) wide V-shaped, (b) Spooning, (c) Z-shaped, (d) reverse L-shaped

Fig. 7 .

 7 Fig. 7. A scene illustrating a wide V-shaped formation

Fig. 8 .

 8 Fig. 8. Different YouTube scenes illustrating new formations

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Adam Kendon for valuable comments on our research.


Kenton Williams
email: kjwillia@media.mit.edu

Cynthia Breazeal
email: cynthiab@media.mit.edu

Reducing Driver Task Load and Promoting Sociability through an Affective Intelligent Driving Agent (AIDA)

Keywords: Affective HCI, Human-robot interaction, Novel user interfaces and interaction techniques

des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

Introduction

Given the substantial amount of time people spend driving, there is an increasing demand for enjoyable in-car experiences that do not compromise safety. To make better use of their time, drivers tend to multi-task (e.g. checking traffic conditions, exchanging texts, etc.) by manipulating their In-Vehicle Infotainment (IVI) systems or mobile devices. Interacting with such devices while driving results in high cognitive load, which can amplify the driver's lack of focus and could lead to accidents. While several IVI systems have been designed to keep the driving experience as safe as possible, it is still inconvenient for drivers to limit themselves to the systems that are part of the car. Many users would like to access their favorite applications everywhere, particularly inside their cars, despite the fact that some of these applications were not designed for a driving context. Many vehicles fail to provide a seamless transition for drivers as they enter and exit the vehicle since data usually does not flow into the car unless additional devices are brought in, and used while driving.

In addition to safety, social and emotional factors play a vital role in the driving experience, yet many IVI systems neglect these influences. For instance, car manu-facturers do consider social factors of their driver demographic, like personality and emotion, as key aspects of car design [START_REF] Bayley | Vehicle Aesthetics and their Impact on the Pedestrian Environment[END_REF]. Further, the driver's emotional state can have a significant impact on driver behavior and safety. Tired or stressed drivers are less likely to fully focus on the road, as compared to alert drivers. And angry, frustrated drivers are more prone to road rage, as compared to happy drivers.

These issues indicate a need for an IVI system that reinforces safety, manages information from the environment and the driver's personal device, and interacts with the driver in a social manner. Integrating these aspects into a unified architecture could make the driving experience safer, more efficient, and overall, more enjoyable.

Related Work

Tchankue, Wesson and Vogts addressed driver distraction while texting by presenting information upon arrival, and additional cues were included to express the priority level of the message [START_REF] Tchankue | The Impact of an Adaptive User Interface on Reducing Driver Distraction[END_REF]. These cues would allow the driver to decide when to deal with the received message. They found that these informative interruption cues were learned quickly and identified accurately to reduce cognitive load. However, this work does not explore the social aspect of driving and the possibility of taking proactive actions that reach out to other applications to offer more support to the driver. Nass and Brave concluded that matching driver emotions with the IVI system's tone of voice improves overall in-car performance [START_REF] Nass | Wired for Speech: How Voice Activates and Advances the Human-Computer Relationship[END_REF]. Matching happy drivers with an enthused voice and upset drivers with a subdued voice resulted in superior driving performance as opposed to matching opposite pairs. In [START_REF] Mcallister | Towards a Non-Contact Driver-Vehicle Interface[END_REF], affective speech interfaces were explored as a means of seamless driver-vehicle communication. While these works reveal the benefits of speech-based interfaces, they do not explore information delivery in an expressive, sociable way to improve the quality of communication. If the IVI can express itself in a way that feels natural and familiar to the driver, then there could be a deeper understanding of the messages that it conveys.

Technologies like Bluetooth headsets and docking stations on windshields and dashboards allow drivers to access their mobile devices without compromising safety [START_REF] Bühler | Safety and Operating Issues for Mobile Human-Machine Interfaces[END_REF]. In [START_REF] Bose | Terminal Mode -Transforming mobile devices into automotive application platforms[END_REF], a system was designed that integrates the IVI system and the user's smartphone. Mobile devices run all phone services, while the IVI system is responsible for all input/output functions to handle a wider range of applications. While these systems are convenient, they degrade the user experience because they are highly reactive. The driver still has to initiate many actions to obtain necessary information.

Core Contribution

With motivations in mind from the previous sections, we have developed an Affective Intelligent Driving Agent (AIDA) [START_REF] Foen | Exploring the Human-Car Bond through an Affective Intelligent Driving Agent[END_REF], a socially expressive robot that acts as a friendly, in-car assistant, Fig. 1. AIDA uses the driver's mobile device as its face. Thus, AIDA uses app-based functionality to display facial expressions, manage and deliver task-specific information, and leverage aspects of the driver's daily life outside of the vehicle for deep personalization. AIDA allows users to accomplish their driving tasks while promoting in-car safety by keeping the phone out of the driver's hands. Since AIDA acts as an intermediary between the driver, the phone's applications, the vehicle and the environment, people will not lose access to the applications they need to perform their activities. Further, as opposed to traditional methods of driver-vehicle communication, e.g. flashing icons and chiming sounds, AIDA communicates with the driver through speech, coupled with expressive body movements.

System Framework

The robot consists of a five degree-of-freedom head and neck mechanism, which sits seamlessly in the dashboard when recessed, but conveys stronger expressions when extended. An Android smartphone acts as the face of the robot. The robot's plastic head shell was designed so that the driver can easily snap in the mobile device. The Android phone is the core of AIDA's framework, which manages internal apps and sensor data, as well as communicates with the physical robot. We have developed an AIDA app, which encapsulates all of this functionality, displays facial expressions, and interconnects other apps. The AIDA app also queries external sources like the Internet for further assistance. The driver communicates with the device via speech commands and to a lesser extent, through tactile interactions.

In addition to the phone's standard apps, we have developed AIDA-specific apps (excluding the LTTS Susan app which was purchased through the Google Play Store) to assess AIDA's effectiveness as a proactive, social driving companion.

(a) LTTS Susan -A text-to-speech engine used to convert written text to verbal utterances using a female voice. This app is used to verbalize emoticons and text statements that the driver may receive during the driving task. (b) Gas Station Finder (GSF) -Finds nearest gas stations given the driver's current location. Once the driver selects a station, the app navigates them appropriately. (c) Travel Time Calculator (TTC) -Determines how long it will take for the driver to navigate to a certain location. The driver inputs an address and the app determines their travel time given the driver's current GPS coordinates. (d) AIDA -This app integrates all context-specific apps into a seamless architect ture, while an expressive face acts as the main interface. The driver interacts with this app via speech and to a lesser extent, through touch. (e) R1D1 -A communication hub between the phone and robot [START_REF] Isla | A layered brain architecture for synthetic characters[END_REF]. It sends motor positions to the robot given commands from the AIDA app.

Experiment

Our experiment examines peoples' attitudes towards AIDA and assesses user interactions with AIDA compared to a mobile device during mock driving tasks. For now, we are not assessing AIDA's impact on driver car handling (e.g. steering, response time, etc.). Instead, we are evaluating AIDA's ability to provide a more seamless way for the driver to handle the data flow between themselves, the car, and the outside world while promoting sociability.

Protocol

Upon arrival, participants were given an orientation, which explained the procedures of the experiment. We demonstrated how to use the smartphone including all necessary apps and services. Users were allowed to practice with the phone until they felt comfortable using it for the experiment. Users were then placed in an in-car environment where a laptop mounted atop a dashboard/steering wheel rig displayed a mock driving system. Users were videotaped while they performed the 15-minute task. Last, participants filled out a questionnaire regarding the interaction.

Experimental Conditions

Three conditions were used for the evaluation, Fig. 2. In Case PHONE, users completed the task with the smartphone alone, Fig. 2 (left). People used the Messaging, Calendar, Contacts, GSF, and TTC apps to assist them. This is similar to the way drivers currently use their smartphones in their vehicles. In Case AGENT, users completed the task with the AIDA app, while the phone was mounted on a stationary dock, Fig. 2 (middle). This resembles existing in-car embedded screens and docking stations for driver assistance. In Case ROBOT, users completed the task with the AIDA app attached to the physical robot, Fig. 2 (right). To minimize distractions, the robot was programmed to move only when the car was stationary in the mock driving system. This explores an in-car interface that fuses driving assistance with sociability.

Experimental Task

Users had two events to attend while stress-inducing phone alerts and vehicle warnings occurred throughout the interaction. We encouraged users to act as naturally as possible and to perform any in-car actions (i.e., signaling, lane switching, accelerating, braking, etc.) that they would normally do while driving in the real world. Thus, users had the choice to make/answer phone calls or to send/read text messages. The R1D1 app handled communication between the driving system and phone/AIDA. Two events were pre-programmed into the phone's calendar: 1) Lunch with the user's fictitious friend named Jaylen and 2) Salsa dancing lessons with another fictitious friend named Nancy. The locations and contact information associated with these events were also stored. The participant's goal was to arrive at these two events on time in the mock driving system. However, we crafted the system to force the user to become late for their first event due to traffic, irrespective of their driving performance. We also fashioned a low-gas vehicle warning when the user navigated to the second event. We also made phone calls and sent text messages to the user (pretending to be Nancy and Jaylen) at critical moments throughout the task. We monitored the interaction remotely in order to send these alerts at the appropriate times.

In PHONE, to navigate to the respective events, participants launched the Calendar app to find the appropriate event addresses. Once they knew the address, they then launched the TTC app to figure out their estimated travel time. We programmed the mock driving system to activate only once the user's travel time was established. If users chose to respond to our texts/calls throughout the interaction, they had to do so while trying to focus on the driving task. If users wanted to fill their gas tank in response to the low-gas warning, they launched the GSF app to assist them.

In AGENT, participants launched the AIDA app and AIDA proactively navigated the user to the event, which made beginning the task more seamless. Because the AIDA app encapsulates the Calendar and TTC apps, AIDA is aware of the driver's contacts and calendar events before they even enter the vehicle. Further, contextual awareness allows AIDA to better mitigate data flow between the driver and outside environment. For example, when the driving system notified the driver that they were late for their first event, AIDA preemptively asked the user if they wanted to send a text to Jaylen (i.e. us) notifying him of their tardiness. This way, users could communicate with the outside world while focusing on the driving task. Also, if users wanted to fill their tank in response to the low-gas warning, AIDA preemptively navigated them to the nearest station since the GSF app is integrated into the AIDA app.

In ROBOT, the interaction was similar, as previously described in AGENT. However, in addition to proactive assistance, the AIDA robot elicited direct non-verbal cues to the driver via body movements. Expressive body movements were coupled with AIDA's messages to the driver to promote deeper sociability.

Hypotheses

Taking insights from works in anthropomorphic interface technology, we predict three hypotheses. In [START_REF] Nass | Computers are social actors[END_REF], it was determined that affective interfaces had a major impact on reducing mental overload. Relating this work to our driving task, we predict: H1 -Task Load: AGENT and ROBOT users will find the experimental task less mentally demanding and easier to complete than PHONE users.

In [START_REF] Kidd | Comparison of social presence in robots and animated characters[END_REF], people felt a stronger sense of cooperation and sociability with a robotic assistant versus an expressive agent. Thus, we predict: H2 -Co-Supportive Teaming: AGENT and ROBOT users will see AIDA as an equal partner more than PHONE users with the smartphone. Further, this sentiment will be stronger felt in ROBOT than in AGENT.

H3 -Impact of Embodiment: ROBOT users will feel a deeper social bond with AIDA as a robot than AGENT users with AIDA as an on-screen agent only.

Dependent Measures

Hypotheses were evaluated through questionnaire responses and video footage. Survey questions from accepted sources provided us with standard methods to assess sociability and cooperation [START_REF] Takayama | I'm sorry, Dave: I'm afraid I won't do that: social aspects of human-agent conflict[END_REF] and cognitive load [START_REF] Sweller | Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning[END_REF]. Video data was used to assess user attention and mood. We coded for eye gaze, facial expressions, gestures, utterances and in-car actions. We define positive affect as smiles, laughs, excitement and positive utterances/gestures expressed by participants. Conversely, we define negative affect as frowns, confusion, anger, sadness and negative utterances/gestures.

Results

We recruited 44 participants (13 PHONE, 17 AGENT, and 14 ROBOT) from the {location} area. There were 20 males, 24 females and the mean age was 28.6 years.

Questionnaires were scored on a 5-point Likert Scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree). Mean (M) and Standard Deviation (σ) values of user responses were calculated for each experimental condition, Fig. 3. ANOVA F-values (AFV) were calculated to assess global variance. Pair-wise comparisons were then found using the Tukey-Kramer Method (TKM).

Video footage was transcribed by two objective individuals for behaviors discussed in Section 7. Krippendorff's alpha criterion was used to determine inter-coder reliability where α-values between 0.8 and 1 (inclusive) suggest acceptable consistency. We found α = 0.873 for key behaviors highlighted in Table 1. Pair-wise comparisons between PHONE-AGENT (T PA ), PHONE-ROBOT (T PR ) and AGENT-ROBOT (T AR ) were then found using TKM, Table 1. H1 -Fig. 3 (H1) shows the average replies to questions regarding high task load during the experiment. AFV revealed that most PHONE users felt that they experienced a high task load while AGENT and ROBOT users largely disagreed (F(2,41) = 3.88, p = 0.029). TKM comparisons showed significant differences between each pair-wise group (T(40,3), all p < 0.05). Thus, ROBOT users felt less exhausted by the task than other users. Table 1 (b) illustrates that PHONE users expressed more negative affect throughout the task. TKM comparisons, T(40,3), showed significant differences between PHONE-AGENT and PHONE-ROBOT, but not AGENT-ROBOT.

H2 -Fig. 3 (H2) shows the mean responses to questions regarding the user's feeling that they were working as a team with the phone or AIDA to accomplish the driving task. PHONE users did not feel a sense of equal partnership with the phone as compared to AIDA users (F(2,41) = 10.26, p = 0.0003). TKM comparisons, T(40,3), showed significant differences between all pair-wise groups. Thus, users felt that the AIDA robot was more of a supportive teammate than the static AIDA display.

H3 -Table 1 (a) shows that AIDA users expressed more positive affect as compared to PHONE users (F(2,41) = 4.92, p = 0.039). TKM comparisons, T(40,3), revealed that ROBOT users expressed significantly more positive affect than AGENT users. Fig. 3 (H3) shows the mean responses to questions regarding the feeling that a mutual social bond existed between the user and AIDA. Users felt more mutual social awareness with the AIDA robot than the static display (F(1,29) = 5.89, p = 0.003).

Discussion

H1 -Task Load: Validated. Since AIDA users did not need to manipulate the device as much as PHONE users, they found the task less mentally demanding.

H2 -Co-Supportive Teaming: Validated. Due to its proactive support, AIDA was seen as an equal partner during the mock driving task more than the smartphone. This sentiment was stronger felt with the AIDA robot than the static agent.

H3 -Impact of Embodiment: Validated. The AIDA robot was able to elicit more personally directed non-verbal cues to the driver. Thus, users felt a deeper social bond with the embodied robot than the static display.

This work provides initial insights into AIDA's effectiveness at reducing task load and promoting sociability. Our results suggest that AIDA has the potential to better support drivers than smartphones alone during simulated driving tasks. They also suggest that the AIDA robot can promote sociability better than the static agent. Further investigation will explore AIDA's effectiveness during real-world driving tasks.

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1. In-car concept of the Affective Intelligent Driving Agent (AIDA).

Fig. 2 .

 2 Fig. 2. Three experimental conditions.

Fig. 3 .

 3 Fig. 3. Mean (M) and Standard Deviation (σ) of questionnaire responses (error = ± σ).

Table 1 .

 1 Observations from video data with Tukey-Kramer Method (TKM) comparisons.


Lene Nielsen

Kira Storgaard Nielsen

Jan Stage

Jane Billestrup

Going Global With Personas

Keywords: personas, scenarios, cross culture, international, design

The persona method is widely used and commonly described both in scientific literature and in case-based blogs. Most often the descriptions point to a local context with local user groups and it is difficult to find writings on use of the method in an international context and in globally distributed teams. This paper reports from a qualitative study conducted in 2012/13 within 13 Danish companies and points to how design teams apply several different strategies when end-users are distributed worldwide. Moreover it shows how the designers value the strength of the method to provide common grounds for the team, especially for team distributed across countries.

Introduction

Personas are descriptions of fictitious users and it is recommended that they get constructed from different forms of field data [START_REF] Nielsen | Personas -User Focused Design[END_REF], such as surveys, user interviews, observations, and a combination hereof. The method enables empathy and engagement in the end-users [START_REF] Nielsen | Engaging Personas and Narrative Scenarios[END_REF] and helps designers to imagine the persona in a future use situation. Personas are used for different design activities that are typically explored in stories -scenarios -that describe future possibilities in an easily accessible way and in a format that is easy to change. The persona method has developed from being a method for IT system development to being applied in many other contexts, including development of products, marketing, communication planning, and service design. The persona descriptions have over the years developed a set layout. The persona has a name, the description is most often 1-2 pages long, and has several subsections that describe the persona's characteristics, life, behaviors, and preferences. Most often a photo accompanies the description [START_REF] Long | Real or Imaginary -the Effect of Using Personas in Product Design[END_REF].

The perceived benefits of personas for design range from increasing the focus on users and their needs, being an effective communication tool, to having direct design influence, such as leading to better design decisions and defining the product's feature set [START_REF] Cooper | The Inmates Are Running the Asylum[END_REF][START_REF] Cooper | About Face 3.0: The Essentials of Interaction Design[END_REF][START_REF] Pruitt | Personas: Practice and Theory[END_REF][START_REF] Ma | Introducing User Profiles and Personas into Information Systems Development[END_REF][START_REF] Miaskiewicza | Personas and User-centered Design: How Can Personas Benefit Product Design Processes?[END_REF][START_REF] Pruitt | The Persona Lifecycle: Keeping People in Mind Throughout Product Design[END_REF]. The method is criticized for: being too founded on qualitative data and nonscientific, being difficult to implement, not being able to describe actual people as it only describes characteristics, and for preventing designers meeting actual users [START_REF] Nielsen | Personas -User Focused Design[END_REF].

Despite criticism the common perceived benefits are two-fold: when designing products the method facilitates that designers remember that they differ from the end-users, and that the method enables designers to envision the end-user's needs and wants. Furthermore the method creates empathic understandings of users and breaks the designers' automated perceptions of end-users, which are grounded in individual experiences and not in data. Finally the persona method supports a common and aligned understanding of the end-users that is shared among project teams. Most persona descriptions are to be used for country specific projects, but international companies also use the method in projects that are aimed at an international audience and used by globally distributed design teams. In this paper we investigate the strategies applied when Danish companies develop personas for an international audience, the outcomes, and the perceived benefits and difficulties.

Creating personas for an international audience is not well described in the literature. Putnam et. al. [START_REF] Putnam | Communicating About Users in ICTD: Leveraging HCI Personas[END_REF] describes two cases of conveying data for personas from Kyrgyzstan and the Andhra Pradesh region of India and the strategies they employed for the persona descriptions that were to be used by designers, developers, and other stakeholders not from these regions. One of the strategies was to use scenarios in the persona descriptions to convey cultural and lifestyle differences.

Snyder et. al. [START_REF] Snyder | Personas on the Move: Making Personas for Today's Mobile Workforce[END_REF] describe a case where they discussed three approaches to integrating cultural differences into persona descriptions: 1) A separate persona for each culture and for each task. 2) U.S. based persona descriptions, each including sections with cultural differences. 3) One persona from each country visited, with the cultural differences as part of the descriptions. In this case the team realized that there were

!i!lang!Jd,!og!selvom!de!bliver!i!tvivl!om,!hvorvidt!revisoren! rådgiver!dem!rigJgt,!så!beholder!de!fortsat!revisoren.!! ! !"!!Vi!spurgte!revisoren!om!vi!kunne!traekke!procestøm!fra,!men!e6er!et!år,!var!der!stadig!ikke! sket!noget.!Revisoren!gad!bare!ikke!tage!sig!af!det.!Hos!Skat!fandt!vi!ud!af,!at!vi!godt!kan!traekke! det!fra,!men!kun!3!år!?lbage,!selvom!fejlen!har!eksisteret!i!15!år.!Men!vi!fik!da!50.000!?lbage.!Så! ski6ede!vi!revisor!?l!en!statsautoriseret,!men!vi!fik!sådan!en!dårlig!behandling.!Som!om!vi!var!et! stort!selskab,!så!måHe!vi!?lbage!?l!den!gamle,!selvom!det!går!traegt.!! ! De!føler!sig!nedprioriteret!af!revisorerne!Jl!fordel!for!de!større!selskaber!-!isaer!af!de! statsautoriserede,!og!de!føler!at!de!er!nødt!Jl!at!"! kende!regler!selv.!! ! !"!Revisoren!kendte!ikke!reglerne!om!repraesenta?on!godt!nok.!Jeg!kan!godt!se,!at!revisoren! skal!ind!i!

mange!spidsfindige!detaljer!om!vores!virksomhed,!men!det!kostede!os!sidste!år!et! kaempe!beløb.!I!år!har!jeg!taenkt,!at!jeg!skal!kende!reglerne!ned!i!alle!hjørner.!!

Revisoren!er!specialiseret!i!områder.!De!områder,!de!ikke!kender!så!meget!Jl,!får! virksomhederne!ikke!rigJg!hjaelp!Jl.!! Dorte på 47 arbejder i sin mands trykkerifirma. Hannes svigermor oplaerte hende i bogføring for 20 år siden. Hun er uddannet fødselshjaelper, men da hendes mand arvede trykkerifirmaet, overtog hun sin svigermors plads som bogfører. Hun bruger ca. 20 timer om ugen på bogføring, og resten af tiden er hun blaeksprutte og betjener kunder, tager telefonen, laver kaffe og andre småopgaver.

Lilli er 39 og er ansat som projektmedarbejder i et mindre konsulenthus. Hun er uddannet merkonom, og er den af de ansatte, som har bedst styr på det økonomiske. Hun har derfor påtaget sig at stå for bogføringen i virksomheden, og bruger ca. few cultural differences. They ended up with persona descriptions from several countries as a reminder to the team that the product is used in different countries and cultures.

Finally we identified a case description by Windows International Program Manager's team in Pruitt and Adlin [START_REF] Pruitt | The Persona Lifecycle: Keeping People in Mind Throughout Product Design[END_REF] where the team identified personas for each ethnographic region and used a scoring on how different these were on selected parameters from the US personas. The team then defined the differences in the persona descriptions in accordance to US.

2

The study

This paper reports from a qualitative study with 28 participants from 13 Danish companies that are experiences in using the persona method. Their experiences range from 6 month to more than 10 years. The study took place from October 2012 to January 2013. The study focuses on the companies' use of the persona method. The interviews are analyzed for statements on cross-cultural issues such as international personas that cover several nationalities and the use of the method in globally distributed design teams.

Finding the companies

In order to find the companies that have experience in using personas we used different online channels such as: personas.dk, Infinit.dk and Linkedin groups such as User Centric Network, Service Design in Denmark, and Sigchi.dk, we advertised for companies in two news letters respectively from Infinit and Sigchi.dk, and used word of mouth.

To broaden the perspective and get companies outside of our own network companies were found by search on keywords such as: personas and usability.

The intention was to cover public and private institutions, as well as large, middlesized and small companies.

In the end we did interviews at public institutions: Danish Broadcast, The Royal Danish Library, The Danish Tax Authorities, Aarhus Libraries. Large private companies: Danske Bank, Microsoft Solutions, Safecom, and Widex. Middle sized private companies: Mjølner Informatics, AdviceDigital. And small private companies: Centre for Digital Pedagogy, Value-Creating Construction, and The Food Culture Zone.

Method of analysis

The participants were asked to describe their processes of work: how they collect and use data, and how they design and use the personas.

In line with Kvale's [START_REF] Kvale | InterView. København[END_REF] advice to start the analysis already when interviewing we began identifying the recurring issues of working with personas in a global setting already in the interview situations. Furthermore we recorded the interviews in the audio transcription tool F4 and while listening to the interviews, passages focusing on use of personas in an international or global perspective, were identified through the method of condensation [START_REF] Kvale | InterView. København[END_REF]. The condensed transcripts have been analyzed, first for statements on use and use situations, secondly for statements on global issues.

Then the statements were mapped into categories, in order to identify which benefits, challenges, and problems the companies face when using personas within an international setting. Moreover which strategies they use to overcome the challenges.

As this study is part of a larger project about the use of personas in general, it has been possible in all phases of the analysis to compare the national and international perspective thus to identify the additional problems and benefits of the method when companies face an international user group.

Findings

The value of personas

In general the benefits of using personas for design are viewed from a strategic level and with a production perspective.

C11: "We are still quite technically oriented and quite nerdy when we develop things. And now it's the customer's needs that are described first. I'm not saying this happens in all the cases, but it is a step towards it. This is totally different from what we did before. And personas has helped to understand what kind of needs it is you have to cover."

On a strategic level the benefits are:

• It provides guidance in the development process as it enables a focus on user needs instead of project participants' likings. • The focus on user needs improves the definition of the project. • In the decision making process the scenarios creates a clear understanding of what the users need and what goals the company wants to achieve. • In the discussions the project participants' implicit understandings becomes explicit. • A participant from IT consultancy mentions that they use the method to confront their clients with their lack of visions.

From a production perspective the benefits are:

• When working agile it helps prioritizing user stories 1 .

• The method creates an understanding of how the product creates value for the endusers.

• The personas are used to create use cases and scenarios. 1 User stories are short descriptions of functionalities [START_REF] Schwaber | Agile Software Development with Scrum[END_REF].

3.2

The value of persona in an international perspective

The benefits of the method are perceived as being even bigger in the companies with a global audience and globally distributed project teams. The perceived values of the persona method are several. One benefit of the method mentioned by all participants is its ability to create a common language and a shared understanding of who the users are. C12: "One thing is for sure, it has provided a common language. It might sound a bit like a cliché, but it really is a common language. I get quite warm at heart when you sit in a meeting where you hardly know anybody, and then somebody says: "Well, would Alex think like this?" Then we all know whom we're talking about, we know the audience, and whom we address -just because of the name. It is a common language and I think it is enormously important -this goes across our department and reaches out to our subsidiary companies."

For large corporations the benefits are twofold: a shared language to discuss and talk about users that are nationally and culturally diverse, and a shared understanding across departments and national borders.

Data

The participants from companies that have an international audience describe it as especially challenging to get enough data and to know when there is enough data. They try to solve this by collecting data from different parts of the world, but none of the participants have data from all of the markets they address. Thus the major challenges become to get enough data, to get the right data, and to know when there is enough data to cover all the important aspects.

In particular it is mentioned that there is a difference making personas for a Western context and an Asian. Data on Asian users are hard to come by as this knowledge is not easy accessible and it is expensive to get data from countries were the Danish companies do not have any offices. Furthermore, from a Danish perspective, it is experienced that the cultural differences between the Danish and the Asian users are larger than those between Danish and European users. This in common makes it difficult to develop personas for Asian users.

Persona descriptions

The companies who have users from different countries experience it as especially challenging to create persona descriptions. They often look at specific national differences that are connected to:

• IT knowledge and use,

• Internet access,

• Language skills,

• Level of education,

• Different levels of autonomy in the companies and how management is distributed.

Strategies for the descriptions

There are mainly two strategies to address the challenges of a global target group: One strategy is to develop persona descriptions that represent users from different countries (e.g. one Finnish, one Polish, etc.), sometimes with the additional information that some personas may be more prevalent in some regions than in others.

Another strategy is to have descriptions that are so general that they can fit a wide variety of countries. Finally some companies try to combine the two strategies, by dividing the persona descriptions into an overall part and a part that singles out national differences. In the descriptions the global perspective can be observed in both naming and the connected images.

C8: "She is from Frankfurt, one is from Poland and one is from Norway. [...]

We have just said to ourselves in order to create a broad representation of users and contacts we must have some personas from around the world.

Whereupon we asked the question to our reference group: "Do we need personas from around the world?" They certainly thought so. They said it makes good sense as we sell worldwide. [...] It is not randomly selected countries, they are chosen to represent several countries."

Strategies for naming

Names are internationalized to cover a broad international group. There seems to be a common understanding that if the name is English; such as Anna, Elizabeth, or Robert, it can refer to any culture or nationality, regardless of an Eastern or Western context. When using the strategy of heightening the national awareness the personas are given specific national names, in order for the reader to deduce the nationality from the name, e.g. a concrete Finnish name such as Pekka.

Strategies for images

As with the names the images that accompany the persona description follow the strategies either to point to a specific nationality or to suppress identification of a specific nationality. For the first strategy the photos represent different types, e.g. Asians, Africans, and Europeans. In order to suppress national characteristics the persona illustrations are typically of Western appearance, or they are intentionally blurred or drawings with no national and typological characteristics. One company chose to not have illustrations at all. According to the participants the company had discussed and agreed upon that a photo of a person from a specific country would hinder empathy and create a distance to the persona, if the project member were not from the same country. The same company had interestingly enough decided to create personas where the name and the description had specific national characteristics. They did however not consider that a text would hinder empathy in the way that a photo will.

Lack of experience

Based on internal considerations and discussions each company develops their own strategy, but does not have any research on if and why the strategy works. They are aware of the fact that they lack evidence of the usefulness of the applied strategy both from company cases and research.

Conclusion

There is no doubt that companies with diverse international customers and companies with globally distributed teams perceive the use of personas as beneficial. The experienced benefits are larger than when the companies operate solely in a national context.

The benefits are two-fold: as a common point of reference for the many different departments and as a common understanding of the diverse user groups. For the last mentioned benefit the method furthermore prevents project participants to use own local experiences on the international audience.

In line with the sparse literature we saw several strategies applied in the descriptions 1) to create descriptions that could fit all nationalities (read: Western cultures) 2) to create country specific descriptions, 3) to create descriptions that fit all nationalities, but with additional culture specific information.

Even though the companies perceive personas for an international audience as beneficial, the described strategies hold difficulties. The strategy to create descriptions that fit all might result in superficial descriptions, this both because of sparse knowledge of all international user groups and the attempt to converse the diversity in the user groups. When coupling nationality with persona description the risk is that the focus on nationality might not be comprehensive and the differences among the personas are perceived as national, even though the differences might lie elsewhere. For the strategy of creating descriptions that fit all, but with additional culture specific information, the descriptions run the risk of being very long and confusing.

We found that there are great benefits of the persona method, but the understanding of the different strategies applied still needs to be investigated further.

The sparse literature on cross-cultural personas is of no help, it deals with communication of different national user groups to designers that might be distant from the end-users, but none includes distributed design teams in the studies. Proctor et. al. [START_REF] Proctor | Understanding and Improving Cross-Cultural Decision Making in Design and Use of Digital Media: A Research Agenda[END_REF] propose to look into the cross-cultural decision-making processes in the phases of design, adoption, use, and support. In line with this and to support the companies we need to further investigate: how data can be efficiently gathered and analyzed for cross-cultural personas and we need to look at how they are perceived and used in globally distributed teams. Finally we need to develop different methods to describe international personas.

Fig 1 :

 1 Fig 1: An example of a typical persona description from The Danish Tax Authorities -Skat.dk. In this example the borders are color coded in order to heighten the perception of differences among the compilation of personas.

Den

  medarbejdende aegtefaelle eller den bedst egnede ansatte !!!!!!!! Laering'om'bogføring:! Gruppen!varierer!meget!i!baggrund,!da!det!o2e!er!aegtefaellens!opstart!af!virksomhed,!der!får! dem!ind!i!branchen.!Nogle!har!en!uddannelse!indenfor!kontor!eller!økonomi,!men!mange!har! laert!det!gennem!deres!revisor,!andet!netvaerk!eller!et!kursus.!! ! Laering'om'moms'og'ska1eregler:! O2e!er!det!via!revisoren!eller!gennem!venner!og!familie,!at!de!i!første!omgang!laerte!om!moms! og!ska?ereglerne.! Nogle!har!taget!små!kurser!i!vaeksthuse,!hos!kommuner!eller!skat!o.l.!! ! !!!!! Mange!har!laert!om!reglerne!når,!som!de!sidder!med!et!bilag,!som!de!ikke!kender!reglerne!om,! og!så!begynder!de!at!søge!e2er!noget!viden,!om!den!her!type!udgi2.! Hvor!holder!de!sig!opdateret:!! En!del!af!gruppen!modtager!et!nyhedsbrev!fra!deres!revisor,!hvor!de!får!viden!om!ny!lovgivning.! De!laerer!ikke,!hvordan!de!skal!bogføre!e2er!de!nye!regler,!men!de!bliver!opmaerksomme!på,!at! der!er!sket!noget!nyt!indenfor!et!område.! Ellers!bliver!de!opmaerksomme!på!nye!regler,!hvis!revisoren!eller!skat!finder!en!fejl!i!deres! regnskaber.!Endelig!opdager!de!nye!regler,!når!de!sidder!med!konkrete!bilag,!der!skal!bogføres,! og!som!de!kommer!i!tvivl!om.!Så!søger!de!på!google,!og!finder!så!de!nyeste!regler.! ! !Isaer!er!det!på!de!store!revisionshuses!hjemmesider,!at!de!finder!hjaelp.!Skats!hjemmeside!er! for!kompliceret.!! Hvis!deres!spørgsmål!kan!vente,!så!samler!de!spørgsmål!sammen!og!spørger!hos!netvaerk!eller! ved!revisoren.! !! Forhold'7l'revisor:! De!har!o2est!en!revisor!Jl!at!lave!e2erposteringer!og!udarbejde!årsregnskabet.! !De!beholder!den!samme!revisor

  7 timer om ugen på det. ! Hvilke'regler'og'procedurer'er'svaere:! Der!er!mange!både!moms!og!afdragsregler,!der!er!svaere!for!gruppen.!Deres!individuelle! hovedproblemer!varierer!e2er,!hvilken!virksomhed,!det!drejer!sig!om.!Nogle!af!reglerne! ved!de!ikke,!at!de!gør!forkert,!og!nogle!af!reglerne!ved!de,!at!der!måske!er!noget!med,! men!de!har!ikke!nogen!forventninger!om,!at!de!kan!gøre!det!helt!rigJgt.! !! !!!!!!Det!er!så!svaert!-!også!med!kørselsfradrag!og!sådan.!Vi!har!en!gulpladebil!og!betaler! moms!af!den,!men!du!må!ikke!haenge!mig!op!på!det.! Eksempler!på!Jng!som!er!svaere:!Om!noget!er!repraesentaJon!eller!reklame;!Hvordan! beregnes!fradrag!for!strøm!og!hvilken!strøm!kan!traekkes!fra;!Indregistrering!af! køretøjer,!gulpladebiler;!Hvilke!momssatser!og!på!hvad;!Forskellige!sondringer!i!moms! og!ska?eregler.!Der!er!fradrag!for!moms!men!ikke!skat!i!forhold!Jl!privat!bolig!med! arbejdsvaerelse!i;!Omkostningsfordeling!privat/virksomhed,!Moms!ved!handel!i!Eu!og!i!3.! lande.!!!!!!!Jeg!køber!en!pose!kaffe!i!Ne?o,!og!noget!af!kaffen!drikkes!ved!kurser,!noget! drikker!de!ansa?e,!noget!drikkes,!når!vi!holder!repraesentaJon,!og!noget!drikkes!af! kunderne.!Der!er!4!forskellige!moms!og!fradragsregler!for!den!pose!kaffe.! ! Hvilket'regnskabsprogram'bruges:! Gruppen!bruger!generelt!et!regnskabsprogram,!og!mange!tager!den!kontoplan,!som! ligger!i!programmet!allerede.! Gennemførsel!af!bogføringsproces! Generelt!har!denne!gruppe!faste!systemer!og!er!koncentrerede!i!bogføringssituaJonen.! Hvert!enkelt!bilag!køres!e2er!en!fast!ruJne.!De!har!orden!i!mapperne.!Mappe!med! betalte!bilag!og!ikke!betalte!bilag.!Alt!sae?es!ind!i!mapper!med!det!samme.! Hvor!meget!er!ejeren!og!andre!inde!i!systemet! AEgtefaellen!har!ikke!meget!styr!på!bogføringen!eller!regnskabsprogrammet.!Det!har!ikke! den!store!interesse,!og!der!er!Jllid!Jl!at!den!medarbejdende!aegtefaelle!bogfører!som! denne!skal.!! Der!kan!ske!fejl!i!systemet,!når!andre!i!virksomheden!skal!ind!over!bogføringen.! Eksempelvis!hvis!en!medarbejder!har!købt!nogle!Jng!i!en!buJk,!eller!der!er!en! følgefaktura!Jl!noget!vareindlevering,!så!kraever!det,!at!de!andre!ansa?e!i!virksomheden! spiller!rigJgt!ind!Jl!ruJnerne!og!får!lagt!de!her!fakturaer!ind!på!kontoret.!De!har!o2e! ikke!så!stort!fokus!på!at!sikre!systemet!omkring!bogføring,!fordi!det!ikke!interesserer.! Hvem!sae?er!kvalitetsniveauet!i!firmaet!og!hvor!høj!er!forventningen!Jl!egen!bogføring:! Det!er!den!der!bogfører,!som!selv!sae?er!niveauet!af!bogføringskvaliteten.!Hun!vil!gerne! gøre!det!rigJgt,!og!giver!det!en!indsats,!men!er!ikke!sikker!på,!at!det!er!rigJgt…!! Det!er!bl.a.!svaert!at!finde!rundt!i,!hvilken!konto!Jng!skal!konteres!på.!Eks.!Er!et!ba?eri! elektronik!eller!kontorarJkler!eller!en!småanskaffelse?! !!!!!!!O6e!sidder!jeg!alene,!når!jeg!har!et!problem!med!et! bilag,!og!så!googler!jeg.!! !!!!!!Jeg!er!overrasket!over,!hvor!mange!penge,!man!skal! tjene!for!at!få!noget!?l!sig!selv."! " " " !!!!!Jeg!kender!ikke!?l!reglerne!om!personalegoder,!så! ind?l!videre!giver!vi!ikke!den!slags!i!firmaet! !

Acknowledgement

We wish to thank Infinit for supporting the research.