Analysis of Designer Emotions in Collaborative and Traditional Computer-Aided Design
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Technology is transforming the way engineering designers work and interact with others; Synchronous collaborative computer-aided design (CAD) tools allow designers to manipulate the same model at the same time. We present a new method using automated facial emotion detection software and cursor tracking to map designer emotions and corresponding designer activities in synchronous collaborative CAD. We present findings from a dataset of 9 participants that were assigned to two distinct working styles in the same synchronous CAD environment: single participants working by themselves and paired participants working together. In general, our results show that designers working in the paired workflow exhibited more emotion compared to designers who worked alone. A frequency analysis was performed by linking occurrences of each emotional response to their antecedent activities, revealing that user emotions were predictable to some degree by specific antecedent activities of CAD work. We concluded that activities happening in the graphics area were the most frequent antecedent events of emotions for single-users, while for paired participants, activities in the chat section and feature menu were the most frequent antecedent events for joy and fear, respectively. Finally, logistic regression was applied for each combination of event and emotion for each participant in order to further investigate the relationships between the user activities and emotions, and meta-regression was used to aggregate the regression results for the two different working styles. In particular, for single-users, activities in the model tree were found to be positively correlated to joy and negatively correlated to disgust, and navigating the feature menu increased the likelihood of contempt. For participants in pairs, communicating with CAD partner and receiving communications from partner was associated with joy, navigating the feature menu was associated with sadness, anger and disgust were associated with partner’s action in the model tree, and contempt corresponded to the designer’s own activities in the model tree area. The approach and conclusions presented in this paper allow us to better understand designer emotions in fully synchronous CAD, which leads to insight related to designer satisfaction, creativity, performance and other outcomes valued by engineering designers in a virtual collaborative environment.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».