Keywords: Communication , Examples , Tangible user interface, haptic interpersonal communication, remote communication, touch-vibration mapping, vibrotactile communication, tactile communication, tangible telepresence INTRODUCTION

ABSTRACT We describe the design of ComTouch, a device that augments remote voice communication with touch, by converting hand pressure into vibrational intensity between users in real-time. The goal of this work is to enrich interpersonal communication by complementing voice with a tactile channel. We present preliminary user studies performed on 24 people to observe possible uses of the tactile channel when used in conjunction with audio. By recording and examining both audio and tactile data, we found strong relationships between the two communication channels. Our studies show that users developed an encoding system similar to that of Morse code, as well as three original uses: emphasis, mimicry, and turn-taking. We demonstrate the potential of the tactile channel to enhance the existing voice communication channel.


NOTE: EFFECT OF OTUCH HAS BEEN EVALUATED WITH THE DESERT SURVIVAL PROLEM
----------------------------------------

?.The senses can become overloaded and important information may be overlooked. The personal communication devices of other often needlessly interrupt our attention and comprise our privacy. One solution is to employ the underused modality of touch.

We studied potential users and their communication habbits.
Remote communication methods (email, telephone, pagers, etc) are not designed to convey subtle nonverbal signals.

?Our subjetcs expressed dislike of force-feedback devices because of the difficulty in overcoming the feedback force to communicate. There was also a convern of unintentional injury due to the force applied by a machine.

Related research: HandJive, InTouch, Kiss Communicator, Heart2Heart
Geldard invented tactile body language called vibratese.

Vibration vs. Force Feedback Most mechanical representations of touch are expensive to build because motors, gears and control systems are required for representing the analog qualities of touch. [?..] Vibration also was chosen because it was already implemented in many commercial communication devices. Each finger could also serve as a place to output vibration.


When we began to think of users other than the sensory-impaired, we generated a list of scenarios to help identify possible user interactions.
Touch communication: private, discreet, multiplexing possible with other signals (i.e. In places where remote communication already takes place, touch devices could allow people to increase their communication by multiplexing existing communication channels. For example, politicians would be able to talk and get feedback from their advisors about how the audience is receiving them during a live debate.)

After trying the pager motors typical of consumer devices like the iFeel mouse, we determined that their dynamic range was too limited for adequate expression. We found a dime-sized commercial acoustic speaker quite suitable in range, and its response was quick and precise enough to represent subtle changes in analog signal.
[?.] Because this touch-to-vibration mapping is so unusual, we needed to test whether the mapping could be used for communication.

The experiments use two scenarios: a general talking scenario and a negotiation scenario (Desert Survival Problem). The talking scenario allowed the users to talk freely over an audio link, with an additional tactile channel.



EVALUATION

The central finding of the preliminary trials was that there is a relationship between the audio and tactile channels. As expected, the information transmitted over the tactile channel was meaningful, and also proved that vibrotactile mappings can be used.
[?.] A touch-based device can provide an informative and private way to augment existing communication. Touch based communication can allow discreet notification of personal messages without broadcasting an interruption to others.

Participants suggested that some improvements could be made on the test. There are two main limitations to this study. First, the participants in each trial were very familiar with one another. Thus, no claims may be made about the potential for successful tactile communication between strangers. Second, visual contact between participants was eliminated by the experimental design. Availability of a visual channel may have a lessened the reliance on the tactile channel. Ergonomics