i Voice in virtual worlds Gregory Robert Wadley Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. December, 2011 Department of Information Systems, Faculty of Science, The University of Melbourne ii Abstract Virtual worlds are simulated online spaces through which large numbers of people connect in order to work, play and socialize. Examples include massively multiplayer online games like World of Warcraft and open-ended worlds like Second Life . Virtual worlds are differentiated from other systems by their simulation of a persistent three-dimensional landscape, in which users are usually represented as avatars. Virtual worlds host large numbers of users and support a variety of recreational and instrumental uses. A critical aspect of any collaborative system is communication. In virtual worlds this is especially complex. Most users encounter people who are unknown to them offline. Most maintain a presence in the world over many months or even years, yet may prefer to be pseudonymous or engage in identity-play. Users must simultaneously manage both physical and virtual contexts. Synchronous as well as asynchronous communication is required. Virtual worlds initially offered only text as a medium for user-to-user communication. More recently, vendors have introduced facilities for communicating by voice. This has made the experience of virtual worlds more convivial for some, and has enabled forms of collaboration that were previously only possible in small experimental systems. But the introduction of voice provoked controversy, with some protesting that it projects too clearly the personal characteristics of speakers, damaging pseudonymity. Some are more sensitive about speaking with strangers than they are typing, and may become less communicative when adopting voice, or more easily dominated by extroverted collaborators. Voice channels are more prone to abuse, and the abuse can be more impactful. Users encounter sound quality problems, and are often uncertain whether they are being heard. Voice is less suited to asynchronous communication, and is more prone to congestion. It appears that voice works well when conditions suit, but can lead to failed implementations when deployed inappropriately. Yet little research has been conducted to help us understand to which situations voice is suited, whom it benefits and whom it does not, and how it can best be configured to support different activities. I conducted four studies designed to fill this gap. Two examined the influence of voice on user experience, in the two major types of virtual world. The others examined the interaction between voice and spatiality, the defining feature of virtual worlds, at macro and micro scales. I studied use in naturalistic contexts, collecting data via interviews and diaries and iii triangulating these with observation, online ethnography, conversation analysis and quantitative measures. I found that voice transforms the user experience of virtual worlds. It makes some forms of collaboration more efficient. However it interferes with identity-play and the ability of users to manage multiple tasks and conversations. When voice is propagated spatially, it increases immersion, reduces channel clutter, and affords new strategies for team coordination. However verbal references to places and objects often fail. I discuss these results in the light of post-media-richness theories of communication, arguing that preferences for one modality or another reflect broader issues of managing social presence in virtual and physical contexts. iv Declaration This is to certify that: (i) the thesis comprises only my original work towards the PhD except where indicated in the Preface, (ii) due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used, (iii) the thesis is fewer than 100,000 words in length, exclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies and appendices. Signed, __________________________________ Greg Wadley Dated: __________________________ Preface Studies 1 and 2 of this thesis were conducted in collaboration with Martin Gibbs and Peter Benda at the University of Melbourne. Martin and I collaborated in designing these studies, and all of us collaborated in collecting the data; however the data analysis and write-up presented in this thesis was conducted by me. Study 3 was supervised by Nic Ducheneaut and conducted by me. Study 4 was supervised by Martin Gibbs and conducted by me. All four studies have been presented at conferences. The publications are listed in Appendix C. These were multi-authored; however the text in this thesis was written by me. v Acknowledgements A thesis cannot come into being without the help and influence of many people, and I would like to thank them now. I make the usual author’s disclaimer that the fault for any inadequacies in the work lies with me alone. My supervisors Martin Gibbs and Steve Howard of the University of Melbourne steered me deftly through a long and sometimes arduous process. The Interaction Design Group at the University of Melbourne has offered unceasing challenge and stimulation while I worked on this thesis, and I thank all past and current members. I have worked with the staff of the Department of Information Systems at Melbourne for a decade and I thank them for their support and collegiality. I learned by working with experienced researchers: thanks Pete Benda, Nic Ducheneaut and Martin Gibbs. I spent four months researching at the Palo Alto Research Center in California, funded by a University of Melbourne PORES scholarship. This was a transformative experience and I thank everyone who made it possible, especially staff at PARC, the Department of Information Systems, and the University of Melbourne’s School of Graduate Research. Most of all I thank my supervisor at PARC, Nic Ducheneaut, and my fellow researchers there Don Wen and Mike Robinson. Many people discussed my work with me and offered useful advice and insights, including Richard Bartle, Tom Boellstorff, Marcus Carter, Paul Dourish, Connor Graham, Mitchell Harrop, Jeremy Hunsinger, Reeva Lederman, Tuck Leong, Bernd Ploderer, Ralph Schroeder, Dmitri Williams, and fellow PhD candidates in the Interaction Design Group. I thank Paul Boustead for making the SpatialVoice system available for study 2. I would like to thank the people who participated in my studies. Study participants receive little compensation for their efforts, and research cannot happen without them. Finally thanks to my friends and family for their support. vi Table of Contents Voice in virtual worlds................................................................................................................... i 1. Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Classification and terminology ........................................................................................ 7 1.3 Theme: Communication in virtual worlds ..................................................................... 13 1.4 Problem .......................................................................................................................... 15 1.5 Prior work ...................................................................................................................... 16 1.6 Gap ................................................................................................................................. 17 1.7 Research Question.......................................................................................................... 17 1.8 Approach........................................................................................................................ 17 1.9 Outcomes and contributions........................................................................................... 20 1.10 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 21 2. Review of related research ...................................................................................................... 23 2.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................... 23 2.2 Virtual worlds................................................................................................................. 23 2.3 Mediated communication............................................................................................... 44 2.4 Voice in virtual space..................................................................................................... 59 2.5 User experience.............................................................................................................. 62 2.6 Gap ................................................................................................................................. 65 2.7 Research question........................................................................................................... 65 2.8 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 67 3. Design of my research program .............................................................................................. 69 3.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................