In and out of the frame of a desktop videoconferencing interaction

1. In and out of the frame of a desktop videoconferencing interaction CiaraR. Wigham & Nicolas Guichon

2. Webconferencing-supportedteaching • screen as technological and semiotic interface (Souchieret al., 2003) • array of information throughdifferent modes • focus attention duringpedagogical interaction – othersemioticresourcespushedinto the background (Guichon & Cohen, 2014) • webcam image mediates and organises pedagogical interaction – meaning-makingpotential

3. Different perspectives

4. Attention to framing • Framingdetermined by participants • Attending to the content of the frame – adjusting camera or sitting more / less close close-up head & torsoshot

5. Importance of framing • offers unique semiotic possibilities allowing users “to be present to one another and to be aware of the people's presence” (Jones, 2004:23) • contributes to “impression formation, rapport, and acquaintanceship development” (Manstead, Lea & Goh, 2011:147) • helps regulate the interaction, for instance by helping define turn-taking and reducing overlaps (Bitti& Garotti, 2011)

6. Research questions • How do trainee-teachers position themselves in front of the webcam? • To whatextent are trainee-teachersaware of how framingcouldenhance or constraininteraction? • Whatare the communicationalfunctions of gesturesthat are visible / invisible in the frame?

7. Context

8. Pedagogical scenario • Seven 40-minute sessions, Autumn 2013 • Visu webconferencingplatform • Thematic sessions, Business French

9. Researchdata • Three sessions: • Videorecordings of hors-champenvironment • Recordings of • webcam image • Screenshot data at minute 17 of sessions (66) • Recordingsof studentpost-course interviews

10. unframed 68% framed 32% Trainee-teachers’ framingchoices balanced 45% canted 55% lateral 29% frontal 71%

11. close-up (face saturatesscreen) head & torso shot head & shoulders shot extreme close-up (focus on part of face) Framing continuum 16.7% 31.8% 7.6% 43.9% framingchoices at minute 17

12. Extreme close-up framing • Part of the face ishiddenfromview • Studentforced to focus on the audio (mouthhidden) • Effect on interaction? - turn-taking? regulators? • ‘whenyou’relearningit’seasier to look at the lips…I foundithelpfulseeingher’ (s8) • ‘I foundthatshetalked to the table more thanyou know soitwas a bit harder whenshespoke’ (s8) ‘onlyfocusing on the audio waslesspersonal’ (s9) • ‘whenshe uses wordswith /r/ I look to see if she’sdoingsomethingspecialwithhermouth’ (s2)

13. ‘itfeltmore comfortableto seewhoyouweretalking to … wecouldseewhatwas happening if shewaslaughing’ (s8) Portrait framing • ‘I saidsomething in Spanishshepouteditwas a jokeif I hadn’tseenher I would have thoughtshewasangry’ (s2) • mimicsseen • gesturespaceopened • ‘shetriedto use her hands a lot to explainthings …it’s more attractive… youlisten more to whatshesays’ (s8)

14. but… some extra-communicative gesturesbecome in view, e.g. thinkinggestures effect on interaction? • ‘itwasreallyeasy to seewhenshe[the trainee-teacher] was in difficultyfor examplewhensheasked a question and s54didn’treply and I wasthinkingyoucouldsee in her face arghwhat do I do nowwhat do I saywhenshe made her ‘I-don’t-know-what-to-do face’ I tried to think more quickly’ (s48)

15. Both hands, thumbs up. “nickel” (great) Visible and invisible gestures Both hands, circular rotating movement. “notre thème aujourd’hui” (ourthemetoday)

16. Gestures in and out of the frame

17. Extra-communicative ‘distracting’ gestures • Don’t display anysemioticmeaning • Don’tconveyany information • Auto-centredgestures • Forget the presence of the webcam or toofocused on theirown image? • Yieldsomenaturalness to the interaction

18. Missedopportunities Left hand index and middle finger extended. “ces deux dernières semaines t’as fait quoi ?” (whatdidyou do the pasttwoweeks?)

19. Useful for mutualcomprehension “alors toi tu était salariée parce que tu gagnais de l’argent okay? “soyouyouwereemployedbecauseyouwereearning money okay? et moi je suis bénévole parce que je travaille and I’m a volunteerbecause I work mais je ne gagne pas d’argent” but I don’tearnany money”

20. Conclusions & perspectives • Access to own image  increasedpotential to communicateeffectively(seeYamada & Akahori, 2009) • Help trainee-teachersdevelopcriticalsemioticawarenessconcerningframing and orchestration of differentsemioticmodalities(Guichon, 2013) • Analysis of gestures shows that a certain amount of information is not conveyed at thislevel. Future study of trainee-teachers’ use of mimics, nods, smiles and in the interaction

21. Thanks! Merci beaucoup ! nicolas.guichon@univ-lyon2.fr http://icar.univ-lyon2.fr/membres/nguichon/ ciara.wigham@univ-lyon2.fr http://icar.univ-lyon2.fr/membres/cwigham/

22. ‘try to communicate an emotionwhenwe move closer to the screen – there’s a pyschological obstaclewecan’tshakehis hand sowe move closer’ (tt24) Trainee-teachers’ reflection on framing ‘wegive the impression thatwe’removing back whenwecanhearwell and thatwemove closerto the screenwhenwecan’thear as well – I need to hearyou!’ (tt10)

23. Communicative functions of gestures …framingchoiceslead to missedopportunities?