Virtual Scientific Collaboration and Nonaka's Ba - Semantic Scholar

Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2001

Virtual Scientific Collaboration and Nonaka’s Ba John Towell, Ph.D. Department of Computer Science Carroll College Waukesha, WI 53186 [email protected]

Elizabeth Towell, Ph.D. Departments of Computer science and Business Carroll College Waukesha, WI 53186 [email protected]

Abstract

first was that virtual scientific seminars were similar to real seminars including the occasional breakdown of the slide projector. The second was that after the meetings were over, the participants merely swiveled their chairs to return to their normal workplaces thus saving considerable time and travel expenses. Shortly thereafter the first Electronic Computational Chemistry Conference (ECCC) was hosted by Steve Bachrach in the chemistry department of Northern Illinois University [10]. The BioMOO group, featured in the Science article mentioned above, presented a paper entitled "Networked Virtual Environments and Electronic Conferencing" which included a MOO-type virtual meeting center called the Virtual Conference Center (VCC) [24]. Although the ECCC was a World Wide Web-based conference, it's participants quickly organized real time meetings and discussion groups in the VCC. Recordings made of scientific discussions held in the various VCC rooms were e-mailed to the conference listserv. During the conference, extensive interviewing was done with the conference participants and the lessons learned from using the VCC at the ECCC, particularly with regard to improving conferencing efficacy, were subsequently published [25]. Attending the ECCC was an Oxford post-doctoral student, Barry Hardy, who was impressed with the VCC and made plans to use it as an integral part of the first Electronic Glycoscience Conference (EGC) [7]. This provided an opportunity to implement changes to the VCC, such as a buffering system which solved text entry problems for those connected to the VCC via raw telnet [25]. The Electronic Glycoscience Conference again demonstrated that our scientific knowledge of human behavior in text-based virtual reality was sorely lacking. For example, numerous anecdotal accounts suggested that many people connected to the MOO experienced feelings of "being there" or presence. To test this, we began to survey MOO subjects from many different populations

Each year, at enormous expense, scientists travel to meetings to exchange knowledge. Because great value is attributed to these gatherings, more should be learned about scientific meetings in virtual places which is considerably less expensive. Scientific conferencing in virtual meeting places has been ongoing since the early 90's. Observations of people experiencing these virtual places prompted objective studies revealing that nearly 70% of them report a sense of "being there" or virtual presence. This manuscript, presents further evidence corroborating these earlier studies and discusses the relationship of virtual presence to Nonaka’s model of knowledge creation. Nonaka's model proposes a concept called ba which denotes a place that promotes knowledge conversion. Ba is not limited to physical space; it includes virtual and mental spaces as well. This paper introduces the similarities between ba and virtual presence, and discusses their relevance to improving the effectiveness of virtual scientific collaboration.

1. Introduction In 1994 an article entitled, "Cyberspace Offers Chance to Do 'Virtually' Real Science," appeared in Science [1]. It chronicled the efforts of a group of disparately located scientists operating an Internet-based virtual meeting place called BioMOO, founded by Gustavo Glusman, and currently running at the Weizmann Institute of Science. BioMOO, a software application of the LambdaMOO type, developed primarily by Pavel Curtis [4] at Xerox PARC, presents to the user a type of text-based virtual reality. The Science article cited BioMOO as "the first major effort to use a virtual environment for day-to-day science and science communication." While scientific collaboration in virtual environments was in its infancy, the article detailed two critically important points. The

0-7695-0981-9/01 $10.00 (c) 2001 IEEE

1


including the group of scientists who used the MOO at the first EGC. We found that 67% of the people connected to MOOs have feelings of "being there" or presence [26]. The exponential growth in Internet use has revealed new facets of human behavior. For example, Young has defined Internet Addiction and finds that 63% of those dependent on Internet use are found extensively in MultiUser Dimensions/Dungeons (MUDS) and chat rooms [28]. What is it about these environments that many humans find compelling? Steuer [23] defined virtual reality as "a real or simulated environment in which a perceiver experiences telepresence." Telepresence was then defined "as the experience of presence in an environment by means of a communication medium." Sheridan [21] suggested that telepresence be reserved for environments involving teleoperation and that 'virtual presence' be used for "feeling like you are present in the environment generated by the computer." Recent brain imaging studies have shown that navigation of virtual reality is accompanied by activation of discrete brain areas [12]. Other recent studies suggest that part of the brain is reserved for not only recognizing faces but also places [16]. These studies however, were done with visually-evoked stimuli while MUDS and chat rooms deliver only text. The link between visually immersive environments and imagined places has recently been made by brain imaging studies. A depiction of these studies is shown in Figure 1. Subjects (left side) were shown one of the four images, (represented by four quadrants) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) techniques revealed that those brain areas that were used to process retinal visual images is the same area used when the subjects (right side) were asked to imagine these same images which had been studied earlier [9]. Thus, the brain map of the subject on the left side (visual) of Figure 1 is identical to the brain map of the subject on the right side (imagined).

Figure 1. Visually perceived (left) and imagined (right) images are processed in the same brain regions. Hence it is not unreasonable to suggest that the presence experienced by people in text-based virtual realities is the result of the stimulation of specific brain areas which may

account in part for the factors involved in Internet addicted subjects. This is depicted in Figure 2 where the subject on the left is experiencing a visually immersive environment while the subject on the right is imagining the environment on the basis of textual stimuli resulting from interactions with people, places and things within the environment.

Figure 2. Visually perceived (left) and textually evoked (right) images are processed by the same brain areas. How is this sense of presence related to scientific collaboration in MOOs? The answer to this is found in part in Ikujiro Nonaka's theory of knowledge creation [14]. This creative process recognizes four types of knowledge conversion which is defined as interaction between tacit and explicit forms of knowledge which creates and expands human knowledge. Knowledge conversion results from human social interaction and does not occur individually. The four types of knowledge conversion are: (1) from tacit knowledge to tacit knowledge; (2) from tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge; (3) from explicit knowledge to explicit knowledge; and (4) from explicit knowledge to tacit knowledge. These four types are called socialization, externalization, combination and internalization, respectively and are represented in Figure 3. When individuals (represented as 'i' in Figure 3) share experiences, tacit knowledge is exchanged and hence the term socialization is used to designate tacit to tacit knowledge conversion. Communication between scientists at meetings would be regarded as socialization. Externalization (from tacit to explicit) occurs when tacit knowledge takes an explicit form in written statements, models or metaphors. Externalization is highly imperfect and requires reflection among individuals to arrive iteratively at the correct representation. Combining forms of explicit knowledge into a knowledge system is called combination. Using a knowledge system to gain tacit knowledge is called internalization. Internalized knowledge when shared with others leads to socialization and hence leads into another turn of a knowledge spiral (Figure 3) where tacit and explicit knowledge enrich each other.

0-7695-0981-9/01 $10.00 (c) 2001 IEEE

2


Recently, Nonaka has introduced the concept of ba to denote a space that promotes knowledge conversion [15]. Although ba literally translates to "place" in English, it implies an ambience suitable for creative exchange. Ba is defined as a place where people communicate and knowledge transformation occurs. Ba is not limited to physical space; it includes virtual and mental spaces as well. The inclusion of ba wraps each phase of the knowledge spiral into a social context and hence, Nonaka identifies a ba for each of the phases of the knowledge spiral (Figure 3). Critical to the effectiveness of ba is the person's awareness and acceptance of it and its relationship to knowledge creation [15]. There are many types of ba including 'cyberba' which we propose is equivalent to the place in MOOs where people experience presence.

The text-based virtual reality used in the studies reported here is of the MOO (Multi-user dimension Object Oriented) type. This system, developed primarily at Xerox PARC (Palo Alto Research Center) by Pavel Curtis [4], is composed of a server and a database which are open source software and available at (ftp://ftp.lambda.moo.mud.org/pub/MOO/) at no cost. The server can provide simultaneous connections for hundreds of Internet users via the telnet protocol (or other more specialized clients). It acts as a parser for interpreting commands given by connected users, and it serves as a database management system. The database contains information about objects that constitute the environment in which the user operates. This information includes the structure of the environment, or topography, which typically consists of rooms connected by entrances/exits that can be navigated with the use of simple commands. The topography of the environment used here, called OMIS MOO (Figure 4), was recorded on a map which could be easily seen by the user. The database also contains information about objects contained within the topography and finally, it contains information about the object to which the user is connected. This object can be thought of as an avatar or virtual representation of the user. Users can easily communicate by textual exchange with any other user occupying the same room. More sophisticated techniques are available for communicating with those who are in other rooms or even in other networked MOOs. The MOO environment is extensible and users need not know how to program to build and characterize their own rooms, exits/entrances and objects.

Figure 3. Nonaka's spiral model of knowledge creation. Individuals are represented by 'i'; groups by 'g'; and organizations by 'o'. This paper further explores the role of presence and 'ba' in the use of Collaborative Problems Solving Environments (CPSE). Further studies of two different groups of nearly 180 subjects, corroborate previous findings that presence is experienced by many in MOO environments. Refinement of the survey instrument has further probed the importance of social context and visual imagery in the MOO. MOO-space and its concurrent presence is proposed as being equivalent to 'cyberba' as developed by Nonaka. And finally, the role of presence and ba are considered for their influence on improving the efficacy of the collaborative aspects of CPSE's.

2. Methods

Figure 4. Topography of OMIS MOO 2.2 Subjects The subjects for the studies reported here were 172 undergraduate students at Northern Illinois University. The students were enrolled in a class which was conducted one-third of the time in OMIS MOO. During one semester, the students attended sessions held in the MOO which ranged from introductory object-oriented concepts to maintaining corporations complete with simulated manufacturing processes. At the completion of the semester the students were asked to complete a survey. The survey was optional and anonymous. Students were notified that their grade was in no way

2.1 Environment

0-7695-0981-9/01 $10.00 (c) 2001 IEEE

3


The survey instrument consisted of the following statements: Please indicate the strength of your agreement with the statements below where a '1' indicates you strongly agree and a '5' indicates you strongly disagree. 1. I felt a sense of "being there" or presence when I was connected to the MOO. 1-strongly agree; 2-moderately agree; 3-neither agree or disagree; 4-moderately disagree; 5-strongly disagree 2. The OMIS MOO Environment did *NOT* help me gain any sense of what object orientation means. 1-strongly agree; 2-moderately agree; 3-neither agree or disagree; 4-moderately disagree; 5-strongly disagree 3. I felt a stronger sense of "being there" or presence when I was with others in the MOO. 1-strongly agree; 2-moderately agree; 3-neither agree or disagree; 4-moderately disagree; 5-strongly disagree 4. I often had pictures in my mind of what the MOO or other people looked like when I was connected. 1-strongly agree; 2-moderately agree; 3-neither agree or disagree; 4-moderately disagree; 5-strongly disagree 5. If I had a job where I worked at home several days a week, I would like something like a MOO to be able to feel connected to my fellow workers. 1-strongly agree; 2-moderately agree; 3-neither agree or disagree; 4-moderately disagree; 5-strongly disagree 6. I would rather attend a lecture than participate in a MOO laboratory. 1-strongly agree; 2-moderately agree; 3-neither agree or disagree; 4-moderately disagree; 5-strongly disagree

3. Results The following results are from the 145 (84%) of the 172 students who opted to return the survey. For purposes of the results discussion, students responding with a '1' or '2' will be considered collectively as the

Responses to Statement 1 80 Number of Subjects

2.3 Survey Instrument

affirmative group. Likewise, students responding with a '4' or '5' are considered as not agreeing with the statement. Figure 5 shows the responses to the statement (1), " I felt a sense of "being there" or presence when I was connected to the MOO." Students responding affirmatively comprised 60% of the total.

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 Strongly Agree

2

3

4

5 Strongly Disagree

Response

Figure 5. Survey results for statement 1, “I felt a sense of ‘being there’ or presence when I was connected to the MOO.” Figure 6 shows that 88% did not agree with the statement, " The OMIS MOO Environment did *NOT* help me gain any sense of what object orientation means." Thus, 88% thought the MOO helped them understand object orientation. Responses to Statement 2 80 Number of Subjects

related to their answers on the survey or to whether they submitted the survey at all.

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 Strongly Agree

2

3

4

5 Strongly Disagree

Response

Figure 6. Survey results for statement 2, “The OMIS MOO Environment did *NOT* help me gain any sense of what object orientation means.” When the students were asked, " I felt a stronger sense of "being there" or presence when I was with others in the MOO" 63% agreed as indicated in Figure 7. Statement 3 seemed to elicit a stronger response than statement 1 suggesting a stronger sense of social presence due to the inclusion of the phrase ‘with others.’ This was tested by looking at the pairs of responses (statements 1 and 3)

0-7695-0981-9/01 $10.00 (c) 2001 IEEE

4


from each respondent and performing a t-test for the mean difference. At the α = .05 level, we tested: H0: µD ≤ 0 H1: µD > 0

several days a week, I would like something like a MOO to be able to feel connected to my fellow workers" (Figure 9). Responses to Statement 5

Responses to Statement 3

Number of Subjects

70

70 Number of Subjects

The test statistic fell within the rejection region (p=.026) so we rejected H0. There is evidence to believe that there is a greater sense of presence when subjects are in the virtual environment with others.

60

60 50 40 30 20 10 0

50

1 Strongly Agree

40

2

30

3

4

5 Strongly Disagree

Response

20 10 0 1 Strongly Agree

2

3

4

5 Strongly Disagree

Figure 9. Survey results for statement 5, “If I had a job where I worked at home several days a week, I would like something like a MOO to be able to feel connected to my fellow workers.”

Response

To explore the amount of visual imagery experienced, 55% of the students responded affirmatively to the statement, "I often had pictures in my mind of what the MOO or other people looked like when I was connected." (Figure 8).

Responses to Statement 4

Responses to Statement 6 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

60 Number of Subjects

Finally, Figure 10 shows that 84% disagreed with the statement, "I would rather attend a lecture than participate in a MOO laboratory."

Number of Subjects

Figure 7. Survey results for statement 3, “I felt a stronger sense of ‘being there’ or presence when I was with others in the MOO.”

1 Strongly Agree

50 40

2

3

4

5 Strongly Disagree

Response 30 20 10 0 1 Strongly Agree

2

3

4

5 Strongly Disagree

Response

Figure 8. Survey results for statement 4, “I often had pictures in my mind of what the MOO or other people looked like when I was connected.” Telecommuting was frequently discussed during the semester and a 90% affirmative response was shown when asked "If I had a job where I worked at home

Figure 10. Survey results for statement 6, “I would rather attend a lecture than participate in a MOO laboratory.” 4. Discussion The results in Figures 5 and 7 corroborate previous findings that a majority of people connected to MOOs experience presence [26, 19]. In a previous study the survey instrument used the following statement: "I feel a sense of actually being in the same room with others when I am connected to a MOO." [26]. It was suggested that the inclusion of the words 'with others' may have

0-7695-0981-9/01 $10.00 (c) 2001 IEEE

5


biased the subject towards the social aspects of the environment. The results shown here lend further merit to this concern by breaking down the original statement into two different ones. Statement 1 (Figure 5) used in the present studies made no reference to being with others, while statement 3 (Figure 7) specifically addressed the question of being with others. A t-test at α= .05 for the mean difference provided evidence that there is a greater sense of presence when subjects are in the virtual environment with others (p= .026). This supports the argument that social presence due to interaction with others in the same virtual space [8], may be a contributing factor to presence in text-based virtual reality. In a study of the use of a MOO as a systems tool, Evard [5] noted the unexpected result of developing team feeling in a systems group at Northeastern University. This has been corroborated by Churchill and Bly [3] in their study of Waterfall Glenn, a MOO used by the Math and Computer Science Division at Argonne National Laboratory since 1993. Their studies indicate that central to the use of the MOO for collaboration was its support for "fluid, informal conversations and social relationships." During class discussions the subjects of the studies reported here became aware of the growing problems with the modern telecommuter. Frequently registered complaints from teleworkers and their managers are loss of comradeship [18, 13], feelings of isolation [22], and alienation [6]. Clearly, they saw the utility of the MOO for maintaining a sense of being connected with their fellow workers (Figure 9). One purpose for using the MOO as part of the curriculum was to provide a learning environment that facilitated active-learning experiences - particularly in regard to object orientation [26]. Statement 2 was used to query whether the students considered the MOO experience helpful to learning object orientation. Thus, not only did the students prefer attending a MOO laboratory to a traditional lecture (Figure 10), they also believed the MOO laboratories helped them learn (Figure 6). With regard to factors contributing to presence in MOOs, previous studies have questioned the affect of visual imagery [26, 19]. Statement 4 queries whether the subjects had visual images of the MOO environment and their MOO comrades. The subjects were from two classes of over 80 students each. Although group projects were conducted in the MOO, students never formally met in their groups in the classroom. Thus, in general, they knew each other in the MOO by name only and their images of one another were formed by virtue of their avatar descriptions. All rooms and objects in the MOO are described textually and thus any visual imagery would result from imaginary processes (see right side of Figure 2). As shown in Figure 8, 55% of the subjects indicated they had "... pictures in my mind of what the MOO or

other people looked like ..." This supports earlier findings [19] that mental imagery may also be a contributing factor to presence in MOOs. Recent transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies have shown that the brain regions that process retinal images are the same regions used when processing "mind's eye" or imaginative images [9]. Thus, those brain areas used for mental imagery in MOOs may be equivalent to those brain areas used in visually immersive environments. It is known that a contributing factor to presence in visually immersive environments is cognitive [11, 2, 23] and experiments in text-based virtual realities may provide unique access to these cognitive processes in the absence of visual stimuli. Hence, text-based virtual realities like MOOs may prove to be useful research environments. With the use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) techniques, Maguire and coworkers [12] have demonstrated that navigation of virtual reality is accompanied by activation of discrete brain areas. If one assumes that navigating visual topographical maps uses the same brain regions as navigation of maps maintained in the imagination or "mind's eye," as the studies of Kosslyn [9] suggest (Figure 2), then presence in MOOs may be related in part to the activation of the same brain areas shown by Maguire et al [12]. What do these brain imaging and presence studies tell us about improving scientific conferencing in text-based virtual realities? A considerable body of knowledge now exists that supports the proposition that the majority of people connected to text-based virtual realities (MOOs), experience feelings of "being there" or presence. The factors contributing to presence are complex and further progress is needed in developing more sophisticated instruments for measuring presence [17, 20]. Nevertheless, it appears that social interaction and visual imagery of the topography, people and objects within the virtual space are significant contributors to the sense of presence [26, 19]. This virtual space (MOO-space) provides a place where individuals communicate directly (with conversation) or indirectly (through description of themselves, their rooms or their objects). We propose this MOO-space where individuals exchange this tacit knowledge is equivalent to Nonaka's originating ba [15]. Nonaka defines originating ba as "the world where individuals share feelings, emotion, experience and mental models." This is the ba where socialization (Figure 3) takes place and is considered by Nonaka to be the primary ba. Originating ba at scientific conferences is where scientists are experiencing one another; how they look; how they act and react. Originating ba is where the seeds of synergism are sown and hence, is what promotes the creative and exciting exchange of scientific ideas. As mentioned previously, the ECCC and EGC both provided opportunities for subgroups to meet and discuss

0-7695-0981-9/01 $10.00 (c) 2001 IEEE

6


specialized areas. By conducting group meetings among participants with common interests, MOO-space provides a place where tacit knowledge is made explicit. This is the externalization process (Figure 3) and Nonaka defines the space for this as interacting ba. During creative exchanges the thoughts of one individual triggers an insight in another individual who then registers that new insight in the form of a verbal statement or question. Moo-space is known to facilitate this type of knowledge exchange and was suggested as contributory to the greater number of subjects experiencing presence at the EGC meetings [26]. Nonaka defines cyber ba as "a place of interaction in a virtual world instead of real space and time." It is where new explicit knowledge combines with established knowledge to generate a new order of knowledge. This is the combination phase (Figure 3) which occurs constantly during virtual scientific meetings. Cyber ba is built into MOO-space particularly since all communication becomes part of the database and hence takes an explicit form. Thus, among the many virtues of text-based reality is the lack of having to take notes. Exercising ba is where the internalization (Figure 3) phase occurs. The explicit knowledge becomes incorporated into the individual. The experiences and learning from the papers, and the subsequent discussions become part of the individual. It is important to note that the entire conference record includes not only the presentations themselves but also the discussions between participants that followed individual presentations. Following the ECCC, Barry Hardy likened the meetings to Transactions of the Faraday Society where not only are the presentations published but also the discussions between the scientists, which occurred following the presentations.

5. Recommendations We propose that there is an important connection between presence, place, and knowledge creation in MOO-space and in similar environments. We have described presence as the sense of ‘being there’ or being somewhere else when connected to the virtual environment. The concept of place then suggests that this somewhere else has unique characteristics. These characteristics are created primarily through text but are given form and dimension by human imagination. Mentally, people can experience virtual places in much the same way that they experience non-virtual places. Some of the unique characteristics of the MOO-space can be compared to Nonaka’s concepts regarding ba. A ba, specifically, is a place that promotes the various forms of knowledge creation. We further propose that virtual environments intended for academic conferencing can be specifically designed to

take advantage of this relationship between presence, place, and knowledge creation. Five specific recommendations are made to enhance the characteristics of ba in a virtual space and therefore the intended knowledge creation: 1) different virtual spaces for the different forms of knowledge creation; 2) on and off-record communication for tacit and explicit exchanges; 3) moderated rooms to focus time and place; 4) stage talk to promote group integration; 5) use of real identities to foster emerging knowledge and relationships. Multiple places in a virtual environment, having different characteristics, can support the four contexts of knowledge creation, socialization, externalization, combination and internalization. For example at the Electronic Glycoscience Conference (EGC) there were presentation rooms, meeting rooms, trade and employment centers, and a coffee shop [7]. Recorders captured much explicit information in presentation rooms, however, commands were allowed for tacit communication that was “off the record” and not captured by the recorders. This is an effective means for accommodating virtual interactions such as smiles, jokes, and gestures. Recorders were not present in the employment center or the coffee shop. To participate in a ba means to get involved and transcend one’s own limited perspective or boundary. Knowledge creation occurs through interaction at a specific time in a specific place. Internet discussions to this end can be complicated because normal protocols, for control of dialog, are absent or are hindered. To get participants simultaneously involved and to remove artificial boundaries requires dealing with both flow of discussion (moderation) and problems with Internet lag. Moderated rooms, like those used at the EGC [25], control dialog so that a discussion can be focused. Participants with lag problems can make comments, which are then recorded and displayed, in the natural flow of conversation. Stage talk, also used at the EGC, can further direct the flow of discussion. Stage talk allows a comment or question to be directed to a specific person in a room. Stage talk, a textual form of body language, is useful when a discussion involves many people. Knowledge embedded in a ba is acquired through one’s own experience or reflections and through the experiences of others. These two are interwoven. Our own experiences provide a context for understanding the experiences of another. We interpret the reflections of another using our perception of his or her role in the organization. Many MOO-spaces are used for social purposes and the real identities of participants are not

0-7695-0981-9/01 $10.00 (c) 2001 IEEE

7


validated or are unknown. In an academic environment, having a suitable identification is important because recordings are made of the discussions. When users talked at the EGC, their names preceded their statements. This allowed others to comprehend the source of the contribution and also to address it in that context. The connection between presence, place, and knowledge creation in virtual spaces has been related to the concept of the ba originally proposed by the Japanese philosopher, Kitaro Nishida, and further developed by management expert Ikujiro Nonaka. Evidence exists that participants connected to virtual spaces experience a feeling of presence. This presence is related to being with others in a place other than their physical surroundings. When this virtual place has certain characteristics, it can support multiple forms of knowledge creation. We have suggested a number of characteristics that can be provided in a MOO-space to facilitate a platform for advancing collective knowledge.

[9] Kosslyn, SM, Pascual-Leone, A, Fecilian, O, Camposano, S, Keenan, JP, Thompson, WL, Ganic, G, Sukel, KE, and Alpert, NM (1999, April) Science, 284 167-170.

6. Acknowledgements

[16] O'Craven, K. & Kanwisher, N. (2000) Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (In Press).

The authors would like to acknowledge the cooperation of Mark Misic, Ph.D., system administrator of the Northern Illinois University College of Business computer system on which OMIS MOO was operated.

[17] Regenbrecht, H., Schubert, T., & Friedmann, F. (1998). International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 10(3), 233-250.

7. References

[18] Ritter, G., & Thompson, S. (1994). The rise of telecommuting and virtual transportation. Transportation Quarterly, 48(3), 235-247.

[1] Anderson, C, (1994) Science, 264, 900-901.

[10] Krieger, J.H. and Illman, D.L. (1994) Chem. Eng. News, 29-40. [11] Loomis, JM, (1992) Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 1(1), 113-119. [12] Maquire, EA, Burgess, N, Donnett, JG, Frackowiak RSJ, Frith, CD, and O'Keefe JO, (1998, May) Science, 280, 921-924. [13] Maynard, R. (1994, August) The growing appeal of telecommuting. Nation's Business, pp. 61-62. [14] Nonaka, I, and Takeuchi H, (1995) In: The knowledge creating company, Oxford University Press, Oxford. [15] Nonaka, I and Konno, N, (1998) California Management Review, 40 (3), 40-54.

[3] Churchill, EF, & Bly, S. (1999) Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Work Activities Coordination and Collaboration, 99-108.

[19] Schiano, T.B. (1999). Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 8(2), 127-139 . [20] Schubert, T., Friedmann, F., & Regenbrecht, H. (1999). Embodied Presence in Virtual Environments. In Ray Paton & Irene Neilson (Eds.), Visual Representations and Interpretations, pp. 268-278. London: Springer-Verlag.

[4] Curtis, P. (1992, May) Conference on Directions and Implications of Advanced Computing, Berkeley, CA.

[21] Sheridan, T.B. (1992) Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 1(1), 120-126.

[5] Evard, R. (1993, November). Collaborative networked communication: MUDS as systems tools. Proceedings of the Seventh Systems Administration Conference (LISA VII), pp. 18, Monterey, CA.

[22] Snizek, W.E. (1995, September). Virtual offices: Some neglected considerations. Communications of the ACM, 38(9), 15-17.

[2] Biocca, F (1992) Journal of Communication, 42(4), 5-22.

[6] Ford, R.C., & McLaughlin, F. (1995, May-June). Questions and answers about telecommuting programs. Business Horizons, pp. 66-71.

[23] Steuer, J. (1992) Journal of Communication, 42(4), 73-93.

[7] Hardy BH, Robinson A, Doughty S, Findsen LA, Towell ER, Towell JF, and Wilson IBH (1996, January) Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 21(1), 31-33.

[24] Towell, J.F., Hansen, P., Mercer, E., Leach, M., Rubin, I., Prilusky, J., & Glusman, G. (1995, November). Networked virtual environments and electronic conferencing. In S.M. Bachrach, D.B. Boyd, S.K. Gray, W. Hase, and H. Rzepa (Ed.), Proceedings of the First Electronic Computational Chemistry Conference [CD-ROM]. ARInternet: Landower, MD.

[8] Heeter, C. (1992) Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 1(2), 262-271.

[25] Towell, J.F. & Towell, E. R. (1995) Internet Research, 5(3), 15-22.

0-7695-0981-9/01 $10.00 (c) 2001 IEEE

8


[26] Towell, J.F. & Towell, E. R. (1997) Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(5) 590-595. [27] Towell, JF (1999) 30th Annual Meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute, November 20-23, New Orleans, 308-310. [28] Young, KS., (1996, December) Psychological Reports, 79, 1-4.

0-7695-0981-9/01 $10.00 (c) 2001 IEEE

9