343 The Distributed Studio: Towards a Theory of Virtual Place for Creative Collaboration Viveka Weiley Creativity and Cognition Studios, University of Technology, Sydney and ACID PO Box 123, Broadway NSW 2007, Australia viveka@it.uts.edu.au Yusuf Pisan FIT, University of Technology, Sydney PO Box 123, Broadway NSW 2007, Australia Phone: +61 2 9514 4478 ypisan@it.uts.edu.au ABSTRACT Virtual environments intended to support creative collaboration are being built without an informed consideration of the implicit interaction design choices being made. This paper proposes a set of design principles for such environments. Drawing from theory and reflective practice we suggest a conceptual focus on a Distributed Studio designed around the following five principles: Support Reconfiguration, Mix Realities, Control Access, Be A/Synchronous, and Transform Space into Inhabited Place. Categories and Subject Descriptors H.5.1 Multimedia Information Systems: Artificial, augmented, and virtual realities, H.5.2 User Interfaces: Theory and methods, H.5.3 Group and Organization Interfaces: Computer- supported cooperative work, Synchronous interaction General Terms Design, Human Factors, Theory. Keywords Creativity Support, Mixed Reality, Place, Practice-based Research, Reflective Practice. 1. INTRODUCTION When humans are confronted with difficult problems we seek creative solutions. Creativity support tools have been shown to have broad social benefits, and are now receiving prominent notice in the computing literature [28]. Rather than being the product of individual genius, creativity emerges from a social milieu and often from a collaborative process [31]. Geographically distributed teams have access to specialists and can be more diverse [12]. When well managed this diversity can in itself be a source of greater creativity [13]. Such teams can also, by their distributed nature, provide greater opportunities for participants in less central locations. Information and communication technologies support distributed work, coordinated over the Internet. However key aspects of creative work resist the structure required for formal and asynchronous coordination. Idea generation for example thrives on loosely construed concepts, developed synchronously [20] which can be worked with and developed while still not fully understood or completely articulated. Csikszentmihalyi’s flow [10], or being in a state of adaptive challenge, similarly demands a synchronous environment for collaboration. To create such an environment is the goal of Collaborative Virtual Environments (CVE) research. Collaboration is given as the goal. Virtuality is the means, and many papers and conferences in the CVE field focus on the engineering challenges of providing Virtuality. This paper focuses on the interaction design of the Environment - an important consideration for creativity support [10, 25]. In section 2 we will set out relevant existing theories of collaborative place, from research into both virtual and real environments for creative collaboration. In section 3 we describe two experiments we have conducted, providing starting points for reflection on those theories as a foundation for design principles. Section 4 will set out our proposed principles, derived from both theory and reflective practice. While these principles are built on existing theory they have not been previously enunciated as such, and we consider the proposition of this list to be a useful and necessary starting point for further work in the design of virtual environments for the support of distributed creative collaboration. 2. PREVIOUS WORK Real world collaborative environments have a long history, and indeed a long pre-history. When we consider a CVE as a kind of collaborative place (not just a site for social interaction) we can apply our understanding of the design of collaborative places that predate virtual environments. 2.1 Space and Place Harrison and Dourish introduced CVE researchers to the distinction between empty space and meaningful place in their seminal 1996 paper [19]. In a ten-year retrospective paper Dourish [11] then drew out the continuum between the two concepts, pointing out that any designed space has some cultural context imparted by the decisions of its designer and therefore is to that extent a place. The key insights in these two papers are sourced respectively in architectural theory [32] and the related field of cultural geography. Although this work by Harrison and Dourish [19] is widely cited, much CVE research focuses on engineering and implementation, typically giving only passing mention of the design of the virtual places described, and no rationale for the design choices they embody [34]. Benford et al. [3] noted that the majority of CVEs are designed around a “virtual office” metaphor despite a lack of evidence that this is necessarily a good design choice. Benford’s paper has subsequently been cited as a justification for continuing to make Virtual Offices [15] (fig. 1), despite the implicit critique of this approach that was intended. More generally, this tendency appears to be an extrapolation from the OZCHI 2008, December 8-12, 2008, Cairns, QLD, Australia. Copyright the author(s) and CHISIG. Additional copies are available at the ACM Digital Library (http://portal.acm.org/dl.cfm ) or can be ordered from CHISIG(secretary@chisig.org ) OZCHI 2008 Proceedings ISBN: 0-9803063-4-5