FANFEEDS: Evaluation of socially generated information feed on second screen as a TV show companion

EuroiTV'12 - Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Interactive TV and Video

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 87-96

  Basapur, Santosh ^a   Mandalia, Hiren ^a   Chaysinh, Shirley ^a   Lee, Young ^a   Venkitaraman, Narayanan ^a   Metcalf, Crysta ^a  

^a MOTOROLA INC   (United States)

Author keywords

fan generated information feed; second screen iTV application

Indexed keywords

CONCEPT EVALUATION; FIELD TRIAL; SOCIAL DYNAMICS; SOCIAL GROUPS; SOCIAL LIFE; TIME-SHIFTED TV;

DIGITAL TELEVISION; MOTIVATION;

INTERACTIVE TELEVISION;

EID: 84864718802     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2325616.2325636     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (32)

1. AJAX. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajax-%28programming%29
2. Apache Web Server. http://httpd.apache.org/
3. Basapur, S., Harboe, G., Mandalia, H., Novak, A., Vuong, V., and Metcalf, C. 2011. Field trial of a dual device user experience for iTV. In Proceedings of the 9th International European conference on Interactive Television (EuroiTV '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 127-136
4. Bernard, H. R. 1998. Handbook of Methods in Cultural Anthropology. Altamira Press
5. Beyer, H., and Holtzblatt, K. 1998. Contextual Design: Defining Customer-Centered Systems. Morgan Kaufmann Pu3blishers.
6. Boxee Box. http://www.boxee.tv/
7. BuddyTV Application. http://www.buddytv.com/
8. Cesar, P., Chorianopoulos, K., and Jensen, J. 2008. Social television and user interaction. Comput. Entertain. 6, 1, Article 4 (May 2008), 10 pages.
9. Cesar, P., Bulterman, D. C., and Jansen J. Leveraging user impact: an architecture for secondary screens usage in interactive television. Multimedia Systems Journal, 15(3):127--142, 2009
10. Cesar, P., Bulterman, D. C. A., Jansen, J., Geerts, D., Knoche, H., and Seager, W. 2009. Fragment, tag, enrich, and send: Enhancing social sharing of video. ACM Trans. Multimedia Comput. Commun. Appl. 5, 3, Article 19 (August 2009), 27 pages.
11. Cruickshank, L., Tsekleves, E., Whitham, R., Hill, A., Kondo, K.: Making interactive TV easier to use: Interface design for a second screen approach. The Design Journal 10(3) (2007).
12. rd Jan 2011 at: http://forrester.com/rb/Research/us-consumer-pc-market-in-2015/q/id/57210/ t/2
13. Facebook's PHP SDK Overview. http://developers.facebook.com/docs/ reference/php/
14. Fallahkhair, S., Pemberton, L., and Masthoff, J. 2004. A Dual Device Scenario for Informal Language Learning: Interactive Television Meets the Mobile Phone. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT '04). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 16-20.
15. Fallahkhair, S., Pemberton, L., and Griffiths, R. 2005. Dual Device User Interface Design for Ubiquitous Language Learning: Mobile Phone and Interactive Television (iTV). In Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE '05). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 85-92.
16. Geerts, D., Cesar, P., and Bulterman, D. 2008. The implications of program genres for the design of social television systems. In Proceeding of the international Conference on Designing interactive User Experiences For TV and Video, pp. 71-80
17. GetGlue Application. www.getglue.com
18. Harboe, G., Massey, N., Metcalf, C., Wheatley, D., and Romano, G. 2008. The uses of social television. Comput. Entertain. 6, 1, Article 8 (May 2008), 15 pages.
19. Huang, E., Harboe, G., Tullio, T., Novak, A., Massey, N., Metcalf, C., and Romano, G. 2009. Of social television comes home: a field study of communication choices and practices in tv-based text and voice chat. In Proc. of the 27th international conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI '09). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 585-594.
20. IntoNow website: http://www.intonow.com/ci
21. JSON. http://www.json.org/
22. Krause, J. 2003. Enhanced TV: A Bridge Between Broadcast and Interactivity. Indiana Univ., Dept. of Telecomm. (http://www.indiana.edu/ ~telecom/people/faculty/krause/etv/etv-article16.pdf)
23. LeCompte, M., and Schensul, J. (1999) Analyzing and Interpreting Ethnographic Data. Ethnographer's Toolkit, V.5, AltaMira Press, CA, US
24. Miso Application. www.gomiso.com
25. Nathan, M., Harrison, C., Yarosh, S., Terveen, L., Stead, L., and Amento, B. 2008. CollaboraTV: making television viewing social again. In Proceeding of the international Conference on Designing interactive User Experiences For TV and Video, pp. 85-94
26. Nielsen Consumer Reports. 2011. State of Media: Consumer Usage Report at website: http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/mediauniverse/
27. Obrist, M., Moser, C., Tscheligi, M., and Alliez, D. 2010. Field evaluation of a cross platform 6 key navigation model and a unified user interface design. In Proceedings of the 8th International European Conference on Interactive TV (EuroITV '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 141-144.
28. Poivre, Sebastien. 2011. RendezVous Project, Orange Labs. Presentation at "iTV in Industry" session at EuroiTV 2011
29. Robertson, S., Wharton, C., Ashworth, C., Franzke, M. 1996. Dual device user interface design: PDAs and interactive television, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: common ground, p.79-86, April 13-18, 1996, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
30. Samuels, W.C. 1996. EarthWeb and ACTV unveil HyperTV™ breakthrough. Business Wire.
31. ScreenTribe. http://www.screentribe.com/
32. TVLoop Application. http://www.tvloop.com/