ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Comparing presentation summaries: slides vs. reading vs. listening
Full text PdfPdf (1.06 MB)
Source Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems archive
Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems table of contents
The Hague, The Netherlands
Pages: 177 - 184  
Year of Publication: 2000
ISBN:1-58113-216-6
Authors
Liwei He  Microsoft Research, One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA
Elizabeth Sanocki  Microsoft Research, One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA
Anoop Gupta  Microsoft Research, One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA
Jonathan Grudin  Microsoft Research, One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA
Sponsor
SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 3,   Downloads (12 Months): 42,   Citation Count: 4
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/332040.332427
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

As more audio and video technical presentations go online, it becomes imperative to give users effective summarization and skimming tools so that they can find the presentation they want and browse through it quickly. In a previous study, we reported three automated methods for generating audio-video summaries and a user evaluation of those methods. An open question remained about how well various text/image only techniques will compare to the audio-video summarizations. This study attempts to fill that gap.

This paper reports a user study that compares four possible ways of allowing a user to skim a presentation: 1) PowerPoint slides used by the speaker during the presentation, 2) the text transcript created by professional transcribers from the presentation, 3) the transcript with important points highlighted by the speaker, and 4) a audio-video summary created by the speaker. Results show that although some text-only conditions can match the audio-video summary, users have a marginal preference for audio-video (ANOVA f=3.067, p=0.087). Furthermore, different styles of slide-authoring (e.g., detailed vs. big-points only) can have a big impact on their effectiveness as summaries, raising a dilemma for some speakers in authoring for on-demand previewing versus that for live audiences.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
2
3
 
4
 
5
Covell, M., Withgott, M., & Slaney, M. Machl: Nonuniform Time-Scale Modification of Speech. Proc. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, Seattle WA, May 12-15 1998.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
 
14
Stanford Online: Masters in Electrical Engineering, 1998. http ://scpd. stanford.edu/cee/telecom/onlinedegree.html
 
15
 
16
17
 
18
Tonomura, Y. & Abe, S., Content Oriented Visual Interface Using Video Icons for Visual Database Systems. In Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, vol. 1, 1990. pp 183- 198.
19


Collaborative Colleagues:
Liwei He: colleagues
Elizabeth Sanocki: colleagues
Anoop Gupta: colleagues
Jonathan Grudin: colleagues