在人們透過電腦媒介傳播的方式。例如文字聊天訊息來相互溝通時。有時會 因為無法以非言語的方式來傳達意旨。例如聲調、表情等。造成雙方對於對話有 所誤解。然而。視訊溝通雖然提供了如臉部表情、手勢、外貌等更豐富的訊息。 但同時地。這些額外資訊有可能造成隱私方面的疑慮。或者對於個人外觀的偏見。 另一方面。在團體聊天室中。每個人的視訊畫面同時出現在單一視窗中。這使得 團體聊天室中的成員必須付出額外的心思與注意力。才能觀察每個人的表情。
在本論文中。我們提出了一個將文字聊天與基於特徵點所呈現的臉部表情結 合的方案。我們將這個系統命名為 KinChat。KinChat 利用 Kinect 的體感偵測 功能來追蹤並呈現使用者的臉部表情。在本論文中。我們做了兩個實驗。第一個 實驗在驗證基於特徵點的臉部表情的隱私性。以及臉部表情傳達的準確性。在第 二個實驗中。我們將 KinChat 與傳統的視訊、純文字聊天來比較。了解其對使 用者的影響。實驗結果顯示。KinChat 能在提供更佳的隱私保護的情況下。保有 一定程度的臉部表情辨識的準確性。此外。在實際對話中。實驗顯示 KinChat 能 降低使用者的社交焦慮。同時提升他們對於整個對話內容的理解程度。除了這兩 個實驗外。我們也嘗試將多人的表情合成為單一表情。希望藉此傳達團體整體的 情緒。在本論文的最後。我們亦進行了一個初步實驗以測試此功能在團體溝通中的效用。

In computer-mediated communication (CMC), the lack of non-verbal visual cues in text communication can cause misunderstanding, as there may not be enough social cues (e.g., facial expression) for one to determine how their partners feel and whether they understand the messages. However, video-mediated communication with rich social cues including how one looks like may raise privacy concerns and social biases. Participants of group conversation also face the difficulty in managing rich visual cues produced by multiple group members.
In this thesis, we propose an interaction technique namely KinChat that combines text chat with feature-based visualization of facial expression that uses motion sensor and 2D graphics to trace and represent interlocutors’ faces during conversations. We conducted two exploratory studies to examine the utilities of this feature-based visualization on de-identification and awareness of facial expression, as well as the broader impact on the outcomes of interactive communication. The results indicate that feature-based visualization of facial expression can preserve both awareness of facial expression and privacy, and can lead to improved understanding and reduced communication anxiety when applied to communication settings. In addition, we designed an extra application, which represents general emotion and social atmosphere of a group with a single synthesized visualization of multiple users’ faces. We also conducted a pilot study to examine this application design.

1. Argyle, M. Non-verbal communication in human social interaction. Non-Verbal Communication 12, 443.
2. Bailenson,J.N., Yee,N., Merget,D. and Schroeder,R. The Effect of Behavioral Realism and Form Realism of Real-Time Avatar Faces on Verbal Disclosure, Nonverbal Disclosure, Emotion Recognition, and Copresence in Dyadic Interaction. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 15, 4 (2006) 359–372
3. Bassili, J. N. Emotion Recognition: The Role of Facial Movement and the Relative Importance of Upper and Lower Areas of the Face. Journal of personality and social psychology 37, 11 (1979), 2049-2058
4. Baylor,A.L. Promoting motivation with virtual agents and avatars: role of visual presence and appearance. Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B 364, 1525 (2009), 3559-3565.
5. Bishop,T. Xbox launches Avatar Kinect: Areviewby my avatar. GeekWire (2011). http://www.geekwire.com/2011/finally-cartoon-chat- xbox-launches-avatar-kinect/
6. Bitouk,D., Kumar,N., Dhillon,S., Belhumeur,P., and Nayar, S. K. Face swapping: automatically replacing faces in photographs. In Proc. SIGGRAPH 2008. ACM Press (2008), 39.
7. Booth-Butterfield,S.,&Gould,M.The Communication Anxiety Inventory: Validation of State-and-Context Communication Apprehension. Communication Quarterly 34 (1986), 194-205.
8. Boyle, M., Edwards, C. & Greenberg, S. The Effects of Filtered Video on Awareness and Privacy. In Proc. CSCW 2000, ACM Press (2000), 1-10.
9. Burke, M. Kraut, R. and Marlow, W. Social capital on facebook: differentiating uses and users. In Proc. CHI 2011. ACM Press (2011), 571–580.
10.Caplan, S. A social skill account of problematic Internet use. Journal of Communication 55, 4 (2005) 721-736
11.Clark, H. H. and Brennan S. E. Grounding in Communications. Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, (1991), Washington DC: APA, 127-149.
12.Denning, C. Physical Attractiveness Bias in Hiring: What Is Beautiful Is Good. (2003), 14–17.
13.Ekman, P. and Friesen, W. V. Unmasking the Face: A Guide to Recognizing Emotions from Facial Cues. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall (1975).
14.Erickson, T., and Kellogg, W. A. Social Translucence: An Approach to Designing Systems That Support Social Processes. Computer-Human Interaction 7, 1 (2000), 59–83
15.Fish, R. S., Kraut, R. E., Root, R. W., & Rice, R. E. Evaluating video as a technology for informal communication. In Proc. CHI 1992. ACM Press (1992), 37-48.
16.Fulk, J., Steinfield, C. W., Schmitz, J., and Power, J. G. A Social Information Processing Model of Media Use in Organizations. Communication Research 14, 5 (1987), 529–552.
17.Gao, G., Wang, H.-C., Cosley, D., and Fussell, S. R. Same Translation but Different Experience: The Effects of Highlighting on Machine-translated Conversations. In Proc. CHI 2013, ACM Press (2013), 449–458
18.Joinson, A. N. Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology 31, 2 (2001), 177–192.
19.Kafai, Y. B., Fields, D. A., & Cook, M. Your second selves: avatar designs and identity play in a teen virtual world. In Proc. SITUATED PLAY (2007).
20.McCroskey, J. C. and McCain, T. A. The measurement of interpersonal attraction. Speech Monographs 41, (1974), 261-266
21.McLeod, P. L. Effects of Anonymity and Social Comparison of Rewards on Computer-Mediated Group Brainstorming. Small Group Research 42, 4(2011), 475–503.
22.Neustaedter, C., Greenberg, S., and Boyle, M. Blur filtration fails to preserve privacy for home-based video conferencing. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 13, 1(2006), 1-36.
23.O’Brien, L. and Murnane, J. An investigation into how avatar appearance can affect interactions in a virtual world. International Journal of Social and Humanistic Computing 1, 2 (2009), 192–202.
24.Peña, J., Hancock, J. T., and Merola, N. A. The priming effects of avatars in virtual settings. Communication Research 36, 6(2009), 838-856.
25.Ratan, R. and Hasler, B. S. Playing Well with Virtual Classmates: Relating Avatar Design to Group Satisfaction. In Proc. CSCW 2014, ACM Press (2014), 564-573.
26.Rennert, K., Karapanos, E. Faceit: supporting reflection upon social anxiety events with lifelogging. Ext. Abstract. CHI 2013, ACM Press (2013), 457-462
27.Tansuriyavong, S., and Hanaki, S. I. Privacy protection by concealing persons in circumstantial video image. Proceedings of the 2001 workshop on Perceptive user interfaces. ACM Press (2001), 1-4.
28.Tidwell, L. C. and Walther, J. B. Computer-Mediated Communication Effects on Disclosure, Impressions, and Interpersonal Evaluations: Getting to Know One Another a Bit at a Time. Human Communication Research 28, 3 (2002), 317–348.
29.Walther, J. B. Computer-mediated communication impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research 23, 1(1996), 3-43.
30.Wang, S-P., Lai, C-T., Huang, A-J. and Wang, H-C. KinChat: Veiling Your Face without Suppressing Facial Expression in Text Communication. Ext. Abstract. CHI 2014, ACM Press (2014), 2461-2466.
31.Yee, N., and Bailenson, J. The Proteus effect: The effect of transformed self representation on behavior. Human communication research 33, 3(2007), 271-290.
32.Yee, N., Ducheneaut, N., Yao, M. and Nelson, L. Do Men Heal More when in Drag? : Conflicting Identity Cues Between User and Avatar. In Proc. CHI 2011. ACM Press (2011), 773–776.
33.Zhao, Q. A., and Stasko, J. T. The awareness-privacy tradeoff in video supported informal awareness: A study of image-filtering based techniques. Georgia Institute of Technology (1998), 1-8.