Tag Archive: embodied interaction


Last Wednesday most of our class had our mock exam. There we had to present our progress, stance and achievements in our project, both practical and theoretical. Making a presentation takes a lot of your time, so I spend most of it working towards my mock exam. In this post I will look at my results of the mock exam, but first I’m gonna look what I have done before it (I didn’t update my blog for two weeks I think). Below my chronological progress what I have done the past weeks.

Photo collages

I gathered all my research I did from the surveys and the photo documentation from the users television environment. I ‘documented’ the results in my sketchbook and in some folders in my laptop, but didn’t apply any decent structure in it. For the presentation (but also for myself), I’ve made a collage of pictures that explain the main conclusions of my field research. The goal of it was to apply this conclusions in my next step, building a testing environment and the object design.

resting positions remotes

resting positions remotes

Persona’s

During my progress I was figuring out how important persona’s are for my project. My target group could be everyone that uses the television (except of course far extremes like disabled people). In the end I thought it was better to make persona’s, just to understand the target group better. I based these persona’s on the people I visited during my field research. I’ve made one central one and two extremes (one technical user and one technophobe).

three persona's

three persona's

Testing room

A while ago I arranged a place to build my test room. During that time I gathered some second hand stuff for decoration, thought about how to do the video documentation and alternative set-ups for testing. With alternative set-ups I want to test how the setting has influence on the user experience, according to the embodied interaction theory. Thats why I want to use different seats, like a couch, fat-boy and crappy chair. I also did my first test, but I will come back to that later.

observation and testing room

observation and testing room

Research set-up

Before I wanted to test users and objects in the test room, I decided to put my observation goals on paper. That’s why I’ve set up an observation document. In this document I’ve thought about my goals, expected results and observation structure.

Sketches and low-fidelity prototypes

My goal was to start with very simple objects, only primary shapes and simple interactions with it. With each iteration I want to define the object(s) more in detail. I’ve started with sketching simple shapes. Secondary was the feedback within the object itself. I thought about simple feedback, like a weight that moves or the characteristics of an object (like softness, form, warm or cold). I bought some stuff from a toy store and DIY shop to make these objects. In the observation document I defined what the expected results would be of each object.
In the mock examination I got some comments on this process, which I will come back on later.

Low-fidelity prototypes

Low-fidelity prototypes

observation room first test

The next step was to test these objects with users and I started with fellow students. I did this through narration (an IDEO method card; a way of testing). This comes down to giving simple commands and let the user think out loud. My main goal was to find out if my set-up worked and some first comments on the objects itself. I was really happy how the testing went, so this is a good basis for future testing.

User testing low-fidelity prototypes

Supportive Narrative

Last but not least, I also worked hard to get a nice draft for the mock examination. I started with finding useful snippets from other papers and books to get a good basis. What also took a lot of time was the outline; structuring my paper relevant to my own project. Writing the first chapter in English was harder than I thought, but I think this will be manageable for the rest of my paper.

Mock exam and feedback

The mock presentation went well, but I went over the 10 minutes, so next time I have to shorten the presentation a lot. After a stressful period of waiting I got the result: a disappointing orange (you get red-orange-green as an indicator). In short, the comments where that I was on the right trajectory, but I have to adapt my end goal a bit and focus more on the object design. Although I wasn’t really happy with the result, they teachers told me I don’t have to worry to much because it are relatively small adjustments.

At the moment my process is mainly research: I want do define my object more in detail through each iteration. It’s a research driven progress. The comments where I have to be more of a designer, so I have to go deeper in the object design. That means defining the form, feeling and interaction more in detail before each iteration. Some examples are choice of materials, form and function. What is central is the interaction with the object itself, so the ‘feeling’ and expectations is most important for the device. I have to build a clear continuum of forms, material selection and feedback. I have to focus on tangibility of designed objects and tested experiences.

With this I have to go to workshops to get some inspiration or guidance. I have to improve my artistic standard, so I have to go more crazy with ideas. I have to apply the same form of research (and use of results) I did for my field research.

My original planning was to work towards a functioning prototype. I could get some help from Aduen, who is an expert on physical computing. The comments where that instead of working to a functioning prototype, I have to make a proof of concept video. This is because of the limited time, and I could focus more on applying the research and concept ideas.

So the first thing I have to do is adjust my end goal (through my planning) and beginning with detailed sketching of the remote object. I can get some help from people in my environment, who are more specialized on this area than me.

Work work!

Start of prototyping

Next week we have a meeting with our class again. Then we have to present a framework of our mock presentation and this is meant as a try-out for the official presentation. That means we are somewhere in the middle of our project. According to my planning I’m still a little bit behind schedule; I had to make some low-fidelity prototyping this week. It’s about finding a balance between building a solid foundation, making the right decisions and working as fast as possible. As always, time is not on my side.

I’ve been busy with putting every bit of information I got together. Below you can see the end of my brainstorm session. I’ve put some extra pictures and source material on the wall in our office room for inspiration too.

end of brainstorm

end of brainstorm

I got some help from Aduen with brainstorming. it was very helpful to get some extra ideas and inspiration.

In retrospect, my starting point of my project was to redesign the control over the television, and adapt it optimally to the human body, human behavior and the television environment. It practically boils down to redesigning the remote in a critical way. I had different ideas to achieve this. I thought about gestures only, redesigning the interface on the remote itself or using a complete new object (not like the candybar design that all remotes have).

My plan for next week will be low fidelty prototyping. Hereby I want take it to the basics of embodied interaction. I want to build a (fake) set up of a television environment and figure out how the average user expects how to control the television and its devices, without the use of any buttons (!). With this I want to find out what mental models people have of a ‘buttonless’ remote.

  • How will people think it will control the television set this way, only through gestures?
  • How do you select different devices?
  • What kind of patterns will emerge from different target groups?
  • What feedback is expected in the controller itself?
  • I want to be the remote as less intrusive as possible (my research concluded that less attention to control, the better it is);
  • I want to test different shapes. a candybar? a cube? a ball? a stick? a pillow?

I have some basic ideas I want to test through observation. I want to put up a camera to document the testing. In the weekend I will develop a plan how to do this observation, so I can start with it as early as possible.

This week is an official holiday week in the Netherlands. The school is still open, but we had to subscribe to get in and the school is only opened for limited hours. It’s really deserted here. Luckily my office partner is here to have some talks once in a while. Like every holiday period, the process is a bit slow.

Last week I mostly worked on the context research. I finished researching itself in the end of the week. I’m really happy I have around 15 filled in questionnaires. I wrote down all off the interesting results from the answers I got. Most of the assumptions I had where right, but a couple of them where a bit different then expected.

Besides the questionnaires, I also went to experience the television environment myself. Hereby I documented the pictures of the television environment in a moodboard mock-up, categorizing all the details in a visual way (I may not say moodboard because Irene hates it). Irene also pointed me a while ago to a relevant course going on somewhere else on the planet, about field research for design (link). It is mostly about documenting and using results from field research in an efficient way. I used (and still use) the blog as a guideline for my research. A picture what caught my attention was this one:

User Experience Treasure Map

User Experience Treasure Map

It really goes in detail of a step by step plan for the process of defining the user experience, so I won’t use every element because of the limited time.

When I was finished with documenting the results, I started writing down keywords of my ideas, findings and inspirations. I have some ideas in my head how the system is going to work. Through brainstorming and writing everything down I want to structure my thoughts and come up with solid ideas. The next step is prototyping and testing my ideas, hopefully with some user testing.

start of writing down keywords

start of writing down keywords

Besides the usual project stuff, I went to the university library to get some additional papers for my supportive narrative. I found some relatively recent papers about embodied interaction and gestural interfaces. Reading is on hold for a moment, but they can prove useful in the future.

What drives me?

Last Tuesday our class had the first meeting with our tutor. Irene van Peer is now going to guide me to the end of my project. We all had to do a small presentation what our status was of each project. It was very interesting to see what everyone is doing. Unfortunately I was the last person who had to do the presentation and I had to rush a bit because we were out of time.

The main comment was that I have to figure out what area interests me the most. Embodied interaction within the living environment is a broad subject, of course. The goal I had set for myself was that I want to look at the possibilities of the embodied interaction and to pick a specific subject through prototyping and research. The plan was to do this the next few weeks. The problem with this is that I can get lost in the process, and don’t come up with a clear subject in the end. It is better to define myself as soon as possible.

During my presentation I gave some examples of projects that use physical interaction as input. With every video, I had some (mostly negative) comments about the interaction. Irene gave me the task to look at every video, and figure out which underlying subject drives me. So here it goes.

Canesta TV Gesture User Interface Demo


the video in short:
A television remote is an annoying necessarily to control your television, the video explains. Especially the on-screen interface is badly designed. Control through gestures is more intuitive. Simple movements with your hands makes you happy, jay! You can even use it while cooking! No need to put your dirty hands on the remote to change the channel.

My comments
Is moving your hands really better in this situation? Do you want to wave, swipe, push your hand when you are sitting on your lazy couch after you come home from work? It are simple physical movements for sure, but doesn’t it become tiring after an extensive period of time? I think buttons on a remote are better then doing physical movements, because it’s more responsive. Even if the remote is unintuitive. The problem lays in the design of the remote, not the interaction. Reminds me of an example of Nicolas Zurcher, whereby he looked at the buttons of the remote we really use:

Nicolas Zurcher's remotes

Which parts of the remote do we actually use?

And how do you go through a large quantity of television stations with only gestures? How do you control other functions, like volume, source selection, the television guide and use of other complex things? How to achieve this without learning complex gestures or using another type of input?

Gestures are not the best way to interact with the system in this situation, I believe.

Embodied Playlist Access


The video in short
The concept is about using personal objects to control your music. Every object stands for a different type of music playlist. The point is to get access through different selections of data by moving personal objects.

My comments:
What interests me is quite simple; by using physical objects you get access to personalized data. It avoids fiddling with computers (i.e. keyboard and mice). It makes selecting you music preference personal and physical. The technical barrier (where tech savvy people are so used to) is gone. The question remains if personal objects are a good representation to get access to different types of music. I see some possibilities in other forms of data, however.

MusicShapes


The video
from the youtube description: “The objective of this project was to produce a concept and a prototype of a physical computing system that would leverage the principles of embodied interaction. We developed a system that combined a webcam and a series of geometric shapes, which would play a sound or music clip depending on which of the faces is facing up. The sounds played by an object were influenced by the surrounding objects and their positions.”

My comments
Not only the movements of the shapes are input, but also the distance between objects matter. The objects can ‘communicate’ with each other, manipulating the output by moving them. It is an very early prototype, but imagine the possibilities implementing this in everyday objects.

Scratch Mat

An very simple example in real life. What makes it awesome that it changes behavior. How many times do you wipe your feet when you enter a building? This mat makes wiping your feet a playful interaction. The output of the system is very simple, but still is effective in this situation.

Siftables

Irene gave this project as a suggestion to look at. Siftables are small interactive computers with a display, wireless communication and motion sensing. What is relevant for my project is that it uses real life gestures as input. For example, pouring paint from one siftable to another, and thus changing it’s color. I would murder someone to get some of these.

I will put my conclusions in the next post.

Some research

I took the time to do some research. I found a paper about embodied cognition. This is quite a recent field in the area of cognitive psychology. It is a long story, but it boils down to this:

(…) the nature of the human mind is largely determined by the form of the human body. They (philosophers, cognitive scientists) argue that all aspects of cognition, such as ideas, thoughts, concepts and categories are shaped by aspects of the body. These aspects include the perceptual system, the intuitions that underlie the ability to move, activities and interactions with our environment and the naive understanding of the world that is built into the body and the brain.

The core of the theory is quite simple and logical. But it’s interesting how the human mind develops mental models, and how much influence the physical body has on this process. An article that explains embodied cognition in an easy, mainstream way can be found here. It uses the movies Avatar and District 9 as a nice way to explain it.

This theory is applied through the field of embodied interaction. I want to focus myself in this area the coming weeks.

I also reading some interesting books  / papers to support my studies:
Donald A. Norman - Emotional Design
Dan Roam - The back of a Napkin (extended edition, F. Yeah!)
Scott R. Klemmer - How Bodies Matter: Five themes for Interaction Design

Powered by WordPress. Theme: Motion by 85ideas. Adapted by N1kname.