Evelien van de Garde-Perik
Abstract
This article focuses on the conceptual relation between the user's input and a system's output in interaction with smart tangible objects. Understanding this input-output relation (IO relation) is a prerequisite for the design of meaningful interaction. A meaningful IO relation allows the user to know what to do with a system to achieve a certain goal and to evaluate the outcome. The work discussed in this article followed a design research process in which four concepts were developed and prototyped. An evaluation was performed using these prototypes to investigate the effect of highly different IO relations on the user's understanding of the interaction. The evaluation revealed two types of IO relations differing in functionality and the number of mappings between the user and system actions. These two types of relations are described by two IO models that provide an overview of these mappings. Furthermore, they illustrate the role of the user and the influence of the system in the process of understanding the interaction. The analysis of the two types of IO models illustrates the value of understanding IO relations for the design of smart tangible objects.
- Archer, B. 1995. The nature of research. Co-desing 2, 6--13.Google Scholar
- Bartlett, F. C. 1995. Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Blackwell, A. F. and Edge, D. 2009. Articulating tangible interfaces. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (TEI'09). ACM Press, New York, 113--118. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bunge, M. 1999. The Dictionary of Philosophy. Prometheus Books, Amherst, NY.Google Scholar
- Cheyer, A. and Julia, L. 1998. Multimodal maps: An agent-based approach. In Multimodal Human-Computer Communication, H. Bunt, R.-J. Beun, and T. Borghuis, Eds, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.~1374, Springer, 111--121. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Crilly, N. 2011. Do users know what designers are up to? Product experience and the inference of persuasive intentions. Int. J. Des. 5, 3, 1--15.Google Scholar
- Djajadiningrat, T., Overbeeke, K., and Wensveen, S. 2002. But how, donald, tell us how? On the creation of meaning in interaction design through feed forward and inherent feedback. In Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques (DIS'02). ACM Press, New York, 285--291. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Djajadiningrat, T., Wensveen, S., Frens, J., and Overbeeke, K. 2004. Tangible products: Redressing the balance between appearance and action. Personal Ubiq. Comput. 8, 5, 294--309. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fishkin, K. P. 2004. A taxonomy for and analysis of tangible interfaces. Personal Ubiq. Comput. 8, 5, 347--358. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Friedman, K. 2003. Theory construction in design research: Approaches and methods. Des. Stud. 24, 6, 507--522.Google ScholarCross Ref
- van den Hoven, E., Frens, J., Aliakseyeu, D., Martens, J.-B., Overbeeke, K., and Peters, P. 2007. Design research and tangible interaction. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (TEI'07). ACM Press, New York, 109--115. Google ScholarDigital Library
- van den Hoven, E., van de Garde-Perik, E., Offermans, S., van Boerdonk, K., and Lenssen, K.-M. 2012. Moving tangible interaction systems to the next level. Comput. (To appear) 68--74.Google Scholar
- Hurtienne, J. and Israel, J. H. 2007. Image schemas and their metaphorical extensions: Intuitive patterns for tangible interaction. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (TEI'07). ACM Press, New York, 127--134. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ishii, H. 2008. Tangible bits: Beyond pixels. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction. ACM Press, New York, xv--xxv. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jameson, A. and Riedl, J. 2011. Introduction to the transactions on interactive intelligent systems. ACM Trans. Interact. Intell. Syst. 1, 1. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kaltenbrunner, M. and Bencina, R. 2007. ReacTIVision: A computer-vision framework for table-based tangible interaction. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (TEI'07). ACM Press, New York, 69--74. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Krippendorff, K. and Butter, R. 1984. Product semantics: Exploring the symbolic qualities of form in innovation. Innovation, Spring, 4--9.Google Scholar
- Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. University Of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Lloyd, P. A. and Snelders, D. 2003. What was philippe starck thinking of? Des. Stud. 24, 237--253.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mazalek, A. and van den Hoven, E. 2009. Framing tangible interaction frameworks. Artif. Intell. Engin. Des. Anal. Manufact. 23, 3, 225--235. Google ScholarDigital Library
- van Mensvoort, K. 2007. Information decoration: Our environment as an information carrier. In Artvertising: The Million Dollar Building, M. Gerritzen, Ed., Idea Books.Google Scholar
- Millon, T. 2003. Handbook of Psychology: Personality and Social Psychology. John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
- Norman, D. A. 1986. Cognitive engineering. In User Centered System Design; New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction, D. A. Norman and S. W. Draper, Eds., Erlbaum Associates Inc.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Norman, D. A. 2002. The Design of Everyday Things. Basic Books. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Passer, M. W. and Smith, R. E. 2005. Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behavior with In-Psych Cd-Rom and PowerWeb. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Preece, J., Rogers, Y., and Sharp, H. 2002. Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction. Wiley. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Redström, J. 2008. Tangled interaction: On the expressiveness of tangible user interfaces. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 15, 4, 1--17. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rijsdijk, S. A., Hultink, E. J., and Diamantopoulos, A. 2007. Product Intelligence: Its conceptualization, measurement and impact on consumer satisfaction. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 35, 3, 340--356.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shaer, O., Leland, N., Calvillo-Gamez, E. H., and Jacob, R. J. K. 2004. The tac paradigm: Specifying tangible user interfaces. Personal Ubiq. Comput, 8, 5, 359--369. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sharlin, E., Watson, B., Kitamura, Y., Kishino, F., and Itoh, Y. 2004. On tangible user interfaces, humans and spatiality. Personal Ubiq. Comput. 8, 5, 338--346. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Skinner, B. F. 1937. Two types of conditioned reflex: A reply to konorski and miller. J. General Psychol. 16, 1937, 272--279.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Thompson, R. F. 2005. In search of memory traces. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 56, 1, 1--23.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ullmer, B. and Ishii, H. 2000. Emerging frameworks for tangible user interfaces. IBM Syst. J. 39, 3--4, 915--931. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wensveen, S., Djajadiningrat, T., and Overbeeke, K. 2004. Interaction frogger: A design framework to couple action and function through feedback and feedforward. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques (DIS'04). ACM Press, New~York, 177--184. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- An analysis of input-output relations in interaction with smart tangible objects
Recommendations
Design research & tangible interaction
TEI '07: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interactionThe research on Tangible Interaction (TI) has been inspired by many different disciplines, including psychology, sociology, engineering and human-computer interaction (HCI). Now that the field is getting more mature, in the sense that basic technologies ...
Comparing Tangible and Multi-touch Interaction for Interactive Data Visualization Tasks
TEI '16: Proceedings of the TEI '16: Tenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied InteractionInteractive visualization plays a key role in the analysis of large datasets. It can help users to explore data, investigate hypotheses and find patterns. The easier and more tangible the interaction, the more likely it is to enhance understanding. This ...
Tangible 3D tabletops: combining tangible tabletop interaction and 3D projection
NordiCHI '12: Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Making Sense Through DesignIn this paper we present the tangible 3D tabletop and discuss the design potential of this novel interface. The tangible 3D tabletop combines tangible tabletop interaction with 3D projection in such a way that the tangible objects may be augmented with ...
Comments