skip to main content
10.1145/3537972.3537984acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmocoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Dance and Movement-Led Research for Designing and Evaluating Wearable Human-Computer Interfaces

Authors Info & Claims
Published:30 June 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Movement research and practice in the context of wearable technologies and human-computer interaction (HCI) shifts the design paradigm to the lived body. Human movement is characterized by sense, intention and expressiveness. Designing HCI from this standpoint opens up new possibilities to make computational devices and applications more accessible and integrated. This work presents an iterative, collaborative, and cross-disciplinary approach using wearable sensor bands in an open-ended performative exploration in exchange with a professional dancer. The goal is to understand the benefits and challenges of using movement-centered tools originating from dance practice and movement research and how they might feed back into the design, development and evaluation process of embodied technologies to improve human-computer interactions. Movement analysis systems and motion computation models are reviewed and leveraged in an interactive audiovisual system, with focus on using force-sensing resistors for low-level motion descriptors and Laban Movement Analysis for higher-level movement features. The artistic methodology, which combines practice and research, results, discussion of the iterative and collaborative process, and the final system architecture are the main topics presented in the paper.

References

  1. Susanne Bødker. 2006. When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges. In Proceedings of the 4th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: changing roles. 1–8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Linda Candy. 2014. Evaluation and experience in art. In Interactive Experience in the Digital Age. Springer, 25–48.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Erin A Carroll, Danielle Lottridge, Celine Latulipe, Vikash Singh, and Melissa Word. 2012. Bodies in critique: a technological intervention in the dance production process. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. 705–714.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Marco Donnarumma. 2017. Beyond the cyborg: performance, attunement and autonomous computation. International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media 13, 2(2017), 105–119.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Sarah Fdili Alaoui, Jules Françoise, Thecla Schiphorst, Karen Studd, and Frederic Bevilacqua. 2017. Seeing, sensing and recognizing Laban movement qualities. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 4009–4020.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Sarah Fdili Alaoui, Thecla Schiphorst, Shannon Cuykendall, Kristin Carlson, Karen Studd, and Karen Bradley. 2015. Strategies for embodied design: The value and challenges of observing movement. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition. 121–130.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Maiken Hillerup Fogtmann, Jonas Fritsch, and Karen Johanne Kortbek. 2008. Kinesthetic interaction: revealing the bodily potential in interaction design. In Proceedings of the 20th Australasian conference on computer-human interaction: designing for habitus and habitat. 89–96.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Leire Francés-Morcillo, Paz Morer-Camo, María Isabel Rodríguez-Ferradas, and Aitor Cazón-Martín. 2020. Wearable design requirements identification and evaluation. Sensors 20, 9 (2020), 2599.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Andrea Giomi. 2020. Somatic sonification in dance performances. From the Artistic to the Perceptual and Back. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Movement and Computing. 1–8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Tobias Großhauser, Bettina Bläsing, Corinna Spieth, and Thomas Hermann. 2012. Wearable sensor-based real-time sonification of motion and foot pressure in dance teaching and training. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society 60, 7/8 (2012), 580–589.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Lauren Hayes. 2019. Beyond skill acquisition: Improvisation, interdisciplinarity, and enactive music cognition. Contemporary Music Review 38, 5 (2019), 446–462.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Kristina Hook. 2018. Designing with the body: Somaesthetic interaction design. MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Stacy Hsueh, Sarah Fdili Alaoui, and Wendy E Mackay. 2019. Understanding Kinaesthetic Creativity in Dance. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Andy Hunt and Ross Kirk. 2000. Mapping strategies for musical performance. Trends in gestural control of music 21, 2000 (2000), 231–258.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Muhammad R. U. Islam and Shaoping Bai. 2019. Payload estimation using forcemyography sensors for control of upper-body exoskeleton in load carrying assistance. Modeling, Identification and Control 40, 4 (2019), 189–198.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Elizabeth Jochum and Jeroen Derks. 2019. Tonight We Improvise! Real-time tracking for human-robot improvisational dance. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Movement and Computing. 1–11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Andrew Johnston. 2014. Keeping research in tune with practice. In Interactive Experience in the Digital Age. Springer, 49–62.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Prithvi Kantan, Erika G Spaich, and Sofia Dahl. 2022. A Technical Framework for Musical Biofeedback in Stroke Rehabilitation. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems(2022).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Rudolf Laban and Lisa Ullmann. 1971. The mastery of movement.(1971).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Caroline Larboulette and Sylvie Gibet. 2015. A review of computable expressive descriptors of human motion. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Movement and Computing. 21–28.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Lian Loke and Toni Robertson. 2008. Inventing and devising movement in the design of movement-based interactive systems. In Proceedings of the 20th Australasian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Designing for Habitus and Habitat. 81–88.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Jakub Ryszard Matyja and Andrea Schiavio. 2013. Enactive music cognition: background and research themes.Constructivist foundations 8, 3 (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Teoma Jackson Naccarato and John MacCallum. 2016. From representation to relationality: Bodies, biosensors and mediated environments. Journal of Dance & Somatic Practices 8, 1 (2016), 57–72.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Joseph Paradiso, Eric Hu, and KY Hsiao. 1999. The cybershoe: A wireless multisensor interface for a dancer’s feet. Proceedings of International Dance and Technology 99 (1999), 57–60.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Katerina El Raheb, Marina Stergiou, Akrivi Katifori, and Yannis Ioannidis. 2019. Dance interactive learning systems: A study on interaction workflow and teaching approaches. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 52, 3 (2019), 1–37.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. I-M Sarivan, Johannes N Greiner, D Díez Álvarez, Felix Euteneuer, Matthias Reichenbach, Ole Madsen, and Simon Bøgh. 2020. Enabling real-time quality inspection in smart manufacturing through wearable smart devices and deep learning. Procedia Manufacturing 51 (2020), 373–380.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Wayne Siegel and Jens Jacobsen. 1998. The challenges of interactive dance: An overview and case study. Computer Music Journal 22, 4 (1998), 29–43.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Katta Spiel. 2021. The Bodies of TEI–Investigating Norms and Assumptions in the Design of Embodied Interaction. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 1–19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Seth Dominicus Thorn, Halley Willcox, and Sha Xin Wei. 2020. Processual and Experiential Design in Wearable Music Workshopping. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Movement and Computing. 1–8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Rachelle Palnick Tsachor and Tal Shafir. 2019. How shall I count the ways? A method for quantifying the qualitative aspects of unscripted movement with laban movement analysis. Frontiers in psychology 10 (2019), 572.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Danielle Wilde, Anna Vallgårda, and Oscar Tomico. 2017. Embodied design ideation methods: analysing the power of estrangement. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 5158–5170.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Zhen G Xiao and Carlo Menon. 2014. Towards the development of a wearable feedback system for monitoring the activities of the upper-extremities. Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation 11, 1(2014), 1–13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Liwei Zhao. 2001. Synthesis and acquisition of laban movement analysis qualitative parameters for communicative gestures. University of Pennsylvania.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Qiushi Zhou, Cheng Cheng Chua, Jarrod Knibbe, Jorge Goncalves, and Eduardo Velloso. 2021. Dance and Choreography in HCI: A Two-Decade Retrospective. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Dance and Movement-Led Research for Designing and Evaluating Wearable Human-Computer Interfaces
      Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        MOCO '22: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Movement and Computing
        June 2022
        262 pages
        ISBN:9781450387163
        DOI:10.1145/3537972

        Copyright © 2022 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 30 June 2022

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate50of110submissions,45%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format