skip to main content
10.1145/985921.986185acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Shake it!

Published:24 April 2004Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper presents our design process and resulting solution for the CHI 2004 Student Design Competition. The design challenge posed was to pilot audience participation as a way to reduce the controversy caused by judging at the Olympics in sports such as diving and gymnastics. We faced this challenge by applying both empirical and analytical human-computer interaction methods, as well as extensive research into the Olympics and available technologies. Our findings led us to suggest the "Shake It!" system for Athens 2004: Each spectator will have a shaker that divides into two parts, each part having a different color and producing a different sound. Audience members use the shaker to express agreement or disagreement with the judge's scores. A computer vision system will be used to process the input, and audience member votes will be represented on a large screen in the venue.

References

  1. Athens 2004. Available at <http://athens2004.com>Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkeson, C. Personal interview. 19, December 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Beyer, H and Holtzblatt, K. Contextual Design. Morgan Kaufman Publishers, USA, 1998Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Buhl Planetarium. Planet Quest observational study. 9, November 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Carnegie Mellon University diving meet. Contextual Inquiry. 1, November 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Carnegie Mellon Univ. Group User test. 1, Dec 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Carnegie Science Center. Focus Group. 9, Nov 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Cassidy, Jared. Personal interview. 9, Sep 2003Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. CHI 2004 Student Competition. Available at <<http://www.chi2004.org/cfp/student.html>>Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Dannenberg, Roger. Available at <http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~rbd/bib.html>Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Dannenberg, Roger. Carnegie Mellon University. Personal interview. 22, September 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Florida Film Festival, applause-meter information. Available at <http://floridafilmfestival.com/events_panels.html>Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Fried, L. Available at <<http://news.com.com/2100-1040-249304.html?legacy=cnet>>.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Gerasimov, Vadim. and Bender, Walter. Things that talk: Using sound for device-to-device and device-to-human communication. IBM Systems Journal Vol 39, Numbers 3 & 4, 2000 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Hudson, Scott. Personal interview. 8, December 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Krug, Julian. Personal interview. 29, August 2003Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. List of companies working in audience voting. Available at <http://dir.yahoo.com/Business_and _Economy/Business_to_Business/Conventions_and_Trade_Shows/Presentation_Services_and_Equipment/Audience_Response/>Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Maynes-Aminzade, D. Avail. at <http://monzy.com>Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Maynes-Aminzade, D, Pausch, R, and Seitz, S. Techniques for Interactive Audience Participation. ICMI 2002 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Neirotti, L, Bosetti, H, and Teed, K. Motivation to attend the 1996 Summer Olympic Games. Journal of Travel Research Feb 2001V39-3, p.327-331Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Nielsen, J., and Mack, R. Usability Inspection Methods. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, USA, 1994 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Pausch, Randy. Available at <http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~pausch>Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Pausch, Randy. Carnegie Mellon University. Personal interview.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Red Fig. Available at <http://www.redfig.com>Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Schell, Jesse. Personal interview. 21, November 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. University of Pittsburgh diving meet. Contextual Inquiry. 10, October 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. USA Diving Online. Available at <http://www.usa-diving.org/>Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. USA Gymnastics Online. Available at <<http://www.usa-gymnastics.org>>Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Yoo, S. Soh, M and Park, J. Personal Communication. 22, September 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

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

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader