Microblog: Emotional Design

Chapter One - Attractive Things Work Better

Summary

In experiments run on both the Japanese and Israeli people attractive designs were found to be easier to use, or more enjoyable than unattractive designs. The author asserts that this is because of the positive affect that is created with an attractive design, leading to more creative ways of functioning. Three levels of processing are explored: visceral, behavioral, and reflexive. Visceral is very reactive and mostly hardwired the same in everyone. Behavioral is not conscious and is developed based on culture and influences. Reflexive is the highest with the ability to examine self.

Discussion

The idea that positive affect creates a more relaxed and creative environment is not surprising. Although, it may not always be best for technology to be designed with positive affect in mind. In certain situations, like the plant control room the author mentions, a negative affect may be required at times. Similarly a system which is trying to be in command should project negative affect to gain respect.

Chapter Two - The Multiple Faces of Emotion and Design

Summary

There are three levels of perception: visceral, behavioral and reflective. Each has an effect on design. Visceral perceptions are usually related to appearance, while behavioral relate to the ease of use and reflective perceptions contribute to the level of contentment a user feels toward a device.

Discussion

This chapter raised some interesting questions for me about the way products are marketed and designed. It makes perfect sense that a product which does well in these perceptive categories will sell better -- especially reflective perception.

Chapter Three - Three Levels of Design

Summary

There are three levels of design: visceral, behavioral and reflective. Visceral is more about emotions emitted from the design. Behavioral focuses on the actual use of the design in a productive manner. Reflective focuses on the meaning of the desing to the individual.

Discussion

This was an interesting expansion on the three levels of design. Many of the concepts are common sense, but easy to forget about in everyday life. I feel like this chapter is one that should be heavily consulted during product design.

Reading #11: Chronicle: Capture, Exploration, and Playback of Document Workflow Histories

Comments

Shena Hoffman

Steven Hennessy

Reference

Chronicle: Capture, Exploration, and Playback of Document Workflow Histories

Tovi Grossman, Justin Matejka, George Fitzmaurice

UIST 2010 - New York

Summary:

Through logging of user events, Chronicle makes later examination of a user’s workflow in an image editing application possible. Though many have explored systems for tracking and presenting to users their past events, workflow histories have not been extensively explored up until this point. Chronicle is unique in that it provides the ability to investigate a document and determine how a particular effect or result was produced. Chronicle provides the user with a timeline, with tracks detailing important events over time. By scrolling through the timeline, users may see the settings which were changed or items created/destroyed in a particular time step. Additionally, Chronicle offers a hierarchical view of important change events to the right of the user interface. The investigation mechanism not only indicates the controls which were changed, but also provides a full video playback of the events which took place during the change. This creates the potential for documents to serve as their own tutorials. Additionally, Chronicle supports a wide array of probing and filtering mechanisms in order to find a specific change or effects usage. Chronicle was tested on eight users with at least three years of experience with image editing software. The results were qualitative, with users indicating a positive feeling about the software.

Discussion:

As someone who spends a lot of time watching tutorial videos for image and video editing products, I would greatly appreciate software like Chronicle. The authors have provided a more than thorough set of tools for creating chronicles of document events. Additionally, they have gone through the trouble to implement this on software which is in real world use as a product. I would really enjoy the opportunity to try out a piece of software like this. It would be great for collaboration and learning. I wish that their user study could have quantified results better, and more participants with a more well formed research question are always desirable. Additionally, I’d like to know the CPU and RAM usage while recording a chronicle document. I’d also like to see if the video capture sizes could be optimized. Finally, this concept needs to be generalized so that more applications can take advantage of it. Overall a great innovation and a tool which would be welcomed by the creative professional community.

Design of Everyday Things - Full Blog

Reference

Design of Everyday Things

Donald Norman

Basic Books 2002

Summary

In this work Norman explores the ideas that lead to both successful and unusable design. He provides several real world examples of items that are difficult and easy to use. Some of the key concepts enforced for designers are: project the state of the system in a way the user can understand, give effective feedback to the user for each action, consider the user's susceptibility to making mistakes, provide natural mappings for controls, and constrain the user when possible.

Significant consideration is given to the case in which a user makes an error and must understand the situation. Norman argues that some users attribute blame to themselves and therefore create an inability to use similar systems. Norman points to the designer as the person at fault for these outcomes. Exploration of the differences between different error types are also explored. The ultimate advice seems to be the designer taking user's mistakes into account ahead of time.

Finally, Norman examines how humans perceive and store knowledge. A strong arguent for pitting information into the world is presented. Norman also strongly advocates researching natural mappings and constraints as part of design.

Discussion

This book is a great introduction to issues which all designers should become familiar with. Many interesting real world examples of design issue are given and are somewhat surprising. Very good points about what factors make a design excellent are presented. Overall it is of great use to any Computer Scientist, not only for UI design, but also for architecting code and systems in ways which are understandable and usable by others. The only downside to this book was its rather repetitive nature.

Ethnography Week #3

Ethnography Week #3

During the past week we began our onsite observation and interaction with technicians. We spent a total of 4 to 5 hours onsite observing and socializing with technicians. While some details must be withheld for privacy concerns, the events of our onsite visits were very colorful and intriguing.

Technicians are housed in a small room on the second floor of a building on campus. The room is largely a storage area for equipment and tools, with some workspace areas. Most of the techs bring their personal laptops to work with them, but a few use one of the provided computers. The most striking aspect of the room is the amount of tools which are kept on hand. When thinking of technical support, one rarely imagines the need for so many heavy duty tools. The presence of the tools is probably attributable to the demanding nature of installing classroom equipment.

We were present at both morning and afternoon shifts, on separate days. The morning shift had fewer people, which were somewhat suspicious or curious about our project and requirement of being there. We have elected to only tell technicians that we are present to observe their tech support calls, as we are studying professors interacting with technology. This allows us to be included into the culture without any obvious deviations in technicians behavior due to our presence.

Techs took little time to warm up to us and went on about their jobs in what seemed to be a normal manner. Much time is spent passing time, filled with visiting popular websites, working on class assignments, eating or chatting with others. During our morning shift observation we attended two tech calls during the time between class change.

The first issue, details redacted, was minor and essentially a non-issue reported as a problem. The professor involved was friendly and curious to tech staff and offered ample support for them to perform their jobs. The second issue involved a total system failure and while the professor was somewhat (legitimately) annoyed by the situation, the professor remained polite and calm while staff fixed the issue.

On the side of analysis it seems that technicians are mainly active during class change periods with very limited time to settle issues. Additionally, it seems that they spend most of their time passing time. There is a sense of ownership of the equipment and responsibility for the systems among employees. Professors have been generally kind and understanding during interactions, though we question if our presence may be causing this (as it creates many people responding to a tech call, rather than a single tech-- sometimes up to 5 or 6 including us).

Overall, we have gained a great deal of insight and more importantly acceptance into the world of help desk technicians and the users they support. We plan to continue our study with this focus, and a continued minor focus on pure classroom observation.

Reading #9 : The Satellite Cursor: Achieving MAGIC Pointing without Gaze Tracking using Multiple Cursors

Comments

Reference

The Satellite Cursor: Achieving MAGIC Pointing without Gaze Tracking using Multiple Cursors

Chun Yu, Yuanchun Shi, Ravin Balakrishnan, Xiangliang Meng, Yue Suo, Mingming Fan, Yongqiang Qin

UIST10 - New York

Summary

A novel technique for using multiple cursors to improve pointing performance through the reduction of input movement is presented. The new technique, a Satellite Cursor, proves through two experiments to be more beneficial than standard pointing. The major concern is that with increasing screen size, use of the single cursor leads to delayed input times and frustration. The paper identifies many previous methods for solving this problem, and the proposes using Satellite Cursors as a solution. This technique works by optimally placing cursors next to each target. The movement of the physical hardware then moves all of the cursors synchronously. The target can then be selected in optimal time. The paper presents several algorithmic approaches for modifying target layout in order to support this method. The paper also proposes variations of hiding the cursors prior to movement, or indicating the possible cursors to be used based on the user’s input. This technique allows for less distraction. The paper also proposes using grouping for dense target regions. An experiment was performed with 10 people that indicated the success of Satellite Cursors in relation to other methods. However MAGIC pointing proved to be faster than in some trials.

Analysis

I had never considered the idea of having multiple cursors bound to various targets in order to speed up the input time. At first, I rejected this idea, thinking of the distractions it would cause and possible confusion. However, upon examining the natural way I use the existing point cursor, I realized that I first fixate on the target, then try to find the cursor. Often times I just move the input device rapidly to locate the cursor out of the corner of my eye, while still fixated on the target. This leads me to believe that multiple cursors would increase productivity. I especially like the idea of hiding the cursors and of grouping denser target areas. This paper was weak in that its study only contained 10 participants and the test system was a set of simple geometric targets. I look forward to seeing this tested with existing software.

Reading #8 : Interaction Design in the University: Designing Disciplinary Interactions

Reference

Interaction Design in the University: Designing Disciplinary Interactions

Gale Moore,Danielle Lottridge

CHI10 - Atlanta

Summary

This paper asks whether the traditional university can accommodate those who are in the relatively new 3rd paradigm of HCI, sometimes called the phenomenological matrix. The paper presents the three categories of multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary work and explains their differences. It then highlights the trouble that transdisciplinary work has being recognized in the common university setting. While disciplines are often encouraged to collaborate, they are all usually expected to produce or “take home” some contribution to their respective fields. This is not always the case in fields like interaction design. This paper calls for adjustments in the typical system of reward and recognition in the university in order to better support this new way of producing knowledge. The paper cites two examples, highlighting the more interpretive and new style of collaborative efforts. Overall the paper encourages a dialog within the community on the topic.

Analysis

This paper was an interesting read, which encouraged me to think of the systematic way the university operates. I agree with the authors, that in today’s setting scholars are often judged based on their publications in the most highly regarded journals of their fields. The new style of “transdisciplinary” work doesn’t lend itself to always yielding something publishable in one’s own traditional journal. This could pose a problem for those interested in working in this manner. While I do see the merit in the arguments, I also question if we should still require some contribution back to an original field. At the time of writing, it isn’t popular to focus solely on transdisciplinary studies. Usually they emerge as a result of many individual’s specialized knowledge in specific fields. Maybe our journals and academic departments just need to be a little more open to accepting non-traditional work.

Ethnography Results - Week #2

Ethnography Results Week #2
Over the past week we have acquired a better approach to our ethnography, diversifying the people and events we will be attempting to capture. Originally, we were primarily interested in the interactions of educators with the technical equipment and their abilities about using it for conveying their subject matter. We have now expanded our study to include those who are in the classroom watching (students) and those who assist professors with troublesome technology (technicians).

We conducted some usual remote observations during the week, finding a few technically interesting issues. We also finalized our access to technicians and set up a schedule for working with them. Our plans for integrating into their work life were also setup.

Finally, we conducted a couple of in classroom observations during this week. One of particular interest involved a professor teaching a large class (~200) in one of the more highly equipped classrooms. To maintain the integrity of the study, the specific technology the professor was interacting with cannot be posted at this time. However it was interesting to see the Professor cope with the continuous failure of the system. The professor appeared to be using the system correctly, with the malfunction likely due to low battery in one of the components. The professor first joked about the situation, and then after about the tenth failure resorted to an older technology to finish conveying his information. This professor is very intent on using the latest technology and often arrives 20 minutes early to class to setup. Additionally, a tech was onsite prior to class, helping the professor with the technology. It was overall a very frustrating experience for the professor, and students, who became verbally annoyed with the failures.

Reading #7: Experience in Social Affective Applications: Methodologies and Case Study

Comments

Jimmy Ho

Shena Hoffman

Reference

Experience in Social Affective Applications: Methodologies and Case Study

Paul Andre, Alan Dix, m.c. schraefel, Ryen W. White

CHI10 - Atlanta

Summary

As new forms of social affective applications become more important so do the techniques used to evaluate them. The authors create a socially affective application and then engage in a novel process to evaluate their tool. Several comparisons to other methodologies and arguments are given. The paper serves as an aid in studying and learning about socially affective applications. A test group of ten people was formed, completing the study over a five week period. The application created allowed users to encode their emotional state into a numerical form and share it with the group. The tool was integrated into Facebook and Twitter. The group met each week to discuss the tool, and modified the tool as needed. Overall the authors aim to generate discussion about evaluation styles.

Discussion

The paper seemed to reference a lot of current debates in the HCI community, of which I am unfamiliar, and choose a side-- or a different direction. The application created was not very novel or very interesting. The study only had ten people, researchers’ friends, try the system and the whole process seemed very casual (though this may be a good thing). There is no compelling data from the “studies” provided or any compelling evidence to support the proposed methodology of evaluation over another. The reviewers are directly addressed in the paper. It seemed overall to me, like a not so interesting piece of work. Maybe great to spark debate about methodologies of evaluation, but not particularly interesting to me. I do admire the authors’ quest for a solid evaluation methodology, but wasn’t convinced to choose one based on this paper.

Ethnography: Report #1

Our group ethnography is centered around observing professors teaching class on campus. We are observing their integrations and use of technology available to them in their classrooms. We hope to gain insight into the role the technology plays in their efforts to communicate concepts. To date we have:

• Established permission and control of classroom remote access systems for observations

• Briefly observed portions of several classes in which technology was being used.

• Formulated the following questions to be asked while observing:

1. Is the technology a pivotal element of the lecture or is it an after thought?
2. Does the user go out of his or her way to avoid certain pieces of equipment?
3. Does the user go out of his or her way to incorporate certain technologies?
4. How does the technology broaden the ability of the learner?
5. How do users typically address the classroom technology?
6. Which technical missteps are common among users?
7. How can we best describe the common teaching style of the user?
8. How does the user further his or her lecture without technology?

In addition to these questions, we also collect practical quantitative data.

We are looking forward to observing more classrooms in the coming days. We have also obtained information about which classrooms submit the most trouble tickets, which will aid us in selecting rooms to observe on a regular basis. As we are interested in any disruptions that misuse or malfunction of the equipment can cause.

Reading #6: Tangible Interfaces for Download: Initial Observations from Users’ Everyday Environments

Comments

Steven Hennessy

Shena Hoffman

Reference

Tangible Interfaces for Download: Initial Observations from Users’ Everyday Environments

Enrico Costanza, Matteo Giaccone, Oliver Kung, Simon Shelly, Jeffry Haung

CHI 2010 - Atlanta

Summary

Tangible user interfaces have been discussed heavily in the past fifteen years in the HCI community. D-touch aims to bring tangible user interfaces to the masses, by using only a webcam, printer and computer. Users are first asked to print and cut out small blocks with symbols on them. Then, after mounting their webcam above their workspace, users are free to move the blocks around in order to produce audio results. The system was released online and usage data recorded. Only qualitative analysis was performed on the collected data. The authors claim the widespread use of their software to prove the normal nature of tangible user interfaces. There were some problems with poor lighting conditions causing recognition problems. Overall users enjoyed the system. Future work includes augmenting the hardware to include the LCD monitor as the workspace.

Discussion

Tangible user interfaces are not normal yet. While this idea is novel, and undoubtedly has sparked some interest in a small community of internet users, it is not widely accepted or widely of interest at this time. The scope of this project is a very focused creative task. Creative individuals (usually professionals) are already privy to the idea of uncommon and different interfaces-- but it is still not considered normal. The trouble with the lighting highlights another major problem: this system is an invasion. Until it can be better integrated into everyday life and hardware, it will remain a novelty used by few. The paper is an excellent testament to the creation of novel interfaces using everyday consumer hardware, but doesn't sufficiently prove its claim that tangible user interfaces are "normal".

Reading #5: Tangible Video Bubbles

Comments

Jessica Gonzales

Jimmy Ho

Reference

Tangible Video Bubbles

Kimiko Ryokai, Hayes Raffle, Hiroshi Horri, Yotam Mann

CHI 2010 - Atlanta

Summary

Between the ages of five and seven children enter a session of rapid increase in expressiveness. The authors propose a tangible video bubble, a device which supports capture and playback of video, as a creative medium for children which uses a friendly multimodal alternative to conventional GUI menu driven systems. The device contains a video camera and screen and is made of polyurethane foam with a 17 inch diameter. Pressing a button starts the capturing process, while pressing it again stops the process. The video can then be played back at various speeds and in various segments based on squeezing the bubble in different locations with different forces. The squeezes are determined by reading LED light levels from the camera image. Users can then transfer portions of their video to a communal screen, where the video can be played back and pictures can be drawn next to it. The system was evaluated with 18 children, ages 4 to 10 in pairs. Data collected was qualitative. Future work includes adding features to the shared screen and adding additional sensors to the bubble.

Discussion

While this project sounds like a ton of fun and is of great use for children, there are some aspects of the design that seem incomplete. On the positive side: an early design study was performed, 18 children were tested on the final design and the qualitative results seem encouraging. On the negative side: the shared screen was poorly described in the paper (how do the drawing activities fit in?), there weren’t any quantitative measures of data reported, and the technical info concerning the implementation was limited. That being said, I would love to play with one of these or at least see a video! The basic ideas of squeezing the toy at different positions and strengths to create new video was really interesting.... it makes me consider other possibilities! It would be great to see an ecosystem of these devices which had different abilities and could transfer between one another to perform more editing on their creations. The public screen space has so much potential too, think adding animation to the video, combining videos, etc. Overall this is a really enjoyable project, with a paper that could have done it much better justice by including a few more details.

Dr.Celine Latulipe Lecture

Summary

Dr. Latulipe visited Texas A&M and gave a talk over her current research on Wednesday. Throughout her graduate school career she focused mainly on two handed interactions, with equal consideration given to both hands. She developed a number of interesting pieces of software which naturally create the opportunity to use two handed motions for input. Currently, she works with a variety of artist on a variety of projects, using their feedback to improve human-computer interaction. She has created and hopes to standardize CSI, an index for determining the effectiveness of creative tools. Her most recent work has analyzed the physiological feedback of audience members watching an artistic performance. She hopes to expand this work, analyzing people in the process of being creative. Overall, her work focuses on interdisciplinary research enabling the discovery of novel concepts which can be useful in many fields.

Discussion

This talk was really enjoyable and a great survey of Dr.Latulipe’s work. I found her examples of photo editing with two hands to be of real intrigue. Without even trying her demo, I can confess that adjusting levels and curves would be much easier and more intuitive with both hands. However, I didn’t find the Ken Burns effect to be as desirable with two hands. (And I’ve done more than my fair share of editing work involving this effect). I am uncertain about her stance on multitouch displays, but I would like to see more of her two handed work, perhaps some incorporated with such displays. I admire her desire to find an effective evaluation method for creative tools. It is difficult to create such a metric and I feel as though she has done a thorough job in creating the CSI test. Her work with physiological sensors is captivating and I am anxious to see it tested with people creating, rather than just watching. Overall, this talk exposed me to a new area of Computer Science which I knew little about before--- which is always greatly appreciated.