Abstract
What will future creativity-based work in collaboration with ubiquitous, AI-driven systems be like? In this paper, we argue that following a ‘tangible interaction’ approach can be beneficial in this context. We describe six connected objects that illustrate how the quality of future creative work could be designed. The objects aim to shape embedded computation in ways that support embodied interaction. They include a place for sacrificing one’s phone, an olfactory calendar, a reader/writer for cloud data in everyday objects, a concrete-based data logger, a slot machine for recombining old ideas into new ones, and a dimmer for artificial intelligence. We summarize the results of a critical reflection of the prototypes in an argument for designing interactions that foster collaborative creative processes between embodied humans in a world of embedded computation.
About the authors
Fabian Hemmert is a professor for Interface and User Experience Design at the University of Wuppertal, Germany.
Elizabeth Bradford is an Industrial Design student at the University of Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Erik Caetano is an Industrial Design student at the Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Parana in Curitiba, Brazil.
Friedrich Kegel is an Industrial Design student at the University of Wuppertal, Germany.
Eva Licht is an Industrial Design student at the University of Wuppertal, Germany.
Marco Höwer is an Industrial Design student at the University of Wuppertal, Germany.
References
[1] Piotr D. Adamczyk and Brian P. Bailey. 2004. If not now, when?: the effects of interruption at different moments within task execution. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’04). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 271–278. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/985692.985727.10.1145/985692.985727Search in Google Scholar
[2] Ismo Alakärppä, Elisa Jaakkola, Ashley Colley, and Jonna Häkkilä. 2017. BreathScreen: Design and Evaluation of an Ephemeral UI. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 4424–4429. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025973.10.1145/3025453.3025973Search in Google Scholar
[3] Durrell Bishop. 1993. Marble Answering Machine. (1993).Search in Google Scholar
[4] Marius H. Braun and Adrian D. Cheok. 2014. Towards an Olfactory Computer-dream Interface. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology (ACE ’14). ACM, New York, NY, USA. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2663806.2663874.10.1145/2663806.2663874Search in Google Scholar
[5] Winslow Burleson and Camilla Jensen. 2010. Slow Computing Gifts. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI ’10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 376. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1709886.1709985.10.1145/1709886.1709985Search in Google Scholar
[6] Stuart Card, Thomas P. Moran, and Allen Newell. 1983. The psychology of human-computer interaction (first ed.). L. Erlbaum Associates. http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/0898598591.Search in Google Scholar
[7] Elizabeth F. Churchill. 2010. Enticing Engagement. interactions 17, 3 (01 May 2010), 82–87. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1744161.1744180.10.1145/1744161.1744180Search in Google Scholar
[8] Laura Dabbish, Gloria Mark, and Víctor M. González. 2011. Why Do I Keep Interrupting Myself?: Environment, Habit and Self-interruption. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3127–3130. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979405.10.1145/1978942.1979405Search in Google Scholar
[9] Tilman Dingler and Martin Pielot. 2015. I’ll Be There for You: Quantifying Attentiveness Towards Mobile Messaging. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI ’15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–5. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2785830.2785840.10.1145/2785830.2785840Search in Google Scholar
[10] Tanja Döring, Axel Sylvester, and Albrecht Schmidt. 2013. Ephemeral user interfaces: valuing the aesthetics of interface components that do not last. interactions 20, 4 (July 2013), 32–37. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2486227.2486235.10.1145/2486227.2486235Search in Google Scholar
[11] Friederike A. Eyssel, Dieta Kuchenbrandt, Simon Bobinger, Laura de Ruiter, and Frank Hegel. 2012. ‘If you sound like me, you must be more human’: On the interplay of robot and user features on human-robot acceptance and anthropomorphism. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI2012), Late Breaking Report, H. Yanco (Ed.). ACM, 125–126. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2157689.2157717.10.1145/2157689.2157717Search in Google Scholar
[12] Neta Ezer, Arthur D. Fisk, and Wendy A. Rogers. 2009. Attitudinal and Intentional Acceptance of Domestic Robots by Younger and Older Adults. In Proceedings of the 5th International on Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Part II: Intelligent and Ubiquitous Interaction Environments (UAHCI ’09). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 39–48. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02710-9_5.10.1007/978-3-642-02710-9_5Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[13] Markus Funk, Tilman Dingler, Jennifer Cooper, and Albrecht Schmidt. 2015. Stop Helping Me – I’m Bored!: Why Assembly Assistance Needs to Be Adaptive. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (UbiComp/ISWC’15 Adjunct). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1269–1273. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2800835.2807942.10.1145/2800835.2807942Search in Google Scholar
[14] Surina Hariri, Nur A. Mustafa, Kasun Karunanayaka, and Adrian D. Cheok. 2016. Electrical Stimulation of Olfactory Receptors for Digitizing Smell. In Proceedings of the 2016 Workshop on Multimodal Virtual and Augmented Reality (MVAR ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3001959.3001964.10.1145/3001959.3001964Search in Google Scholar
[15] Marcel Heerink, Ben Kröse, Vanessa Evers, and Bob Wielinga. 2010. Relating Conversational Expressiveness to Social Presence and Acceptance of an Assistive Social Robot. Virtual Real. 14, 1 (March 2010), 77–84. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10055-009-0142-1.10.1007/s10055-009-0142-1Search in Google Scholar
[16] Frank Hegel, Soeren Krach, Tilo Kircher, Britta Wrede, and Gerhard Sagerer. 2008. Theory of mind (ToM) on robots: a functional neuroimaging study. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction (HRI ’08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 335–342. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1349822.1349866.10.1145/1349822.1349866Search in Google Scholar
[17] Frank Hegel, Claudia Muhl, Britta Wrede, Martina H. Fastabend, and Gerhard Sagerer. 2009. Understanding Social Robots. In Proceedings of the 2009 Second International Conferences on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions (ACHI ’09). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 169–174. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/achi.2009.51.10.1109/ACHI.2009.51Search in Google Scholar
[18] Fabian Hemmert. 2014. Encountering the Digital: Representational and Experiential Embodiment in Tangible User Interfaces. Ph. D. Dissertation. Berlin University of the Arts.Search in Google Scholar
[19] Allen Huang and Raymond Wu. 2016. Deep Learning for Music. (15 June 2016). http://arxiv.org/abs/1606.04930.Search in Google Scholar
[20] Hiroshi Ishii. 2008. Tangible Bits: Beyond Pixels. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (TEI ’08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, xv–xxv. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1347390.1347392.10.1145/1347390.1347392Search in Google Scholar
[21] Hiroshi Ishii and Brygg Ullmer. 1997. Tangible Bits: Towards Seamless Interfaces between People, Bits and Atoms. In CHI. 234–241. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.46.4416.Search in Google Scholar
[22] Diana James and Judy Drennan. 2005. Exploring Addictive Consumption of Mobile Phone Technology. ANZMAC 2005 Conference: Electronic Marketing (2005). http://smib.vuw.ac.nz:8081/WWW/ANZMAC2005/cd-site/pdfs/12-Electronic-Marketing/12-James.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
[23] Donald R. Jones and Darrell Brown. 2002. The division of labor between human and computer in the presence of decision support system advice. Decision Support Systems 33, 4 (2002), 375–388. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9236(02)00005-2.10.1016/S0167-9236(02)00005-2Search in Google Scholar
[24] Bhautik Joshi, Kristen Stewart, and David Shapiro. 2017. Bringing Impressionism to Life with Neural Style Transfer in Come Swim. (18 Jan. 2017). http://arxiv.org/abs/1701.04928.10.1145/3105692.3105697Search in Google Scholar
[25] Martin Kaltenbrunner and Ross Bencina. 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, 69–74. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1226969.1226983.10.1145/1226969.1226983Search in Google Scholar
[26] Joseph Kaye. 2004. Olfactory Display. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST ’04). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 163. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1029632.1029661.10.1145/1029632.1029661Search in Google Scholar
[27] Shin’ichi Konomi, Christian Müller-Tomfelde, and Norbert A. Streitz. 1999. Passage: Physical Transportation of Digital Information in Cooperative Buildings. In Cooperative Buildings. Integrating Information, Organizations, and Architecture, Norbert A. Streitz, Jane Siegel, Volker Hartkopf, and Shin’ichi Konomi (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 45–54.10.1007/10705432_5Search in Google Scholar
[28] Mei K. Lai. 2015. Universal Scent Blackbox: Engaging Visitors Communication Through Creating Olfactory Experience at Art Museum. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual International Conference on the Design of Communication (SIGDOC ’15). ACM, New York, NY, USA. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2775441.2775483.10.1145/2775441.2775483Search in Google Scholar
[29] Jaron Lanier. 2013a. How Should We Think about Privacy? Sci Am 309, 5 (Nov. 2013), 64–71. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1113-64.10.1038/scientificamerican1113-64Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[30] Jaron Lanier. 2013b. Who Owns the Future? (first ed.). Simon & Schuster.Search in Google Scholar
[31] Yu K. Lee, Chun T. Chang, You Lin, and Zhao H. Cheng. 2014. The Dark Side of Smartphone Usage: Psychological Traits, Compulsive Behavior and Technostress. Comput. Hum. Behav. 31 (Feb. 2014), 373–383. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.047.10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.047Search in Google Scholar
[32] Yong K. Lee, Youn K. Lim, and KunPyo Lee. 2016. Timelessness: User Experience of Unplanned Smartphone Use. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 73–83. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2901790.2901839.10.1145/2901790.2901839Search in Google Scholar
[33] Scott D. Mainwaring and Charlotte P. Lee. 2017. Turnover and the Model of Coordinated Action (MoCA). In Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW ’17 Companion). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 239–242. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3022198.3026359.10.1145/3022198.3026359Search in Google Scholar
[34] Paul Marshall. 2007. Do tangible interfaces enhance learning?. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction (TEI ’07). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 163–170. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1226969.1227004.10.1145/1226969.1227004Search in Google Scholar
[35] Aleksandar Matic, Martin Pielot, and Nuria Oliver. 2015. Boredom-computer Interaction: Boredom Proneness and the Use of Smartphone. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp ’15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 837–841. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2750858.2807530.10.1145/2750858.2807530Search in Google Scholar
[36] Shalini Misra, Lulu Cheng, Jamie Genevie, and Miao Yuan. 2014. The iPhone Effect: The Quality of In-Person Social Interactions in the Presence of Mobile Devices. Environment and Behavior 48, 2 (1 July 2014), 275–298. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013916514539755.10.1177/0013916514539755Search in Google Scholar
[37] Daisuke Noguchi, Sayumi Sugimoto, Yuichi Bannai, and Ken I. Okada. 2011. Time Characteristics of Olfaction in a Single Breath. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 83–92. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1978956.10.1145/1978942.1978956Search in Google Scholar
[38] Tadashi Okoshi, Jin Nakazawa, and Hideyuki Tokuda. 2016. Interruptibility Research: Opportunities for Future Flourishment. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct (UbiComp ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1524–1529. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2968219.2968543.10.1145/2968219.2968543Search in Google Scholar
[39] Alex Soojung Kim Pang. 2013. The Distraction Addiction: Getting the Information You Need and the Communication You Want, Without Enraging Your Family, Annoying Your Colleagues, and Destroying Your Soul (first ed.). Little, Brown. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2563523.Search in Google Scholar
[40] Eric Paulos. 2013. The Rise of the Expert Amateur: DIY Culture and the Evolution of Computer Science. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS ’13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 153–154. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2451116.2451133.10.1145/2451116.2451133Search in Google Scholar
[41] Jon Penney. 2016. Chilling Effects: Online Surveillance and Wikipedia Use. Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series (27 April 2016). http://ssrn.com/abstract=2769645.Search in Google Scholar
[42] Andrew K. Przybylski and Netta Weinstein. 2013. Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 30, 3 (1 May 2013), 237–246. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407512453827.10.1177/0265407512453827Search in Google Scholar
[43] Susan M. Ravizza, Mitchell G. Uitvlugt, and Kimberly M. Fenn. 2017. Logged In and Zoned Out. Psychological science 28, 2 (Feb. 2017), 171–180. http://view.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28182528.10.1177/0956797616677314Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[44] Ariel Rosenfeld, Noa Agmon, Oleg Maksimov, Amos Azaria, and Sarit Kraus. 2015. Intelligent Agent Supporting Human-Multi-Robot Team Collaboration. In IJCAI. 1902–1908.Search in Google Scholar
[45] Anand Sriraman, Jonathan Bragg, and Anand Kulkarni. 2017. Worker-Owned Cooperative Models for Training Artificial Intelligence. In Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW ’17 Companion). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 311–314. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3022198.3026356.10.1145/3022198.3026356Search in Google Scholar
[46] Sayumi Sugimoto, Daisuke Noguchi, Yuichi Bannnai, and Kenichi Okada. 2010. Ink Jet Olfactory Display Enabling Instantaneous Switches of Scents. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM ’10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 301–310. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1873951.1873994.10.1145/1873951.1873994Search in Google Scholar
[47] Axel Sylvester, Tanja Döring, and Albrecht Schmidt. 2010. Liquids, smoke, and soap bubbles: reflections on materials for ephemeral user interfaces. In TEI ’10: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 269–270. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1709886.1709941.10.1145/1709886.1709941Search in Google Scholar
[48] Sherry Turkle. 2016. Reclaiming Conversation: The Power of Talk in a Digital Age (reprint ed.). Penguin Books. http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/0143109790.Search in Google Scholar
[49] John Underkoffler and Hiroshi Ishii. 1999. Urp: A Luminous-tangible Workbench for Urban Planning and Design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’99). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 386–393. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/302979.303114.10.1145/302979.303114Search in Google Scholar
[50] Jelle van Dijk, Remko van der Lugt, and Caroline Hummels. 2013. Beyond Distributed Representation: Embodied Cognition Design Supporting Socio-sensorimotor Couplings. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction (TEI ’14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 181–188. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2540930.2540934.10.1145/2540930.2540934Search in Google Scholar
[51] Yanan Wang, Shuai Liu, Yujia Lu, Jun Duan, Cheng Yao, and Fangtian Ying. 2016. Designing with Concrete For Enhancing Everyday Interactions. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1497–1502. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2851581.2892372.10.1145/2851581.2892372Search in Google Scholar
[52] Adrian F. Ward, Kristen Duke, Ayelet Gneezy, and Maarten W. Bos. 2017. Brain Drain: The Mere Presence of One’s Own Smartphone Reduces Available Cognitive Capacity. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research 2, 2 (1 April 2017), 140–154. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/691462.10.1086/691462Search in Google Scholar
[53] Mark Weiser and John S. Brown. 1996. The Coming Age of Calm Technology. (5 Oct. 1996).Search in Google Scholar
[54] Aaron Weiss. 2009. A Digital Trail is Forever. netWorker 13, 2 (June 2009), 14–19. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1540392.1540397.10.1145/1540392.1540397Search in Google Scholar
© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
