Zain’s Literature Review
Pin&Mix: When Pins Become Interaction Components
- Mixer pins are basically manufactured out of potentiometers. Range from 0 – 100 ohms.
- Voltage range at the moment 0 – 5.12V
K.V. Laerhoven, N. Villar, A. Schmidt, H.W. Gellersen, M. Håkansson and L. E, Holmquist (2003). “Pin&Play: The Surface as Network Medium”. IEEE Communications Magazine, April 2003.
- Within ubiquitous networking
- “Networked Surface” at Cambridge University is a similar tiled based item, which has some proximity information. Problems with complexity and set up however.
- Resistance and capacitance will hinder communication. Perhaps lack of insulation?
- Everyday items can be upgraded to create components of a network.
T. S. McNerney (2004) “From turtles to Tangible Programming Bricks: explorations in physical language design” Pers Ubiquit Comput 8: 326–337
- Explores forms of electronic tangible children’s toys for educational purposes.
- Looks at tangible programmable bricks for a “digital construction set”.
- A lot of collaborative work done with Lego. Lego have a tangible programmable interface robotics program called “Mindstorms”. “Logo” programming language.
- Seymour Papert – created turtle programmable machine. Drew shapes. Suggested children learn (geometry) faster when modelled in physical space. “Body Centred Geometry”.
- Slot machine interface big first example of tangible for education
Used battery powered minicomputers, coded bricks, modulated computing. - Lego Bricks could be grouped to sequence tasks – cooking – defrost, cook, stand.
Was limited to 1D layers (ie upwards only), no 2D proturions. Author states “Simplicity is an important feature of a Papert-style microworld” - TUI’s make computation immediate and dynamic, and this is good for education
Toys and play TUI’s often lead to real world products. Kids are good testers.
M. Lowe; A. King; E. Lovett; T. Papakostas (2004) “Flexible tactile sensor technology: bringing haptics to life” Sensor Review; 2004; 24, 1; pg. 33
- As GUI’s touchscreens and voice recognition proliferates, a “feedback” element, especially a physical one is lost. Eg keyboard – feel sensation when keystroke completed, or click sound on mouse.
- Haptic sensors in the past have been problematic due to bulk, size, and physical interruption with measurements. Also problem of low “resolution”.
- Paper introduces theory of resistance of electrical contact, which can measure force. Can have varying levels of sensitivily.
- As sensors can be film thin (100um), limits are of plastic deformation. = good. Uses semi-conductive ink for electrical feedback.
- Low cost, works with OEM software, and can default measurements of 1 tonne.
- RnD applications in syspension systems for cars, human shoes and pressure points, and can measure impact force and duration.
- Game and HCI implications could be added, ie pressure as well as triggers and orientation of joysticks.
L.E. Holmquist, A. Schmidt, B. Ullmer (2004) “Tangible interfaces in perspective”, Pers Ubiquit Comput 8: 291–293
- Different terms used for tangible include “graspable interfaces, tangible interfaces, physical interfaces, embodied interfaces,”
- Historical examples show the importance of tangibility – abacus, money etc.
- Ishii and Ullmer big players in Tangible.
- Reference for slot machine – (Perlman 1976).
- Independent interfaces is future of tangibile and ubiquitous comp.
E. Hornecker, (2005) “Tangible Interaction Design, Space, and Place”
- Patten and Ishii (2000) looked people using TUIs vs GUIs when looking at spatial distribution and recall of information. TUIs came up with more strategies for dealing with this.
- Sharlin et al (2004) suggest that humans are naturally better with TUIs as it activates spatial skills better. They say its essential if the domain is spatially orientated.
- Tangilbe interactions from a spatial point of view include not just manipulating the objects and interacting with them, but moving yourself and changing reference points.
- We are spatial beings. We need to consider that when interacting, we take the reference point from our personal positions.
- Tangible interactions are always spatial, and require different considerations and should support full body motion and expression.
- Software defines virtual structure, similarly tangible requires some emobodied physical structure.
- Case study of Chawton house (jane austen novels come from here). Audio guides which sense if ppl are approaching and increase volume to accommodate. Systems could monitor congregation of groups and act appropriately.
P. Fagerberg, A. Stahl, K. Hook. (2004) “eMoto: emotionally engaging interaction” Pers Ubiquit Comput 8: 377–381
- Emotional engagement of users of tangible interfaces with cognitive and psychological considerations
- Apparently, 66 people surveyed suggested that mobile text messaging lacked emotional expression.
- Users can send text messages and add emotional conent (non-verbal semantics) to users reflecting emotional state.
- Mobile sensor in phone or stylus pen (used SE P900) and uses shaking vs. less, and swinging vs. less to map onto emotional state “map”. Eg, lots of shaking and lots of swinging = alarmed/scared. Little shaking and little swinging = relaxed.
- Used primitive colour semantics to represent different moods. Green = relaxed, red/purple = alarmed.
- Main concept is bringing emotional content from tangible interactions. Seems to be using tangible as a more passive system to existing ubiquitous (ie phones).
•Wonder if phone could be damaged/dropped if slips out of hand. Hmmmm.
A. Paivaa,, M. Costaa, R. Chavesa, M. Piedade, D. Mourao, D. Sobral, K, Hook, G. Andersson, A. Bullock. (2003) “SenToy: an affective sympathetic interface” Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 59 227–235
- Tangible doll used to effect emotional responses from a computer game character.
- Aims to bring other interaction styles into GUIs with TUIs
- Carried out a Wizard of Oz study (wizard behind the scenes) where users manifested emotional actions out on dolls, and then this was transferred on screen via animation of a character.
- Developed SenToy to recognise 6 forms of emotion based on manipulation.
- Doll includes many sensors, such as acceleration, and light sensors on eyes to see if hands are covering it, etc. Eg, angry = shaking the doll.
- Mapped manipulation from children, teenagers and adults to map movement into emotion
- Very questionable statistics and data analysis to back up results, but concept still good. Needs development, toy only lasts 2 weeks!
- Perhaps shows limitations of sensitive TUIs when it comes to emotional expression. Linked into eMoto – damage to phone? Surley not a good thing to teach children to manifest physical anger/frustration on doll – BOBO Doll! Bandura Ross and Ross (1961?). Transference of physical violence against toy manifested into human aggression.
K P. Fishkin (2004) “A taxonomy for and analysis of tangible interfaces” Pers Ubiquit Comput 8: 347–358
- Aims to provide suggestions for classifying TUIs and their contexts.
- There are problems with integrating TUIs with actual conventional interfaces, and it is hard to have a baseline to compare and contrast different TUI research.
- A good TUI eliminates the distinction between input device and output device,
- Input event occurs – some physical action: touch, push, squeeze
- A computer system senses the action
- Feedback is provided in some way : usually haptic or physical
- Suggests that its actually very hard to define what is tangible – Can you adapt something conventional and thus transform it into a tangible definition?
- Two factors suggested to define it (2D). 1: Embodiment and 2: Metaphor.
- Emobidment, how is the input focus related to output? 4 levels proposed, ranging from full (ie input device is output device), nearby (ie lego bricks), environmental (controlling lights) and distant ( like TV).
- Metaphor: associating the Tangible physical reality with the task or event, and associating all the factors with it. Even bringing them into the interaction itself. In particular, the shape and the motion of objects
- Some detail into contexts, consequences, and semantics (eg colour has different meanings to different cultures).
- Suggest TUIs will be more and more real world based as opposed to tied down to a computer. Mobile computing been and done, lets move around (it seems).
- If you move around (ie physical human interfaces without PC), consider anthropology, contexts, and psychology more so rather than focusing on the movement away from computer to human interfaces
N.Y. Cheng (2003) “Approaches to design collaboration research Automation in Construction” 12, 715– 723
- Looks at the dynamics of research in terms of scale, background, range etc.
- Explores standards and methods of analysing it.
- Discusses verbal protocols, using videos to actually record group members in erms of initial reactions to products or concepts.
- Suggests some rather odd methods for improving group interaction on the collaborative nature, like video conferencing with sound tracking for purposeful interaction. Hmm
- Some suggestions made on Tangible ideas. Ishii’s modelling 3D clay.
Questions raised from research
Could 1 PC control more than 1 “group” of pins and connections? For e.g. a 4X4 patch to create some proximity awareness, or even serve as a master control with multiple inputs (e.g. usb hub) to control different whole packages? Like a server?
Idea: 3D shape mapping. Eg using a face pin thing, with pins, acting as sensors. Could map shapes of objects.
Referencing so important, integrate ideas from Brainstorms.