Last week it was published "The DesignX Manifesto". Many big names in Design (like Donald Norman), signed the document that you can read here. What was so excited in this Manifesto for me? As a behavior analyst I saw so much B. F. Skinner in the text ! For instance, the authors establish Design as a "evidence-based approach", "based on science and experiment" (but with artistic and intuitive skills too), and must deal with "many of the complex and serious problems facing the world today". Now, please compare the DesignX Manifesto with the approach of B. F. Skinner to Behavioral Sciene, which is also evidence-based, based on science and experiment, and focused on create sustainable environment. I believe that if B. F. Skinner was alive today, he whould be a designer, and not a psychologist. While psychologist became more and more focused on Clinic and theoretical research, designers had advanced in applied research, specially focused in sustainability. Psychology became something almost entirely analytical. In this scenario, designers come with the necessary synthesis skills. But still there are psychologist involved with sustentability. For more information about them, click here.
My research on Tangible User Interface is based on a theoretical model called "Situated Cognition". In a nutshell, it means that human cognition (perception, thinking, feeling, imagining, etc), isn't something only intellectual and inside our heads, but a process that occurs in a physical and cultural environment.
Cognition as a mental process inside our heads?
Forget it if you want to do or study Tangible Interactions!
The classical cognitivist paradigm (1960) says something different: "It is all in the brain/mind". Therefore, it is more important to study the brain, or metal processes, and that is all.
The Embodied Cognition (1970) says: "Almost everything is in the body, and not only in the brain". So, the body as a whole is the issue. In this approach emotions and motor skills came together with all the intellectual and logical processes.
The Distribued Cognition (1980-90) says: "Its all in the environment". So, its more importan to study the context, specially cultural artefactcs like language.
How to summarize the Situated Cognition? I think this is a good try: "Cognition is action. Someone does something using the whole body in a physical and social context. Study these actions and the situation in which they occur".
Situated Cognition doesn't only incorporates past approaches. There is more. It is about understand contingences of reinforcement in which the person is inserted, without compartmentalizations and reductionisms.
I believe that Situated Cognition is the best theoretical and methodological approach not only to understand and analyse, but even to design tangible interfaces. I think so because in tangible interactions you need to focus on the user as a living being in a complex reality. Tangible interaction is much more complex to do than graphical user interface.
That a good look at this amazing invention from MIT:
How about? Just great, right?
Let's analyse. What you saw is a tangible interface between a user and a system. The person is doing commands to control a ball, which are read by sensors. This is information generates events in the system, which also controls a ball, in a match of actions.
This is a "distant" type tangible interaction(1). This means that the output occurs, or could occur, distant to user. In other room, or even on another continent.
According to Hornecker (2), this interfaces works providing a interaction between real and virtual world through manipulation of physical objects. The user is not immersed in a virtual reality. He just moves physical objects.
I could also say that is a "natural interface" (3), because the user only uses gestures that he already knows. He doesn't need learn any kind of code to interaction.
According to Wensveen (4) there are multiple matches in this interactions: contiguity between user actions and the system, spacial match, direction match, and also speed and force. The purpose is clear: a perfect match between events.
There are other taxonomies. But I just wanted to introduce these for today.
References
1 - Falcão, T. Design de interfaces tangíveis para aprendizagem
de conceitos matemáticos no Ensino Fundamental. 2007. 110 f.
Dissertação (Mestrado). UFPE.
4 - Wensveen, S.A.G. Interaction Frogger: a Design Framework to Couple
Action and Function through Feedback and Feedforward. , August, 2004,
Cambridge, MA, USA.
Today I want to share with you guys why I am researching Tangible User Interfaces (TUI).
This is the theme of my Master's Degree research at UFSC. So, I chose to research TUI for some reason. Yes, and for a good one: I really love it. I mean, TUI is about take the interaction out from the screens and bring it to the real world. And there is more: TUI is about understand the whole human cognition (thoughts, emotions, body, senses, the interaction with the enviroment and other people, etc) to design better, what is just great for me, a psychologist.
I discovered TUI in 2012, when I made a trip to Joinville, SC. I went to visit the WhirpoolUsability LAB. They were researching about how to do better appliances to kitchen, and all the research is human-centered. Really interesting!
And they told me about TUI. They told me how, in the future, almost all the appliances will be TUI or TUI-GUI mixed. And even more: the car dashboards also, and a lot of other products.
Less GUI, more and more TUI in cars
"To make TUI it is necessary invent many design theories and methods which just don't exist today". This phrase never left my mind.
And that is why now I am doing academic research on TUI.
My ambition now is very clear: create the perfect integration between Behavioral Psychology and Design, and thereby create better TUI interactions.
In this post I share the Summary of my new paper, "A Study on Tangible Interfaces: Usability Evaluation of a Simulator of Firearms".
In a nutshell: I researched the tangible interface present in a simulator in order to propose improvements.
SUMMARY: The tangible user interfaces, characterized by the capture of user's physicality, are becoming more accessible due to new technological features like augmented reality and motion sensors. One application is the simulators for training motor skills. However, due to the tangible interfaces are a recent phenomenon their design is still not systematized and documented, creating challenges for applications development. Such innovative paradigm of interaction represents a potential novel in terms of digital training, since it allows the teaching of motor skills in several areas such as driving, operating instruments and even weapons. In this context, the present study has the main objective to present an evaluation of this tangible interface in a simulator of firearms, the SimIF-FT, developed in Florianópolis, SC, the company Simulogica and used by a private security company, called PROSEGUR . It was conducted a survey that employed the usability evaluation protocol called System Usability Scale, and questionnaires and interviews, with a class of 14 students of vigilant Training Center PROSEGUR in Palhoça, SC. The results point to a correlation between satisfaction with the usability of SimIF-FT and tangible aspects of interaction such as the apprehension of physical objects, kinesthetic realism in correspondence between real and virtual shooting feedback, and to need immersion through user its incorporation in virtual reality. These results have allowed suggestions for changes in design of the simulator interface.
For my firts post with academic content I chose start from the basics : what is Tangible User Interface? (TUI).
I think a good start is talking about Graphical User Interface (GUI). A interface is something between the user and the system, a layer which has the function of integrate these human and machine. By the late 1990s almost all interfaces were GUI. The main characteristics of this interaction paradigm are:
a) use of metaphors: a GUI usually imitates real objects and enviroments (like "Desktop", "Trash", etc);
b) a code of graphical signs called WIMP (Windows, Icons, Menus e Pointing devices).
The first personal GUI (Apple, 1983).
But in the end of 1990s new technologies, like Virtual and Augmented Reality, made possible overcome the WIMP model.
And, of course, finally I am talking about TUI.
Certally a lot of people were working on something like TUI, but an official landmark for this new interaction paradigm is the work, in 1997, of Ullmer (1). Ullmer proposed a classification of TUI into three types: interactive surfaces, built assemblies and assemblies made up of tokens and constraints. The basic components can be:
One of the first TUI
a) pyfos (a physical object that takes part in digital interaction. The term comes from the Spanish and was used to differentiate the common expression "object");
b) the token (one pyfo understandable, i.e., which can be captured by the digital part of the system and demonstrate virtual properties);
c) constraints (one pyfo limiting behavior of the token which it is associated); and
d) TAC, "token and constraints" (a relationship between tokens and constraints generating rules of interaction called "frames of references". rules of a TAC concerning how pyfos are coupled, relational definition between them, associations, interpretation what they do and computational rules of manipulation by the user).
OBS: There is others models beyond the Ulmer's TAC paradigm, but that is for another day, ok?
The main characteriscs of a TUI (2) are:
space-multiplexing (the physical enviroment is changed by the inclusion of digital properties);
concurrent access and manipulation (often involving twohanded interaction);
use of strong-specific devices (instead of weak-general, that is generic and non-iconic;
spatial awareness of the devices, and spatial reconfigurability.
Tomorrow I will talk about other characteristics of TUI. Specially about the cognitive issues involved (Situaded Cognition is a fascinating field of Behavioral Sciences. Get ready!). Now a video about TUi to end this post:
References
(1) - Ullmer,
B. Tangible Interfaces for Manipulation Agregates of Digital
Information. PhD Thesis, MIT, september of 2002.
Hi, there! I am Alessandro, behavioral psychologist, and this is my blog about Tangible Interaction (the research topic of my thesis). Currently, I am studying Masters Degree in Design at UFSC (Florianópolis, Brasil).
I chose Tangible User Interfaces (TUI) as study theme because I think this kind of human-machine interaction is something amazing. And I really have not regretted on this choice!
In a few words, TUI is about taking the interaction off the screen and put it in the physical world.
Ok, ok, but how design and evaluted this kind of interaction? (Yeah, this is my
Interaction beyod windows, icons, menus and prompts
What you willsee in this blog:
- Reviews about papers, books and other publication on TUI;
- a lot of Situated Cognition theoretical stuff;
- my comments on TUI from my work experience with R&D on driving simulators;
- some pratical applications examined by me;
- the models, patterns and condiderations about TUI from my research;
- some technical tips on TUI about my experience for people who want study and make TUI.
.jpg)
.jpg)