TangibleTime, a time phenomena study based on tabletop ...

TangibleTime, a time phenomena study based on tabletop interaction.Master thesis for the Interdisciplinary Master in Cognitive Systems and Interactive Media

Author: Carles SoraAdvisor: Sergi Jordà (Phd.)

Initial inspiration, Problem, State of the art, Experiment: Results and Conclusions

TangibleTime, a time phenomena study based on tabletop interaction.

TangibleTimeInitial inspiration, Problem, State of the art, Experiment, Results and Conclusions

Initial inspiration

Khronos projector [Casinelli, 2005]

Khronos projector [Casinelli, 2005] Minard graph of Napoleon’s march to Moscow 1812 - [Tufte, 1983]


[Hueda, 1993]

Initial inspiration


Khronos and Minard are the exceptions!

Could it be possible to create new conventions of time representations with new tangible interfaces?

Problem

Khronos projector [Casinelli, 2005] Minard graph of Napoleon’s march to Moscow 1812 - [Tufte, 1983]

New paradigms in tangible user interfaces (TUI):

- Continuous gestures [Jordà, 2009]

- Tokens and manipulatives as control interfaces. [Fitzmaurice, Ishii & Buxton, 1995].

- Use of circular and other shapes of surfaces and screens, rather than rectangular as in WIMP interfaces.


Tabletop tangible user interfaces and time

Problem

A. Will users use in TUI the same time conventions?

B. Will the shape of the tokens or the interface interfere in the correlation of the time and space understanding? Changes in graphical presentation or input devices can have a strong effect on user's expectations about system behaviour. [Buxton, 2000] [Jordà, 2005]

C. Can the embodiment of the participant interfere in the time convention? Gestures create meaning. [MnNeil, 2006]


[Jordà, 2005]

7.30 Models and Theories

flowing, especially with the hot water tap. The degree of consensus is a good indicator of the strength of the S-R stereotype.

Figure 14: Lever-Type Faucets If the faucets shown in Figure 13 are replaced by lever-type faucets, how are your expectations affected? Is the direction that you would turn the taps to turn on the water affected? (From Smith, 1981).

What happens if the faucets of the previous example are replaced by lever-type faucets, as illustrated in Figure 14? Are our expectations the same with respect to how to turn the water on? From the previous example, most North Americans would have formulated the rule: ``Faucets are closed by clockwise motion and are opened by counterclockwise motion.'' We now have to qualify this rule. The supplement is: ``If the faucet has lever-type controls, it is opened by pulling and closed by pushing.''

Seemingly simple changes can affect our expectations and behaviour. As with changing the tap handles in the previous example, minor changes in graphical presentation or input devices can have a strong effect on user's expectations about system behaviour. As a designer you must understand these effects so that they work for you, rather than against you.

The next example illustrates this type of error in an actual system. On the original Apple Macintosh there was a rotary potentiometer to control the screen brightness. Its position with respect to the computer is illustrated in Figure 15.

Before reading further, look at the figure, then close your eyes and mentally turn up the intensity of the display. Which way did you turn the potentiometer?

Figure 15: The Intensity Control on the Original Macintosh Computer A rotary potentiometer was used to control intensity. Which way should the pot turn to increase the intensity of the screen?

Haptic Input 4 January, 2009 Buxton

[Buxton, 2005]

Tabletop tangible user interfaces and time

Problem

Time and spatial metaphorsTime is an abstract representation of the world, need to be addressed through the spatial metaphors. [Lakoff & Johnson,1980]

Writing directionalities and time understanding

Exist signi"cant differences of thinking about the concept of time between Mandarin and English speakers due to the spatial words that they use for time concepts. [Boroditsky, 2001]

Particular spatial metaphors to represent time differs across driven by their writing directionality. [Boroditsky, 2009]

Time has not the same measures of representation in all cultures. [Steger, 1991]


[Steger, 1991]

State of the artSome insights from the state of the art:

Representation of movementThe representation of time has been a big challenge for scientist and artists often addressed in the study of movement. [Cutting, 2002].

The directionality of time representation it’s a cultural convention. Cave paintings were not narrative structured in time.


[Wachtel, 1993]

[Wachtel, 1993]

Some insights from the state of the art:State of the art


Static images Moving images Real Time images

[Degas,1874 - Painting]

[Bush,1865 - Painting]

[Bush,1865 - Painting]

[Marey,1865 - Chronofotography - Biology]

[Silf,1960 - Slit-scan - Photography]

Interactive

[Gondry -Bullet time,1995 - Cinema]

[Méliès,1874 - Timelapse - Cinema]

[Xtrans,1988 - Cinema]

[Rybczynski,1988 - Cinema]

[Walitsky,1970 - Art]

[Utterback, 2001 - Art]

[Art+Com, 97 - Art]

[Christi, 97 - Art]

[Ängeslevä, 2002 - Art]

[Cassinelli, 2005 - Art]

[Achituv, 1997 - Art]

State of the art


Research questions:A. Will users use in TUI the same time conventions?A. When will users apply their preminent time-arrow-model in gestural interactions?

B. Will the shape of the tokens or manipulatives interfere in the correlation of the time and space understanding?B. Could the shape of the interface interfere in the users time models? C. How can the gestures of the participant interfere in the time-space correlation metaphor? C. Can complex gestures overshadow the time-arrow-model of the users?

A

Experimental group

B

Experiment

C


Participants:

• Thirteen western participants • Students from audiovisual studies at UPF• Ages: from 18 to 21

Experimental group

Experiment A: (GUI: Less variables than in TUI)

Measures:

•Paths of the mouse• Time of each path (drag&drop)

Experiment

Procedure:

1. Participants were exposed to see the video once.2. Participants were told to forward the video by dragging the mouse on the interface. (The video only moved forward when participants drag the mouse from the top of the interface until the bottom.)3. Participants did not get any reward until they found the right direction.

A. When will users apply their preminent time-arrow-model in gestural interactions?


Experimental group

ExperimentData analysis and ResutlsWe got only the x axis of the starting point for the analysis

x axis 9 trials with left-right direction: 70%3 trials with right -left: 23%1 diagonal 7%


Experimental group

Research questions:• A When will users apply their preminent time-arrow-model in gestural interactions?

Conclusions:

• A Western users will provably apply their time-arrow model as a "rst option in gestural applications with rectangular windows.

• A The left-right model might have become a convention in HCI due the rectangular interface, the window.

Conclusions:


Participants:

• Ten western participants • Students from audiovisual studies at UPF• Ages: from 18 to 21

Experimental group

Experiment B: (GUI: Less variables than in TUI)

Measures:

• Time of each path (drag&drop)• Paths of the mouse

Experiment

Procedure:

1. Participants were exposed to see the video once.2. Participants were told to forward the video by dragging the mouse on the interface. (The video only moved forward when participants drag the mouse from the top of the interface until the bottom.)3. Participants did not get any reward until they found the right direction.

Variation:

The shape of the interface was circular

B. Could the shape of the interface interfere in the users time models?


Experimental group

ExperimentData analysis and Results

6 trials with clockwise direction: 60%2 trial with anticlockwise direction: 20%1 trials with left-right direction: 10%1 vertical top-bottom direction: 10%

The median of the amount of covered pixels in experiment B is 280.

The median of the amount of covered pixels in experiment A is 140.


Experimental group

ExperimentData analysis and Results

6 trials with clockwise direction: 60%2 trial with anticlockwise direction: 20%1 trials with left-right direction: 10%1 vertical top-bottom direction: 10%

The median of the amount of covered pixels in experiment B is 280.

The median of the amount of covered pixels in experiment A is 140.

Clockwise


Experimental group

Research question:

• B Could the shape of the interface interfere in the users time models?

Conclusions:

• B The "rst A statements do not "t in tangible context. Experiment B has demonstrated that if the shape of the interface is circular users will not apply their preminent time model. Participants will apply the clockwise model.

• B Users seems to understand circular surfaces as a continuum in time.

Conclusions:


Experimental group

Future work - Experiment CExperiment

More sophisticated interaction techniques can be developed if we allow more than one handles, for i.e. one acting as an anchor. [Fitzmaurice, 1995]

Will clockwise be a convention in complex interactions with circular surfaces too?

!

!"#$%&'()(*)!"#$%&'!(&)!*#+(+%&'!,#+-!,*%./0!(+!+-1!0(21!+%21!.(3010!+-1!141.+*#&%.!

#,51.+!+#!,1!+*(&06#*21)!(0!%6!%+!71*1!,1%&'!-14)!%&!#&180!-(&)9!

"#$!%$&!'($)!*+)*!*+',!$-)./0$!'001,*2)*$,!',!*+)*!*+$!32'4%,!566$2!)!,'7#'6'4)#*0&!2'4+!

854)310)2&!56!$-/2$,,'5#!652!'#/1*!($8'4$,9!:5./)2$(!*5!.5,*!/5'#*'#7!($8'4$,!;$979<!

*+$!.51,$=!>+'4+!5#0&!566$2,!)#!-?&!054)*'5#<!*+$!32'4%,!566$2!.10*'/0$!-?&!054)*'5#,!

)#(!52'$#*)*'5#!'#652.)*'5#!)*!*+$!,).$!'#,*)#4$,!'#!*'.$9!

@#! *+',! 4+)2)4*$2'A)*'5#<! *+$! 32'4%,! ,$28$! ),! 72),/)30$! 61#4*'5#,! >+'4+! 4)#! 3$!

/$2,',*$#*0&!)**)4+$(!*5!8'2*1)0!53B$4*,9! @#!$,,$#4$<! *+$!C2),/)30$!D@,!51*0'#$(!+$2$!

)2$! )! 30$#(! 56! 8'2*1)0! )#(! /+&,'4)0! )2*'6)4*,<! $)4+! 566$2'#7! )6652()#4$,! '#! *+$'2!

2$,/$4*'8$! '#,*)#*')*'5#9! @#!.)#&!4),$,<!>$!>',+!*5!566$2!)!,$).0$,,!30$#(!3$*>$$#!

*+$! /+&,'4)0! )#(! 8'2*1)0! >520(,9! E'#)00&<! *+$! ($,'7#! *)%$,! )(8)#*)7$! 56! )! ,/)4$?

.10*'/0$-!'#,*$)(!56!)!*'.$?.10*'/0$-!'#/1*!,*&0$9!!

!

!"#$%&'()((!:*%./0!.(&!,1!*10-(;1)9!<7#!=.3*$1=!0-(;1)!,*%./0!(*1!0-#7&!(&)!(.+!

(0!='3(*)!*(%409=!<-1%*!!"#$!03*6(.1!%0!,1%&'!301)!(0!())%+%#&(4!.#&0+*(%&+0!+#!*10-(;1!

+-1!141.+*#&%.!#,51.+9!!

! F!!

[Fitzmaurice, 1995]

Multiple directionalities

Two handles for stretching or shrinking time?

Multiple instants

• Consider other "elds of knowledge for the study like philosophy, physics...

C. Can complex gestures overshadow the time-arrow-model of the users?

Experimental group

Backwell, A. F. 2006. The reification of metaphor as a design tool. ACM transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, Vol. 13.

Boroditsky, L. 2000. Metaphoric structuring: understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition 75, 1-28. Elsevier.

Boroditsky, L. 2001. Does language shape thought?: Mandarin and English speakers’ Conceptions of Time. Cog. Psicology 43, 1-22.

Buxton, B. 2007. Theories, models and basic concepts. Chapter 7. Models and Thories.

Braun, M. 1992. Picturing Time: the work of Etienne-Jules Marey (1830- 1904). The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Cassinelli, A. and Ishikawa, M. Khronos projector. Emerging Technologies, SIGGRAPH 2005.

Clark, H. H. 1973. Space, time, semantics and the child. In T.E. Moore. Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press.

Cutting, E. J. 2002. Representing motion in a static image: constraints and parallels in art, science, and popular culture. Perception

Fitzmaurice , G. Ishii, H. Buxton, W. 1995. Bricks: laying the foundations for graspable user interfaces. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.442-449, May 07-11.

Gibson, J.J. 1986. The Ecological Approach to Visual. Perception. Houghton Mifflin Company.

Hirotada Ueda 1993. Automatic Structure Visualization for Video Editing. Proceedings of the INTERACT '93.

Jaschko, S. 2002. Space-Time Correlations Focused in Film Objects and Interactive Video. ISEA Papers, Nagoya/Japan.

Jordà, S. Alonso. M. 2006. Mary had a little scoreTable or the Reactable goes melodic. Proceedings on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME06).

Jordà, S. 2009. On stage: the reactable and other musical tangible go real. Int. J. Arts and Technology, Vol. 1.

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL. University of Chicago Press.

McNeill, D. 1996. Hand and Mind. University of Chicago Press.

Steger, F.H. 1991. La concepción de tiempo y espacio en el mundo andino. Ed. Vervuert Verlag, Latinoamérica student 18.

Tufte, Edward R. 1983. Visual explanations : images and quantities, evidence and narrative . Cheshire, Graphics Press, cop.

Wachtel E, 1993. The first picture show: Cinematic aspects of cave art. Leonardo 26. MIT Press.

References:

TangibleTime, a time phenomena study based on tabletop ...

Documents

Transcript of TangibleTime, a time phenomena study based on tabletop ...