Not just seeing, but also feeling art: Mid-air haptic experiences integrated in a multisensory art exhibition

Abstract The use of the senses of vision and audition as interactive means has dominated the field of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) for decades, even though nature has provided us with many more senses for perceiving and interacting with the world around us. That said, it has become attractive for HCI researchers and designers to harness touch, taste, and smell in interactive tasks and experience design. In this paper, we present research and design insights gained throughout an interdisciplinary collaboration on a six-week multisensory display – Tate Sensorium – exhibited at the Tate Britain art gallery in London, UK. This is a unique and first time case study on how to design art experiences whilst considering all the senses (i.e., vision, sound, touch, smell, and taste), in particular touch, which we exploited by capitalizing on a novel haptic technology, namely, mid-air haptics. We first describe the overall set up of Tate Sensorium and then move on to describing in detail the design process of the mid-air haptic feedback and its integration with sound for the Full Stop painting by John Latham (1961). This was the first time that mid-air haptic technology was used in a museum context over a prolonged period of time and integrated with sound to enhance the experience of visual art. As part of an interdisciplinary team of curators, sensory designers, sound artists, we selected a total of three variations of the mid-air haptic experience (i.e., haptic patterns), which were alternated at dedicated times throughout the six-week exhibition. We collected questionnaire-based feedback from 2500 visitors and conducted 50 interviews to gain quantitative and qualitative insights on visitors’ experiences and emotional reactions. Whilst the questionnaire results are generally very positive with only a small variation of the visitors’ arousal ratings across the three tactile experiences designed for the Full Stop painting, the interview data shed light on the differences in the visitors’ subjective experiences. Our findings suggest multisensory designers and art curators can ensure a balance between surprising experiences versus the possibility of free exploration for visitors. In addition, participants expressed that experiencing art with the combination of mid-air haptic and sound was immersive and provided an up-lifting experience of touching without touch. We are convinced that the insights gained from this large-scale and real-world field exploration of multisensory experience design exploiting a new and emerging technology provide a solid starting point for the HCI community, creative industries, and art curators to think beyond conventional art experiences. Specifically, our work demonstrates how novel mid-air technology can make art more emotionally engaging and stimulating, especially abstract art that is often open to interpretation.

[1]  M. Murray,et al.  The role of multisensory memories in unisensory object discrimination. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[2]  C. Spence Crossmodal correspondences: A tutorial review , 2011, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[3]  Ellen Yi-Luen Do,et al.  Digital flavor interface , 2014, UIST.

[4]  Manfred Tscheligi,et al.  LOLLio: exploring taste as playful modality , 2013, TEI '13.

[5]  Mei-Kei Lai,et al.  Universal scent blackbox: engaging visitors communication through creating olfactory experience at art museum , 2015, SIGDOC.

[6]  Aduén Darriba Frederiks,et al.  Towards tactile expressions of emotion through mediated touch , 2013, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[7]  Antonio Frisoli,et al.  The Museum of Pure Form: touching real statues in an immersive virtual museum , 2004, VAST.

[8]  Hiroyuki Shinoda,et al.  Airborne Ultrasonic Tactile Display Brain-computer Interface Paradigm , 2014, ArXiv.

[9]  Hans-Peter Seidel,et al.  An efficient construction of reduced deformable objects , 2013, ACM Trans. Graph..

[10]  Betsy van Dijk,et al.  Measuring enjoyment of an interactive museum experience , 2012, ICMI '12.

[11]  Ali Israr,et al.  AIREAL: interactive tactile experiences in free air , 2013, ACM Trans. Graph..

[12]  Marianna Obrist,et al.  Measuring the added value of haptic feedback , 2017, 2017 Ninth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX).

[13]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Design Principles for Tools to Support Creative Thinking , 2005 .

[14]  Anjan Chatterjee,et al.  The Aesthetic Brain: How We Evolved to Desire Beauty and Enjoy Art , 2013 .

[15]  Monica Bordegoni,et al.  Can the feel of the haptic interaction modify a user's emotional state? , 2013, 2013 World Haptics Conference (WHC).

[16]  Paul A. Bell,et al.  The Influence of Museum Exhibit Design on Immersion and Psychological Flow , 1998 .

[17]  Young J. Kim,et al.  Interactive generalized penetration depth computation for rigid and articulated models using object norm , 2014, ACM Trans. Graph..

[18]  E. Alexander Museums in Motion: An Introduction to the History and Functions of Museums , 1996 .

[19]  D. Keltner,et al.  The communication of emotion via touch. , 2009, Emotion.

[20]  M. Csíkszentmihályi Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday Life , 1997 .

[21]  Karon E. MacLean,et al.  Communicating emotion through a haptic link: Design space and methodology , 2007, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[22]  Sriram Subramanian,et al.  Talking about tactile experiences , 2013, CHI.

[23]  L. Bannon,et al.  Designing interactive museum exhibits : enhancing visitor curiosity through augmented artefacts. (Awarded Best Paper) , 2002 .

[24]  Eva Hornecker,et al.  “I don’t understand it either, but it is cool” - visitor interactions with a multi-touch table in a museum , 2008, 2008 3rd IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal Interactive Human Computer Systems.

[25]  Karon E. MacLean,et al.  Haptic experience design: What hapticians do and where they need help , 2017, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[26]  Karon E. MacLean,et al.  Exploiting haptic facets: Users' sensemaking schemas as a path to design and personalization of experience , 2017, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[27]  Claus-Christian Carbon,et al.  Art Perception in the Museum: How We Spend Time and Space in Art Exhibitions , 2017, i-Perception.

[28]  Mira Dontcheva,et al.  Proceedings of the adjunct publication of the 27th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, UIST 2014 Adjunct Volume, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, October 5-8, 2014 , 2014, UIST.

[29]  Carlos Velasco,et al.  Integrating Mid-Air Haptics into Movie Experiences , 2017, TVX.

[30]  Yukio Iwaya,et al.  Sounds can alter the perceived direction of a moving visual object. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[31]  Youngwoo Park,et al.  The roles of touch during phone conversations: long-distance couples' use of POKE in their homes , 2013, CHI.

[32]  Dirk Heylen,et al.  Touching the Void -- Introducing CoST: Corpus of Social Touch , 2014, ICMI.

[33]  Peter Ride,et al.  Redefining Access: Embracing multimodality, memorability and shared experience in Museums , 2016 .

[34]  Lutz Jäncke,et al.  Synaesthesia: When coloured sounds taste sweet , 2005, Nature.

[35]  Nadia Bianchi-Berthouze,et al.  An Embodiment Perspective of Affective Touch Behaviour in Experiencing Digital Textiles , 2013, 2013 Humaine Association Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction.

[36]  Chi Thanh Vi,et al.  A Comparison of Scent-Delivery Devices and Their Meaningful Use for In-Car Olfactory Interaction , 2016, AutomotiveUI.

[37]  Martin Loomes,et al.  Soundscape and haptic cues in an interactive painting: A study with autistic children , 2014, 5th IEEE RAS/EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics.

[38]  Joyce Ma,et al.  Using a Tangible Versus a Multi-touch Graphical User Interface to Support Data Exploration at a Museum Exhibit , 2015, TEI.

[39]  Sriram Subramanian,et al.  Rendering volumetric haptic shapes in mid-air using ultrasound , 2014, ACM Trans. Graph..

[40]  V. Jousmäki,et al.  Parchment-skin illusion: sound-biased touch , 1998, Current Biology.

[41]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Creativity support tools: accelerating discovery and innovation , 2007, CACM.

[42]  Stephen E. Palmer,et al.  Aesthetic science: Connecting minds, brains, and experience. , 2011 .

[43]  Geehyuk Lee,et al.  PinPad: Touchpad Interaction with Fast and High-Resolution Tactile Output , 2017, CHI.

[44]  Sriram Subramanian,et al.  SensaBubble: a chrono-sensory mid-air display of sight and smell , 2014, CHI.

[45]  Anton Nijholt,et al.  A multisensory approach for the design of food and drink enhancing sonic systems , 2016, MHFI@ICMI.

[46]  G. Dijksterhuis,et al.  Smelly primes – when olfactory primes do or do not work , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[47]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Hot Under the Collar: Mapping Thermal Feedback to Dimensional Models of Emotion , 2016, CHI.

[48]  Sriram Subramanian,et al.  Investigating Expressive Tactile Interaction Design in Artistic Graphical Representations , 2016, ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact..

[49]  Anders Warell,et al.  Assessing the sensory experience of product design: Towards a method for ‘Five Senses Testing’ , 2006 .

[50]  Á. Pascual-Leone,et al.  The Multisensory Museum: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Touch, Sound, Smell, Memory, and Space , 2017 .

[51]  Lisa F. Smith,et al.  Spending Time on Art , 2001 .

[52]  Sriram Subramanian,et al.  Emotions Mediated Through Mid-Air Haptics , 2015, CHI.

[53]  Hiroyuki Shinoda,et al.  Noncontact Tactile Display Based on Radiation Pressure of Airborne Ultrasound , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Haptics.

[54]  Nuno Correia,et al.  A multi-touch tabletop for robust multimedia interaction in museums , 2010, ITS '10.

[55]  Haruo Noma,et al.  Sumi-nagashi: creation of new style media art with haptic digital colors , 2004, MULTIMEDIA '04.

[56]  Michel Chion,et al.  Audio-Vision: Sound on Screen , 1994 .

[57]  Sriram Subramanian,et al.  UltraHaptics: multi-point mid-air haptic feedback for touch surfaces , 2013, UIST.