TUI as Social Entity: a Study of Joint-actuation and Turn-taking-actuation in Actuated-interfaces

We present an actuated-interface that is not only a tangible interface but also an autonomous object, designed as an independent entity that takes a similar role to the user’s role in an anagram word game. We highlight two leading interaction paradigms: Turn-taking-actuation and Joint-actuation, and evaluate both in a qualitative interaction study with the autonomous actuated-interface. Our findings reveal that all participants perceived the interaction as a social experience. The different interaction paradigms led to different interpretations: Turn-taking-actuation was interpreted as a competitive experience, while Joint-actuation was interpreted as a collaborative experience. The interaction paradigms also influenced the intensity of emotions and perception of control, with Joint-actuation leading to more intense emotions and higher sensitivity to control in the interaction. To conclude, our findings show that it is possible to design an actuated-interface that users perceive both as a tangible interface and as a social entity with its own intent.

[1]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms , 1997, CHI.

[2]  Kasper Hornbæk,et al.  Understanding Affordance, System State, and Feedback in Shape-Changing Buttons , 2016, CHI.

[3]  Wendy Ju.  Approachability : How People Interpret Automatic Door Movement as Gesture , 2008 .

[4]  Helge J. Ritter,et al.  An integrated multi-modal actuated tangible user interface for distributed collaborative planning , 2012, Tangible and Embedded Interaction.

[5]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Mechanical constraints as computational constraints in tabletop tangible interfaces , 2007, CHI.

[6]  Guy Hoffman,et al.  Animating Mechanisms: A Pipeline for Authoring Robot Gestures , 2017, HRI.

[7]  Wendy Ju,et al.  Designing the Behavior of Interactive Objects , 2016, TEI.

[8]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  inFORM: dynamic physical affordances and constraints through shape and object actuation , 2013, UIST.

[9]  Rjg Raymond Opdenakker.  Advantages and disadvantages of four interview techniques in qualitative research , 2006 .

[10]  Jun Kato,et al.  Reactile: Programming Swarm User Interfaces through Direct Physical Manipulation , 2018, CHI.

[11]  Selma Sabanovic,et al.  Happy Moves, Sad Grooves: Using Theories of Biological Motion and Affect to Design Shape-Changing Interfaces , 2016, Conference on Designing Interactive Systems.

[12]  Richard E. Boyatzis,et al.  Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development , 1998 .

[13]  Matthew Barr,et al.  Student attitudes to games-based skills development: Learning from video games in higher education , 2018, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[14]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  LineFORM: Actuated Curve Interfaces for Display, Interaction, and Constraint , 2015, UIST.

[15]  Hadas Erel,et al.  Companionship Is Not a Function: The Effect of a Novel Robotic Object on Healthy Older Adults' Feelings of "Being-Seen" , 2020, CHI.

[16]  Kenneth P. Fishkin,et al.  A taxonomy for and analysis of tangible interfaces , 2004, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[17]  Miguel Bruns Alonso,et al.  Balancing User and System Control in Shape-Changing Interfaces: a Designerly Exploration , 2016, Tangible and Embedded Interaction.

[18]  Majken Kirkegaard Rasmussen,et al.  "It's alive, it's magic, it's in love with you": opportunities, challenges and open questions for actuated interfaces , 2013, OZCHI.

[19]  Austin Lee Nichols,et al.  The Good-Subject Effect: Investigating Participant Demand Characteristics , 2008, The Journal of general psychology.

[20]  Orit Shaer,et al.  Reality-based interaction: a framework for post-WIMP interfaces , 2008, CHI.

[21]  Guy Hoffman,et al.  The Greeting Machine: An Abstract Robotic Object for Opening Encounters , 2018, 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN).

[22]  Marianne Graves Petersen,et al.  Aerial tunes: exploring interaction qualities of mid-air displays , 2012, NordiCHI.

[23]  D. Maynes-Aminzade,et al.  The actuated workbench: computer-controlled actuation in tabletop tangible interfaces , 2003, ACM Trans. Graph..

[24]  Marianne Graves Petersen,et al.  "It's in love with you": communicating status and preference with simple product movements , 2012, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[25]  Guy Hoffman,et al.  Designing Vyo, a robotic Smart Home assistant: Bridging the gap between device and social agent , 2016, 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN).

[26]  David S. Kirk,et al.  Tangible autonomous interfaces (TAIs): exploring autonomous behaviours in TUIs , 2014, TEI '14.

[27]  Ken Perlin,et al.  Physical objects as bidirectional user interface elements , 2004, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[28]  Hadas Erel,et al.  Robots are Always Social: Robotic Movements are Automatically Interpreted as Social Cues , 2019, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[29]  Jamie Zigelbaum,et al.  Shape-changing interfaces , 2011, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[30]  Markus Löchtefeld,et al.  Morphees: toward high "shape resolution" in self-actuated flexible mobile devices , 2013, CHI.

[31]  Stuart M. Shieber.  A call for collaborative interfaces , 1996, CSUR.

[32]  William Gobson,et al.  Multimedia: From Wagner to Virtual Reality , 2001 .

[33]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Bricks: laying the foundations for graspable user interfaces , 1995, CHI '95.

[34]  Michel Beaudouin-Lafon,et al.  Designing interaction, not interfaces , 2004, AVI.

[35]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Recompose: direct and gestural interaction with an actuated surface , 2011, CHI EA '11.

[36]  Guy Hoffman,et al.  Negotiating the Creative Space in Human-Robot Collaborative Design , 2019, Conference on Designing Interactive Systems.

[37]  Sriram Subramanian,et al.  Is my phone alive?: a large-scale study of shape change in handheld devices using videos , 2014, CHI.

[38]  Ivan Poupyrev,et al.  Actuation and tangible user interfaces: the Vaucanson duck, robots, and shape displays , 2007, TEI.

[39]  Miriam Sturdee,et al.  Analysis and Classification of Shape-Changing Interfaces for Design and Application-based Research , 2018, ACM Comput. Surv..

[40]  Alissa Nicole Antle,et al.  The CTI framework: informing the design of tangible systems for children , 2007, TEI.