The Interaction-Attention Continuum: Considering Various Levels of Human Attention in Interaction Design

IntroductionOver two decades ago, Weiser (1991) set out his influential vision for the 21st century in which computers of all sizes and functions are integrated in the everyday environment. In recent decades, the presence of computing technology in everyday environments has rapidly increased and much of Weiser's vision has turned into reality, seeing digital technology integrated into many devices from door knobs to mobile touchscreen enabled devices. Nowadays, the digital world is omnipresent and available to be interacted with at any time. Perceiving and interacting with this digital information usually requires the user's undivided attention, e.g., when looking at a smartphone screen or controlling a tablet through a graphical user interface. Alternative to these focused interactions, many interactive systems are currently being developed that act autonomously based on sensor data such as smart thermostats that adapt to users' routines (Nest., n.d.). Compared to attention demanding, focused interactions, these interactive systems rely on implicit interactions (Ju, 2015; Ju & Leifer, 2011; Schmidt, 2000) that do not require any attention from the user and happen outside the user's behest or intention.When comparing focused and implicit interactions with computing technology to the way people interact with everyday physical environments, a remarkable difference can be observed. People can easily perceive and interact with the physical world without consciously thinking about it. For example, we do not have to consciously look outside to have an impression of the weather or time of day and we can easily tie our shoelaces while having a conversation. These actions and perceptions happen on a routine basis and neither require focused attention nor take place entirely outside of the attentional field; we can easily focus our attention on them whenever this is desired or required (e.g., when it unexpectedly starts to rain or when our shoelaces are entangled such that we need to focus to untangle them). These activities take place in the background or so called periphery of attention (Bakker, van den Hoven, & Eggen, 2010).Weiser's discussion of ubiquity in the computer for the 21st century (Weiser, 1991) also broached the need for computing devices to seamlessly blend into everyday life by operating in the periphery of attention (Weiser & Brown, 1997). This vision of 'calm technology' (Weiser & Brown, 1997) inspired many researchers in the domain of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) to study digital information displays that can be perceived at the periphery of attention (Hazlewood, Stolterman, & Connelly, 2011; Heiner, Hudson, & Tanaka, 1999; Ishii et al., 1998; Matthews, Dey, Mankoff, Carter, & Rattenbury, 2004; Mynatt, Back, Want, Baer, & Ellis, 1998; Pousman & Stasko, 2006). Recently, the focus of such research has shifted towards studying both the perception of and interaction with digital information at the periphery of attention, enabling peripheral interaction with computing technology (Bakker, van den Hoven, & Eggen, 2015b; Edge & Blackwell, 2009; Hausen, Tabard, von Thermann, Holzner, & Butz, 2014; Olivera, Garcia-Herranz, Haya, & Llinas, 2011). Despite these efforts, barely any computing devices enable peripheral interactions.With the increasing ubiquity of technology, we believe that the vision of making interactive systems available in people's periphery of attention is of growing relevance in order to seamlessly integrate computing technology into people's everyday lives and environments. To achieve this, we argue that calm technology or peripheral interaction should not be seen as an alternative to focused or implicit interaction, but as a part of a continuum of interaction possibilities corresponding with varied levels of human attention. If interactive systems could seamlessly shift between focused, peripheral and implicit interaction, users would have the flexibly to choose the level of attention they wish to devote to the interaction depending on their context, goals and desires. …

[1]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Water lamp and pinwheels: ambient projection of digital information into architectural space , 1998, CHI Conference Summary.

[2]  Scott E. Hudson,et al.  The information percolator: ambient information display in a decorative object , 1999, UIST '99.

[3]  Alan F. Blackwell,et al.  Peripheral tangible interaction by analytic design , 2009, Tangible and Embedded Interaction.

[4]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Attention and Effort , 1973 .

[5]  Wendy Ju,et al.  The Design of Implicit Interactions: Making Interactive Systems Less Obnoxious , 2008, Design Issues.

[6]  Pablo Llinás,et al.  Do Not Disturb: Physical Interfaces for Parallel Peripheral Interactions , 2011, INTERACT.

[7]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled & automatic processing: behavior, theory, and biological mechanisms , 2003, Cogn. Sci..

[8]  C. Wickens Engineering psychology and human performance, 2nd ed. , 1992 .

[9]  Arne Jönsson,et al.  Wizard of Oz studies: why and how , 1993, IUI '93.

[10]  Erik Stolterman,et al.  Issues in evaluating ambient displays in the wild: two case studies , 2011, CHI.

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

[12]  J. G. Hollands,et al.  Engineering Psychology and Human Performance , 1984 .

[13]  Katherine Isbister,et al.  Designing for the physical margins of digital workspaces: fidget widgets in support of productivity and creativity , 2014, TEI '14.

[14]  Elise van den Hoven,et al.  Peripheral interaction: characteristics and considerations , 2014, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[15]  Michael Rohs,et al.  A Taxonomy of Microinteractions: Defining Microgestures Based on Ergonomic and Scenario-Dependent Requirements , 2011, INTERACT.

[16]  Dario D. Salvucci,et al.  Threaded cognition: an integrated theory of concurrent multitasking. , 2008, Psychological review.

[17]  Andreas Butz,et al.  Evaluating peripheral interaction , 2014, TEI '14.

[18]  Jacob Buur,et al.  Getting a grip on tangible interaction: a framework on physical space and social interaction , 2006, CHI.

[19]  James H. Aylor,et al.  Computer for the 21st Century , 1999, Computer.

[20]  Albrecht Schmidt,et al.  Implicit human computer interaction through context , 2000, Personal Technologies.

[21]  Panos Markopoulos A Design Framework for Awareness Systems , 2009, Awareness Systems.

[22]  K. Newell Motor skill acquisition. , 1991, Annual review of psychology.

[23]  Karl Gyllstrom,et al.  Activity put in context: identifying implicit task context within the user's document interaction , 2008, IIiX.

[24]  Elise van den Hoven,et al.  Acting by hand: Informing interaction design for the periphery of people's attention , 2012, Interact. Comput..

[25]  Masahiko Inami,et al.  Move-it sticky notes providing active physical feedback through motion , 2014, TEI '14.

[26]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  ambientROOM: integrating ambient media with architectural space , 1998, CHI Conference Summary.

[27]  Saul Greenberg,et al.  Proxemic interaction: designing for a proximity and orientation-aware environment , 2010, ITS '10.

[28]  Emile H. L. Aarts,et al.  The New Everyday: Views on Ambient Intelligence , 2003 .

[29]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Emerging frameworks for tangible user interfaces , 2000, IBM Syst. J..

[30]  Albrecht Schmidt,et al.  There is more to context than location , 1999, Comput. Graph..

[31]  Juan Carlos Augusto,et al.  Design and evaluation of an ambient assisted living system based on an argumentative multi-agent system , 2010, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[32]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Gaining empathy for non-routine mobile device use through autoethnography , 2014, CHI.

[33]  John T. Stasko,et al.  A taxonomy of ambient information systems: four patterns of design , 2006, AVI '06.

[34]  Tara Matthews,et al.  A toolkit for managing user attention in peripheral displays , 2004, UIST '04.

[35]  Lida Xu,et al.  The internet of things: a survey , 2014, Information Systems Frontiers.

[36]  Sebastian Boring,et al.  The Unadorned Desk: Exploiting the Physical Space around a Display as an Input Canvas , 2013, INTERACT.

[37]  Berry Eggen,et al.  User interaction with everyday lighting systems , 2014, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[38]  Niels Taatgen,et al.  Toward a unified theory of the multitasking continuum: from concurrent performance to task switching, interruption, and resumption , 2009, CHI.

[39]  Joep Frens,et al.  Designing for the unknown : a design process for the future generation of highly interactive systems and products , 2008 .

[40]  Boris E. R. de Ruyter,et al.  Ambient assisted-living research in carelab , 2007, INTR.

[41]  Gregory D. Abowd,et al.  Towards a Better Understanding of Context and Context-Awareness , 1999, HUC.

[42]  Elise van den Hoven,et al.  Grasping gestures: Gesturing with physical artifacts , 2011, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[43]  Anton Nijholt,et al.  Design for the periphery , 2010 .

[44]  H. Aarts,et al.  Habits as knowledge structures: automaticity in goal-directed behavior. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[45]  John Seely Brown,et al.  The coming age of calm technolgy , 1997 .

[46]  Wendy Ju,et al.  The Design of Implicit Interactions , 2015, Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics.

[47]  Berry Eggen,et al.  Making Sense of What Is Going on 'Around': Designing Environmental Awareness Information Displays , 2009, Awareness Systems.

[48]  David T. Neal,et al.  A new look at habits and the habit-goal interface. , 2007, Psychological review.

[49]  Colin Potts,et al.  Design of Everyday Things , 1988 .

[50]  G. R. J. Hockey,et al.  Applied Attention Theory , 2009 .

[51]  J. Juola Theories of Focal and Peripheral Attention , 2016 .

[52]  Elise van den Hoven,et al.  Evaluating Peripheral Interaction Design , 2015, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[53]  Elizabeth D. Mynatt,et al.  Designing audio aura , 1998, CHI.