The use of abstraction and motion in the design of social interfaces

In this paper, we explore how dynamic visual cues can be used to create accessible and meaningful social interfaces without raising expectations beyond what is achievable with current technology. Our approach is inspired by research in perceptual causality, which suggests that simple displays in motion can evoke high-level social and emotional content. For our exploration, we iteratively designed and implemented a public social interface using abstraction and motion as design elements. Our interface communicated simple social and emotional content such as displaying happiness when there is high social interaction in the environment. Our qualitative evaluations showed that people frequently and repeatedly interacted with the interface while they tried to make sense of the underlying social content. They also shared their models with others, which led to more social interaction in the environment.

[1]  Bernt Schiele,et al.  LaughingLily: Using a Flower as a Real World Information Display , 2003 .

[2]  W. G. Parrott,et al.  Emotions in social psychology : essential readings , 2001 .

[3]  S. Runeson On visual perception of dynamic events , 1983 .

[4]  Young Hay,et al.  Body Brush , 2002 .

[5]  A. Leslie,et al.  Do six-month-old infants perceive causality? , 1987, Cognition.

[6]  Stephen DiVerdi,et al.  The interactive FogScreen , 2005, SIGGRAPH '05.

[7]  P. Todd,et al.  How motion reveals intention: Categorizing social interactions , 1999 .

[8]  P. Ekman,et al.  Approaches To Emotion , 1985 .

[9]  Phoebe Sengers,et al.  Culturally embedded computing , 2004, IEEE Pervasive Computing.

[10]  J. N. Bassili Temporal and spatial contingencies in the perception of social events , 1976 .

[11]  Alan B. Milne,et al.  Impressions of enforced disintegration and bursting in the visual perception of collision events , 1999 .

[12]  A. Michotte The perception of causality , 1963 .

[13]  P. White,et al.  Phenomenal causality: impressions of pulling in the visual perception of objects in motion. , 1997, The American journal of psychology.

[14]  C. Nass,et al.  Does computer-synthesized speech manifest personality? Experimental tests of recognition, similarity-attraction, and consistency-attraction. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[15]  F. Heider,et al.  An experimental study of apparent behavior , 1944 .

[16]  Patrice D. Tremoulet,et al.  Perceptual causality and animacy , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[17]  John A. Kembel,et al.  Infotropism: living and robotic plants as interactive displays , 2004, DIS '04.

[18]  Kevin Quennesson conscious = camera , 2005, SIGGRAPH '05.

[19]  Joonhwan Lee,et al.  Studying the effectiveness of MOVE: a contextually optimized in-vehicle navigation system , 2005, CHI.

[20]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Robots, Gender & Sensemaking: Sex Segregation’s Impact On Workers Making Sense Of a Mobile Autonomous Robot , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[21]  P. Todd,et al.  Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart , 1999 .

[22]  B. Rimé,et al.  The perception of interpersonal emotions originated by patterns of movement , 1985 .

[23]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  Can computer personalities be human personalities? , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[24]  Anat Rafaeli,et al.  Emotion as a Connection of Physical Artifacts and Organizations , 2004, Organ. Sci..

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

[26]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  Public anemone: an organic robot creature , 2002, SIGGRAPH '02.

[27]  Khalil Sima'an,et al.  Wired for Speech: How Voice Activates and Advances the Human-Computer Relationship , 2006, Computational Linguistics.

[28]  M. Gill,et al.  On the genesis of confidence. , 1998 .

[29]  S. Lea,et al.  Visual Perception of Intentional Motion , 1994, Perception.