Modelling Interaction Decisions in Smart Cities: Why Do We Interact with Smart Media Displays?

This study examined the personal characteristics and preferences of individuals that encourage interactions with smart media displays (media facades). Specifically, it aimed to determine which key aspects of a smart display “media facade” enhance intuitive interactions. A range of smart display technologies and their effects on interaction decisions were considered. Data were drawn from a survey of 200 randomly sampled residents and/or visitors to a smart building, One Central Park, in Sydney, Australia. A binomial logistic regression analysis was undertaken to establish links between a range of design, perceptions and socio-demographic variables and individuals’ decisions to interact with a smart media display. The results showed that the aesthetics of an installation, the quality of an installation’s content and the safety of the operation-friendly environment significantly affected respondents’ decisions to interact with the media display. Interestingly, respondents born overseas were more likely to interact with a smart display than those born in Australia. Respondents who expressed a preference for photograph-based interactions were also more likely to interact with the display. Somewhat surprisingly, age, residency and levels of familiarity with digital technology did not significantly affect respondents’ decisions to interact with the display.

[1]  Kim Halskov,et al.  Designing urban media façades: cases and challenges , 2010, CHI.

[2]  Jasna Cikic-Tovarovic,et al.  Specific problems of media facade design , 2011 .

[3]  Mirjam Struppek,et al.  The social potential of Urban Screens , 2006 .

[4]  K. Fiedler,et al.  Social Cognition: How Individuals Construct Social Reality , 2004 .

[5]  Jörg Müller,et al.  The Audience Funnel: Observations of Gesture Based Interaction With Multiple Large Displays in a City Center , 2011, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[6]  Hoon Han,et al.  Installing large-scale community infrastructure: Homeowners’ preferences toward notification and recourse , 2017 .

[7]  Nina Valkanova,et al.  Smart Citizen Sentiment Dashboard: A Case Study Into Media Architectural Interfaces , 2014, PerDis.

[8]  Vesna Popovic,et al.  Applying and testing design for intuitive interaction , 2014 .

[9]  Jae Wan Park.  Interactive Kinetic Media Facades: A Pedagogical Design System to Support an Integrated Virtual-Physical Prototyping Environment in the Design Process of Media Facades , 2013 .

[10]  Kenton O'Hara,et al.  Understanding collective play in an urban screen game , 2008, CSCW.

[11]  William P. Morgan,et al.  Self‐Motivation and Adherence to Habitual Physical Activity1 , 1980 .

[12]  Mitchell Harrop,et al.  Uncovering the Honeypot Effect: How Audiences Engage with Public Interactive Systems , 2016, Conference on Designing Interactive Systems.

[13]  Ronald Schroeter,et al.  Engaging new digital locals with interactive urban screens to collaboratively improve the city , 2012, CSCW.

[14]  Tomohiro Tanikawa,et al.  Particle Display System - A Large Scale Display for Public Space , 2009, EGVE/ICAT/EuroVR.

[15]  Kazuhiro Jo,et al.  ParticipArt: Exploring participation in interactive art installations , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality - Arts, Media, and Humanities.

[16]  C. Frith.  Social cognition , 2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[17]  Alethea L. Blackler,et al.  Intuitive Interaction and older people , 2012 .

[18]  P. Taçon.  Socialising landscapes: the long-term implications of signs, symbols and marks on the land , 1994 .

[19]  Jörg Müller,et al.  MyPosition: sparking civic discourse by a public interactive poll visualization , 2014, CSCW.

[20]  Eva Hornecker,et al.  Beyond information and utility: Transforming public spaces with media facades , 2013, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[21]  Charles D. Barrett.  Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior , 1980 .

[22]  P. Young,et al.  Emotion and personality , 1963 .

[23]  R. Nesse,et al.  ORIGINAL ARTICLES Fear and Fitness: An Evolutionary Analysis of Anxiety , 1994 .

[24]  Stephen J. Payne,et al.  Adaptively distributing cognition: A decision-making perspective on human - computer interaction , 2001, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[25]  Andrew Vande Moere,et al.  The role of context in media architecture , 2012, PerDis '12.

[26]  Greg Corness,et al.  Human-computer-intuition? Exploring the cognitive basis for intuition in embodied interaction , 2009, Int. J. Arts Technol..

[27]  Mohammed Abdullah Eben Saleh,et al.  The architectural form and landscape as a harmonic entity in the vernacular settlements of Southwestern Saudi Arabia , 2000 .

[28]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The Adaptive Character of Thought , 1990 .

[29]  Martin Tomitsch,et al.  Designing for collective participation with media installations in public spaces , 2012, MAB '12.

[30]  Anna Jorgensen,et al.  Woodland spaces and edges: their impact on perception of safety and preference , 2002 .

[31]  Tan Yigitcanlar,et al.  Stimulating technological innovation through incentives: Perceptions of Australian and Brazilian firms , 2017, Technological Forecasting and Social Change.

[32]  Siti Aqilah Jahari,et al.  Destination image as a mediator between perceived risks and revisit intention: A case of post-disaster Japan , 2014 .

[33]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Enticing People to Interact with Large Public Displays in Public Spaces , 2003, INTERACT.

[34]  Christian Dindler.  Designing infrastructures for creative engagement , 2014, Digit. Creativity.

[35]  Sven Gehring,et al.  Designing interaction with media façades: a case study , 2012, DIS '12.

[36]  Kim Halskov,et al.  Staging Urban Interactions with Media Façades , 2009, INTERACT.

[37]  Lucy Suchman.  Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication , 1987 .

[38]  Peter Dalsgaard,et al.  Social Interaction Design Patterns for Urban Media Architecture , 2015, INTERACT.

[39]  Eva Hornecker,et al.  Urban HCI: spatial aspects in the design of shared encounters for media facades , 2012, CHI.

[40]  Youngkook Kim.  Impacts of the perception of physical environments and the actual physical environments on self-rated health , 2016 .

[41]  Martin Tomitsch,et al.  Strategies for Intuitive Interaction in Public Urban Spaces , 2015, Interact. Comput..

[42]  Tom Barker.  Interactive Polymedia Pixel and Protocol for Collaborative creative content generation on urban digital media displays , 2010 .

[43]  Wael W. Al-Azhari,et al.  Large Interactive Media Display and Its Influence on Transformation Urban Spaces from Neglecting to Action: The Case of Al-Thaqafa Street in Amman City , 2014 .

[44]  M. Chignell,et al.  Affective Interaction Understanding, Evaluating, and Designing for Human Emotion , 2011 .

[45]  Jörn Hurtienne,et al.  Towards a unified view of intuitive interaction: definitions, models and tools across the world , 2007, MMI Interakt..

[46]  D. Gauldin.  Deb’s Page: Once Upon a Time… , 1999, Journal of Perinatal Education.

[47]  Stephan Wensveen,et al.  Aesthetic Interaction: A Framework , 2010, Design Issues.

[48]  Gitte Lindgaard,et al.  What is this evasive beast we call user satisfaction? , 2003, Interact. Comput..