The Effect of Tangible Interaction on Spatial Design Tasks

Tangible user interfaces (TUIs) enable physical affordances that encourage the spatial manipulation of multiple physical objects to interact with digital information. We claim that the affordances of tangible interaction can affect design cognition on spatial tasks. While many researchers have claimed that TUIs improve spatial cognition, there is a lack of agreement about what improve means and a lack of empirical evidence to support the general claim. While most cognitive studies of TUIs focus on a comparison of tangible and traditional GUI keyboard and mouse interaction, we focus on comparing the use of TUIs on spatial versus nonspatial design tasks to validate the claim that tangible interaction specifically affects spatial design tasks. The results show that TUIs encourage users to perform more epistemic actions, leads to unexpected discoveries, and off-loads spatial reasoning to the physical objects. We conclude that the positive impact of tangible interaction is more dominant in spatial design tasks than nonspatial design tasks.

[1]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Using Diagrams and Gestures to Think and Talk about Insight Problems , 2006 .

[2]  Mary Lou Maher,et al.  Conceptual Combination Modulated by Action using Tangible Computers , 2015, CogSci.

[3]  Yoshihiko Nakamura,et al.  Influence of 3D images and 3D-printed objects on spatial reasoning , 2016, CogSci.

[4]  Mary Lou Maher,et al.  The Impact of Tangible User Interfaces on Designers' Spatial Cognition , 2008, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[5]  Alissa Nicole Antle,et al.  Hands on what?: comparing children's mouse-based and tangible-based interaction , 2009, IDC.

[6]  Paul P. Maglio,et al.  How Physical Interaction Helps Performance in a Scrabble-like Task , 2015, CogSci.

[7]  Jodi L. Davenport,et al.  Tangible models and haptic representations aid learning of molecular biology concepts , 2016, CogSci.

[8]  M. Alibali,et al.  Gesture and the process of speech production: We think, therefore we gesture , 2000 .

[9]  Wolmet Barendregt,et al.  Epistemic action: A measure for cognitive support in tangible user interfaces? , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[10]  David Kirsh,et al.  Let's Get Physical: Thinking with Things in Architectural Design , 2015, CogSci.

[11]  Susan Goldin-Meadow,et al.  Action’s Influence on Thought: The Case of Gesture , 2010, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[12]  T. Graham,et al.  The role of gesture in children's learning to count. , 1999, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[13]  Paul P. Maglio,et al.  On Distinguishing Epistemic from Pragmatic Action , 1994, Cogn. Sci..

[14]  John S. Gero,et al.  Characterizing Tangible Interaction During a Creative Combination Task , 2017 .

[15]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution , 2001 .

[16]  Ian D. Walker,et al.  A Tangible, Story-Construction Process Employing Spatial, Computational-Thinking , 2016, IDC.

[17]  S. Goldin-Meadow,et al.  Gesturing makes learning last , 2008, Cognition.

[18]  Susan Goldin-Meadow,et al.  Gesturing has a larger impact on problem-solving than action, even when action is accompanied by words , 2015, Language, cognition and neuroscience.