Spectator understanding of error in performance

The development of computer-based devices for music control has created a need to study how spectators understand new performance technologies and practices. As a part of a larger project examining how interactions with technology can be communicated to spectators, we present a model of a spectator's understanding of error by a performer. This model is broadly applicable throughout HCI, as interactions with technology are increasingly public and spectatorship is becoming more common.

[1]  Jens Rasmussen,et al.  Cognitive Control and Human Error Mechanisms , 1987 .

[2]  Michael Gurevich,et al.  Expression and its discontents: toward an ecology of musical creation , 2007, NIME '07.

[3]  S. Vosniadou.  Mental Models in Conceptual Development , 2002 .

[4]  D. Wolpert,et al.  Why can't you tickle yourself? , 2000, Neuroreport.

[5]  Jodie A. Baird,et al.  Discerning intentions in dynamic human action , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  Jens Rasmussen,et al.  The Definition of Human Error and a Taxonomy for Technical System Design , 1987 .

[7]  F. Fakültesi,et al.  MUSIC PERCEPTION AS A TOPIC OF COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY , 2007 .

[8]  David N. Ford,et al.  Mental models concepts for system dynamics research , 1998 .

[9]  J. Decety,et al.  From the perception of action to the understanding of intention , 2001, Nature reviews. Neuroscience.

[10]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  A mental model can help with learning to operate a complex device , 1993, CHI '93.

[11]  Christopher Dobrian,et al.  The 'E' in NIME: Musical Expression with New Computer Interfaces , 2006, NIME.

[12]  Dieter Zapf,et al.  Introduction: Human Errors and Error Handling , 1994 .

[13]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  Disentangling behavioral intention and behavioral expectation , 1985 .

[14]  C. Stevens,et al.  Sweet Anticipation: Music and the Psychology of Expectation, by David Huron . Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2006 , 2007 .

[15]  G. Knoblich,et al.  Predicting the Effects of Actions: Interactions of Perception and Action , 2001, Psychological science.

[16]  Dieter Zapf,et al.  Error Detection, Task Characteristics, and Some Consequences for Software Design , 1994 .

[17]  Austin Henderson,et al.  Making sense of sensing systems: five questions for designers and researchers , 2002, CHI.

[18]  Patrick Langdon,et al.  Cognitive Scales and Mental Models for Inclusive Design , 2007, HCI.

[19]  Tony P. Pridmore,et al.  Expected, sensed, and desired: A framework for designing sensing-based interaction , 2005, TCHI.

[20]  Steve Benford,et al.  Designing the spectator experience , 2005, CHI.

[21]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Design rules based on analyses of human error , 1983, CACM.

[22]  R. Green.  The psychology of human error. , 1999, European journal of anaesthesiology.

[23]  Sidney Fels,et al.  Mapping transparency through metaphor: towards more expressive musical instruments , 2002, Organised Sound.