Welcome to the presentation of Pictorial Unleashed, Into the Folds of Interactive Qualities.
On behalf of me, Jeroen Peeters, and my co-authors: Rosa van der Veen and Ambra Trotto.
One could state that pictorials were created in response to an increasing awareness of
the inadequacy of traditional publication formats to effectively express design knowledge,
in particular of interaction design.
Pictorials answer the need for a communicative layer that addresses other than the merely
cognitive skills of readers, and can convey some of the richness of design processes and
outcomes.
Pictorials can also be seen to contribute to an attempt to make design research results
more actionable.
Rutkowska et al. analysed 51 pictorials, and presented an actionable palette of six ways
in which pictorials so far have attempted to share design research outcomes in actionable
ways.
These include for example Referential Resources, where additional materials is available elsewhere.
Engaging Narratives, where design led investigations are presented with as much richness as possible,
or in new and engaging ways.
Or Tacit Mediations, providing participatory activities for the reader to engage with parts
of a design process or outcome.
In this pictorial we aim to contribute to this list of examples.
In particular the ones that have to do with Tacit Mediation.
In this case, we focus on Tangible Interaction.
Tangible Bits, Embodied Interaction, there are many different approaches based on different
foundations, but the use of the body has become common within the interaction design community.
There is a shared sense of importance for physical manipulation, that offers particular
qualities when designing for interaction.
In helping to design the experience of using something, or in understanding what is being
done.
In this pictorial we explore how we might leverage active physical engagement on the
reader’s part.
In this pictorial, we ask the reader to actively engage with the papers of the pictorial.
We present two different tangible interaction designs, that are designed for the same functionality
and for the same context.
Both of them are allowing people to make, break and manage connections in a smart home
environment.
In previous work, we have published on a comparative evaluation between the two, looking at the
mental models that users create when using these designs.
This time around, we focus more on the qualities of interaction.
We try to explore how the pictorial provides a freedom to highlight these qualities of
interaction in an active way.
The first design is called Interaction Tile.
Interaction Tile is a centralized design.
Connections between various devices are made by interacting with a central device, irrespective
of the locations of devices that are to be connected in the living room.
The network connections are abstracted and taken out of context.
The design mainly relies on cognitive skills.
It relies on representation and symbolic meaning of icons and colours.
So, here we will use the pictorial as a way to explain the interaction of the design.
Having cut off strips of paper, the reader can start to interact with the pictorial by
folding along indicated lines.
This design is based around a central object, shaped like a rounded cube, the Interaction
Tile.
Smaller, similarly shaped objects, each represent a device in the living room.
Which device these objects represent, is communicated by the icon on top of it.
Folding the page demonstrates how a smaller object, representing a DVD player, is placed
next to the Tile.
The green light on the Interaction Tile indicates a connection is possible.
Folding the page a second time demonstrates how another object, representing a TV, is
placed next to the Tile.
A second green light indicates a connection has been established.
Folding the page a third time demonstrates how the last object, representing a set of
speakers, is placed next to the Tile.
A third green light indicates a second connection has been established.
The second design is called Nodes.
Nodes is a distributed design.
Elements of the system are spread throughout the room, as they are placed next to the location
of devices one wants to connect.
This requires the person using Nodes to physically move around the space, to interact with the
system and the components he or she wants to connect.
The design itself consists of three types of objects.
These objects are “nodes”, “start points” and “end points”.
The nodes are circular platforms that are placed on or near devices that are to be connected.
Start points are arrow shaped signifiers that are inserted into a node.
End points have the negative shape of an arrow and are also inserted into a node.
Aiming a start point at and end point visually completes the shape.
This establishes a connection between the two nodes, flowing from the start towards
the end point.
Again, we will convey the interaction scenario through the way the reader interacts with
the pictorial.
First, she cuts out two start points.
Then, she makes a series of cuts to prepare the Nodes page for folding.
Where Interaction Tile has a certain way of constructing every network, in Nodes, because
of the way it works, there are different scenarios possible for the same functionality of a network.
Because connections can be relayed between devices.
In the pictorial we present this by showing two scenarios for the same network.
In the first scenario, the reader inserts a start point into the node at the DVD player.
Aiming this at the node near the speaker.
Folding the page aims this end point at the start point, and establishes the first connection.
The reader inserts another start point into the node at the DVD player, and aims it at
the node near the TV.
Folding the page again, aims this end point at the second start point, and establishes
the second connection.
Starting over from scratch..
In the second scenario, the readers inserts a start point into the node at the DVD player
and aims it at the TV.
Folding the page aims the end point at the TV towards the start point and establishes
the first connection.
A second start point, inserted into the node at the TV, now aims towards the speaker.
Folding the page there aims the last end point at the speaker, towards the start point at
the TV.
Establishing the second connection.
This connection is relayed by the TV on the way to the speakers.
Some conclusive remarks.
This pictorial explored how active physical engagement with the pages of a formal publication
may supplement – or perhaps to some extent replace – textual descriptions of interactions,
images or supplementary content such as video.
The act of interacting with, and experiencing a design research artefact is difficult to
communicate without the thing itself.
The folding sequences presented in this pictorial are of course no substitute for interacting
with the actual designs.
These exercises have clear limitations themselves.
For example in their inability to allow free exploration, or in the limited sensorial richness
the pages provide in comparison to the 3D objects of the actual prototypes.
However, we believe there is value in examining how we might attempt to present interactions
when we share our work in the community.
To try and get more closely aligned to interacting with the thing itself, as has also been raised
by others.
If we forego some of the design articulations in the way that we communicate about our work,
we risk losing a lot of the value that work.
To explore ways in which we might transpose parts of the design articulation, the richness
of materiality and experience, into publications is a worthy endeavor.
This kind of work also deals with ambiguity.
In the sense that if we try to create a pictorial where some of the meaning is emergent in interaction,
than we give space for interpretation towards the intentions of the authors.
But there is also a risk for misinterpretation of course, and this may be an issue.
Lastly, there are clear tensions that are embodied by this pictorial.
We are aware, and this was also pointed out by some of the reviewers, rightly so, that
presenting work in this manner makes certain assumptions.
For example an assumption of able-bodiedness for the reader.
Or her access to infrastructure, such as a printer.
This might be an issue.
Moreover, the publishing of this pictorial required a bit of back and forth between authors,
publishers and chairs after being accepted.
Because it is designed in a different way and started to push against the publishers
norms for publications.
In itself it becomes a challenge to play with the expectations there.
I hope we can have some discussions around this now, and I thank you for your attention.