Joanna Hare

Physigrams: modelling devices for natural interaction

This paper explores the formal specification of the physical behaviour of devices ‘unplugged’ from their digital effects. By doing this we seek to better understand the nature of physical interaction and the way this can be exploited to improve the design of hybrid devices with both physical and digital features. We use modified state transition networks of the physical behaviour, which we call physiograms, and link these to parallel diagrams of the digital state. These are used to describe a number of features of physical interaction exposed by previous work and relevant properties expressed using a formal semantics of the diagrams. As well as being an analytic tool, the physigrams have been used in a case study where product designers used and adapted them as part of the design process.

Active and passive physicality: making the most of low fidelity physical interactive prototypes

This paper presents three case-studies which comprise a systematic investigation into the use of low fidelity physical interactive prototyping techniques to form a design principle based on the constructs of active and passive physicality. It proposes that, with a better understanding of active and passive physicality, designers can make more effective prototypes for early stage user trials. Results of our studies indicate that the most effective prototypes balance both active and passive physicality equally. In addition, the notion of physicality can demonstrate why, in our studies; paper prototyping, screen-based prototypes and even Arduino prototypes produced unsatisfactory user data.

The effect of physicality on low fidelity interactive prototyping for design practice

In this paper we propose the concept of ’active’ and ’passive’ physicality as mental models to help in understanding the role of low fidelity prototypes in the design process for computer embedded products. We define ‘active physicality’ as how the prototype and its software react to users and ‘passive physicality’ as how the prototype looks and feels offline. User trials of four different types of ‘low fidelity’ prototypes were undertaken using an existing product as the datum. Each prototype was analysed in terms of active and passive physicality and user responses were collated and compared qualitatively and quantitatively. The results suggest that prototypes that balance both active and passive physicality produce data closer to the final device than those that are strong in one at the expense of the other.

Getting into Context Early: A comparative study of laboratory and in-context user testing of low fidelity information appliance prototypes

ABSTRACT For designers developing information appliances, bringing together the physical and digital elements of a product early in the design process presents a prototyping challenge. Whilst prototyping methods have been developed to address this need, these methods have so far only been evaluated using laboratory-based testing approaches. This paper argues that testing in-context should also be supported by prototyping methods, and presents the findings of a comparative study between a laboratory and in-context user test of early information appliance prototypes. A key question was whether the type of ‘rough and ready’ prototypes frequently found in user laboratory setting might, with some careful development, be suitable for in-context testing. The results of the study show that in-context and laboratory testing of early, ‘rough and ready’ prototypes uncovered different usability problems. In this study, in-context testing of prototypes uncovered problems with physical inputs and product format not seen in the laboratory environment. In contrast, the increased opportunities for spontaneous user reflection during laboratory testing provided insights into user expectations of functionality not seen during in-context testing.

Editorial: Physicality and interaction

We live in an increasingly digital world yet our bodies and minds are naturally designed to interact with the physical. The products of the 21st century are and will be a synthesis of digital and physical elements embedded in new physical and social environments. As we design more hybrid physical/digital products, the distinctions for the user become blurred. It is therefore increasingly important that we understand what we gain, lose or confuse by the added digitality. Digitally augmented physical artefacts can be tailored and adapted to operate within a wide range of ecological settings. However, they also become more complex and require a fairly intensive design process to make them not simply practical and functional but also engaging. As a result, the need becomes even more pressing to comprehend the underlying computational intricacies, the physical form, properties and behaviour, the physical and social contexts, and the issues of aesthetics and creativity. This special issue of Interacting with Computers arose out of series of workshops on the issue of Physicality (see http:// www.physicality.org/). These attracted a wide range of participants: artists and architects, designers and dancers, programmers and philosophers; all in different ways seeking to understand and exploit the physical nature of the world, things within the world and the human body itself. They also reflected intersections with other topical areas including ubiquitous computing and tangible interaction. The importance of issues surrounding physicality and materiality is clear. At the same time that the call for this special issue was issued there were two other journal special issue calls in closely related areas. However, the level of interest is such that despite this ‘competition’, the call for this issue was in fact heavily oversubscribed. The editors’ own interest in the issue of physicality cuts across a number of areas including: understanding the way physical artefacts act as prompts or triggers for action; using the placement of objects in the environment as a resource for the analysis of human activity; studying digital and electrical appliances in order to understand the role of physical form and behaviour in enhancing usability and user experience; and exploring the role of physical tools and models during the design process and how this affects the designers themselves and users testing early prototypes. The papers in this special issue also demonstrate the wide range of domains where issues of physicality are important. Antle, Corness and Droumeva in ‘‘What the Body Knows: Exploring the Benefits of Embodied Metaphor in Hybrid Physical Digital Environments” look at the use of physical metaphors to drive the design of tools for creating music. Khoo, Merritt and Cheok in ‘‘Designing Physical and Social Intergenerational Family Entertainment” focus on physical