Interactivity in the Context of Designed Experiences

Carrie Heeter
Michigan State University

Abstract
Interactivity is something researchers study, new technology commercials promote, and designers create. It's not something people do. People use the internet, watch T , shop, explore, learn, send and receive email, loo! things up... The word interactivity and its derivatives are used to represent so many different meanings that the word muddles rather than clarifies the spea!er's intent. The construct is worth salvaging carefully so future research more clearly defines the interaction parameters of interest and specifies what aspect"s# of interactivity are $eing examined. This article offers a conceptuali%ation of interactivity and suggests domains for operationali%ations intended to $e useful for researchers and designers.

The Muddle: Common uses of interact and interactive

Interactivity is an overused, underdefined concept. Everything a human does to or with another human can $e called an interaction. &uman interactions that use media are mediated human interactions. Everything a human does to or with a computer is a human' computer interaction.

The curriculum development group of the (C) *pecial Interest +roup on Computer'&uman Interaction "www.acm.org,sigchi,cdg,# suggests, -there is currently no agreed upon definition of the range of topics which form the area of human'computer interaction.Instead they offer a $rief definition followed $y a chapter'long ela$oration.

-&uman'computer interaction is a discipline concerned with the design, evaluation and implementation of interactive computing systems for human use and with the study of ma.or phenomena surrounding them "Chapter / p. 0#.- )ost germain to this article, -on the human side, communication theory, graphic and industrial design disciplines, linguistics, social sciences, cognitive psychology, and human performance are relevant. (nd, of course, engineering and design methods are relevant.-

Ted &anss "1222# used the word interact or interactivity 13 times in a recent tal! a$out Internet/ applications. In addition to PE4P5E and C4)P6TE7*, here are some things he mentioned that humans interact with using Internet/8 I9*T76)E9T* "scanning electron microscope# D(T( "atmospheric, oceanographic# E9 I749)E9T* "fly through spaces, colla$oratively view and annotate virtual environments#

*I)65(TI49* "a farm over four seasons# I*6(5I:(TI49* "construct, record, and preview scientific visuali%ations; )7I $rain scans# )EDI( C5IP* "audio li$rary# Interactivity is fre<uently discussed $y designers, often meant as a synonym for navigation and sometimes .ust generally to refer to good we$ site design. =or example, -interactivity on a we$site is the a$ility to ma!e the interface with a visitor an easy rather than a difficult process "http8,,www.we$$onan%a.com,interactive.html#.- *ome software manuals and design $oo!s use interactivity to refer to mouse events "mouse up, mouse down, roll over#. 4thers reserve interactivity to descri$e more complex programming in >avascript to provide logic for gaming or data$ase calls to dynamically compose content. (lan Cooper "1222 p. //# descri$es a $road domain he calls Interaction Design '' -the selection of $ehavior, function, and information, and their presentation to users.-

Using Interactive to Emphasize Changes in Traditional Media

assive!

?efore the Internet, $efore PCs were common, mass media industries "newspapers, $oo!s, movies, radio, and television# created and mar!eted pac!aged content to $e consumed $y passive audiences. )ass communication researchers studied the one way flow of programming sent $y media industry sources over media systems to consumer audiences. In the mid 12@As, communication researchers $egan to write a$out new technologies $ringing interactivity to mass media. 7ice "12@B p. C0# descri$ed new media as communication technologies that -allow or facilitate interactivity among users or $etween users and information.-

7eacting to expanded channel lineups $rought $y ca$le T , remote controls, and prototype videotext systems, &eeter "12@2# offered seven o$servations a$out interactivity in emerging media systems8

1# Information is always sought or selected, not merely sent.

/# )edia systems re<uire different levels of user activity. "6sers are always active to some extent#.

C# (ctivity is a user trait as well as a medium trait. *ome media are more interactive than others; some receivers are more active than others.

B# Person'machine interactions are a special form of communication.

0# Continuous feed$ac! is a special form of feed$ac! in which $ehavior of all users is measured on an ongoing $asis $y a source "e.g. videotex system# or gate!eeper "e.g. ca$le operator#.

D# The distinction $etween source and receiver is not present in all media systems.

3# )edia systems may facilitate mass communication, interpersonal communication, or $oth. Ehen new technologies and services are introduced which change a traditionally passive media experience to $e more active, it ma!es sense to tal! a$out interactive television or interactive drama. 4n the other hand, descri$ing a video game, computer program, or we$ site as interactive doesn't mean much since all video games, computer programs and we$ sites are, to some extent, interactive.

&ere is a ta$le of present day interactive television services "company names and categories from a ta$le in Evans 1222#. The range of services is diverse; the common thread is each is somehow a different viewer experience than traditional passive one'way television.

Table "# Interactive T$ Services

category interactive services

Internet%&n%T$ uEe$T www.we$tv.com Adds concurrent activities during viewing of typical broadcast television. iewers can lin! to companion we$ content "using

u(45T u)orecom www.morecom.com uEorldgate www.wgate.com,splash,main.html

set top $ox controller, viewed on your T set# corresponding to $roadcasts offering play along game shows, voting, we$ $rowsing, eCommerce. Adds mediated interpersonal communication with other viewers and with TV personalities to viewing experience. Chat, email, instant messaging synchroni%ed with $roadcast T .

ersonal T$ u7eplayT www.replaytv.com,home.htm uTI o www.tivo.com Changes the program selection process. Digitally records and saves up to CA hours, recording synced to daily online program guide for point and clic! automated recording of wee!ly shows and even genres. 5earns from your viewing $ehavior and rating of programs. *uggests shows. Changes viewing $ehavior. *low motion replay, pause live T and resume where you left off, fast forward with <uic!s!ip.

rogram 'uides u+emstar www.gemstar.co.u!,en,showview, u*ource )edia www.sourcemedia.com, uT +uide www.tvguide.com

Changes the program selection process.Interactive program guides for search, favorites, parental control and pay per view ordering.

$ideo%&n%(emand )$&(* uDI ( www.divatv.com u*ea Change uIntertainer www.intertainer.com uT 9 www.tvn.com Adds choice of time as well as choice of program with preview. 9avigate 4D choices, offered in full motion video or &T)5. =ind, $uy, preview content.

Enhanced T$ u(CT Content and outcomes within a live broadcast

www.actv.com uEin! www.win!.com

vary depending on user choices at branching decision points. Interact with live television $y changing channels "up to B (CT channels carry synchroni%ed related content such as different camera angles of the same event, or different answers to the same trivia <ui% <uestion# ' you $e the director of music video or foot$all. (nswer <uestions, choose endings, synchroni%ed with $roadcast T , programming, and advertising. Viewers can instantly purchase a product while it is being advertised on TV. Purchase advertised products online.

+ybrid T$ uICT www.ictv.com

&igh speed T $rowser set top terminal technology "no particular services announced yet#

ideo on demand is a vastly different form of interactive television than chatting online in a corner of the screen with the star of a show while the show is on. )ost of the interactive services involve more viewer activity of some !ind, although the Personal T *ervices may

actually result in less viewer activity $ecause the intelligence in the $ox does program selection for you. )ar!eting each of these services as interactive television helps inform consumers that the service will $e different from the traditional television viewing experience they're accustomed to. ?ut from a research and design standpoint, a more clear, $etter differentiated conceptuali%ation of interactivity is needed.

Erestling with this challenge eventually lead me to transcendental phenomenology philosophers &eidegger and &usserl for fundamental definitions of human experience as a foundation for a theory of interactivity.

,undamentals
Situated in Time &umans exist in a temporal hori%on -situated in the 9ow, $eing there in imminence of the =uture in relation to the impinging past- "9ehaniv 1222a citing &eidegger 123/#.

This $road temporal hori%on is -evidenced $y emotions such as hope and regret, concern

with planning for future actions and storytelling a$out past or imagined events- "9ehaniv 1222a#.

&umans therefore tend to approach and recall interaction in a way that ma!es narrative sense. &umans possess narrative intelligence ' we have awareness of our own and the o$.ects and $eings in our world's history and expectations for the future ")urray 1223#. Ee ma!e inferences that go $eyond our o$servations to construct coherent stories and interpretations of events.

(ffect for humans is an aspect of situatedness in time.... Temperament, mood, and emotion each occupy a point in emotional space. Diet% and 5ang "1222# have mapped affect to a cu$e along (roused'Calm, Pleasant'6npleasant, and Control,Dominance dimensions. Temperament is a fixed coordinate that defines one's rudimentary personality. )ood is our persona at any given time and emotion is our emotional state at the moment. Situated in Space (embodied) Ee perceive the world from the point of view of our $odies, situated in time and space, mediated $y the senses. 4ur $odies are our interface to the world. They represent us to the world, and they present the world to us.

If the self is an em$odied $eing whose life is manifest in action, the relation to the surrounding world will inevita$ly assume the form of an interaction ")acann 122C p. 0C#. The physical $ody directly interacts with its environment while psychic states endow a distinctive point of view. It is via .udgment or inference that we connect with the physical world, $ut it is via action that we interact with the world.

Physical aspects of interaction in the world, with appropriate research instrumentation, are directly o$serva$le. These include direction of ga%e, focal point, $ody position and motion, speech, facial expression, and all other physical actions and reactions.

(ccompanying internal dimensions of interaction with the world and with ourselves "selective attention, perception, interpretation, intent, thin!ing, feeling, imagining, wanting, anticipating, etc.# are not su$.ect to direct o$servation. ived !xperience

Paraphrasing dictionary definitions, to experience something means to participate in or live through an event or a series of events. It implies $eing present in space and in time. (ccording to &usserl, a lived experience is whatever is actually lived out "perceived, thought, imagined, remem$ered# ")acann 122C#. "ifferentiating Self and #ther &ow do humans distinguish self from non'selfF *patially, our $ody is -here- and everything else is -there.- Throughout early childhood our differentiation of self and nonself solidifies. &usserl emphasi%es $odily movements, and the !inesthetic experiences where the -I- comes into contact with other corporal o$.ects. 4ne's $ody 'holds sway' over o$.ects of the world through actions such as lifting, moving, !noc!ing over, etc. "Phillips 122B#.

4ur $ody,mind is self and everything else is non'self. *chuemie "1222# suggests we first distinguish self and nonself, and then further divide non'self into social and environmental components. Ee differentiate living and nonliving things, human and nonhuman.

4ur conceptuali%ation of other $eings is $ased upon our own experience '' we must recogni%e another $ody as a lived $ody li!e ourselves ' another -I- which is em$odied and holds sway. Ee recogni%e it as the $ody of a person, or at least a sentient $eing... ")iller 12@B, Phillips 122B#.

&umans tend to attri$ute human, self'li!e <ualities not .ust to other humans $ut also to other animate and inanimate o$.ects. &umans since prehistory have attri$uted human' or god'li!e personalities to living and nonliving entities and forces in their worlds. Tlinget Indians in *outheast (las!a revered the spirit of the cedar trees they selected and used to carve totem poles. The ancient +ree!s suffered through dealing with deities for the seasons, for wind, the sea, fire, wine and much more. Today we attri$ute human characteristics to our pets "and our computers#. Ee are fundamentally social $eings, and in the a$sence of strong evidence to the contrary, the default hypothesis is that the other is li!e us. Affordances *chuemie "1222# suggests organisms perceive o$.ects in terms of their affordances, the possi$le interactions with the element for the organism. &usserl's notion of 'holding sway' over o$.ects, and &eidegger's description of assessing the 'handiness of o$.ects' are consistent with >.>. +i$son's concept of affordances "descri$ed in 9orman 122@#. -( roc! can

$e moved, rolled, !ic!ed, thrown, and sat upon ' not all roc!s, .ust those that are the right si%e for moving, rolling, !ic!ing, throwing, or sitting upon. The set of possi$le actions is called the affordances of the o$.ect.-

Ehen we assess our immediate environment, we are aware of the some of the affordances each o$.ect offers. Chairs to sit on or throw, doors to open or close, !itchens to coo!, lights to illuminate. (n affordance is not a property of an o$.ect as much as it is a relationship $etween an o$.ect and the organism that is acting on the o$.ect "9orman 122@ p. 1/C#. The same o$.ect can have different affordances for different individuals. ( child might scan a !itchen and notice playthings and treats, a non'coo! might notice possi$ilities for eating <uic!ly '' a microwave, refrigerator, and $ag of potato chips, while a chef would see myriad tools and ingredients.

9ot all affordances involve physical action. (ffordances such as learning, mental arousal, or relaxation may re<uire no physical action on the part of either the human or the world.

In the design of experiences, real affordances are not nearly so important as perceived ones; it is perceived affordances that tell the user what actions can $e performed on an o$.ect and, to some extent, how to do them "9orman 122@#. $nteraction (n interaction is an episode or series of episodes of physical actions and reactions of an em$odied human with the world, including the environment and o$.ects and $eings in the world. These actions and reactions are actual interactions, a su$set of the range of potential interactions of the human and the world at that time and place. "esigned !xperiences ( designed experience is a human attempt to structure an environment to create affordances for a human participant. )ediated designed experiences are of particular interest for this article, $ut architecture, interior design, museums, and event planning are examples of non' mediated designed experiences. *torytelling "in person# is a form of designed experience ' it lets listeners imagine real or fictitious worlds and others as conceived and presented $y the storyteller.

,undamentals of Communication Technologies

The $ody separates, integrates, and represents a human in the world. Communication technologies further separate, integrate and represent the $ody in a mediated world. Communication technologies alter the human experience of time and space. They limit, eliminate, and sometimes amplify or alter our normal $ody input,output perceptions and interactions. Context is less visi$le and must $e inferred to a greater extent. Computer interactions result in $ehavior unconnected to physical forces, resulting in cognitive friction "Cooper 1222#. =or example, typing E7(*E (55 on a typewriter results in a page of type that says E7(*E (55, while typing E7(*E (55 on a computer could erase the contents of a hard drive. Situated in Time Communication technologies ena$le human mediated interaction and human machine interaction to occur asynchronously. )essages or commands can $e sent and received later. Events can $e recorded and experienced later. The human participant always experiences composing or receiving a communication in the present, even when the overall experience is asynchronous, separated in time. Ehen we compose a message to $e received later, we attempt to tailor the message to $e received and understood later. Ehen we receive an asynchronous message, we attempt to ta!e the time warp into account as we interpret it. 5atency is a pro$lem in mediated experiences. Cheshire "122D# writes, -whether we're dealing with people or o$.ects, interaction is essential. Ee perform some action, and when we o$serve how the person or o$.ect reacts we modify our $ehavior accordingly. *ometimes the reaction needs to $e very <uic!, li!e when we're having a conversation or fighting with swords, and sometimes a slow reaction is ade<uate, such as carrying out a lengthy postal correspondence with a distant relative...-

9ielsen "1222# $elieves fast response times are the most important design criteria for we$ pages. =urthermore, he says the response time should $e predicta$le and consistent. 9ielsen "1222, pp. BC'BB# <uotes 7o$ert ?. )iller's classic 12D@ paper at =all >oint Computer Conference on minimal response times for a media system8

4ne tenth of a second "A.1# is a$out the limit for having the user feel that the system is reacting instantaneously

4ne second is a$out the limit for the user's flow of thought to remain uninterrupted, or for the user to feel they are moving freely through information space, even though the user will notice the delay.

1A seconds is a$out the limit for !eeping the user's attention focused on the dialogue.

?oth ?iocca "1222# and 7eeves "1222# tal! a$out human $andwidth ' matching transmission speeds with the information processing capa$ilities of users. (lready the Internet and $roadcasting carry more information than any human could process. ?ut the amount of content in an individual transmission is usually far less than we experience physically through our real world $odies. Situated in Space (embodied) In the physical world we are here and everything else is there. Ee exist in an environment surrounded $y o$.ects and forces. Traditional media recogni%e our spatiality not at all. They are another o$.ect within our space, and we do not exist within their space.

Communication technologies allow us to experience spaces we could not visit $efore '' spaces which do not exist in the physical world and spaces we cannot physically visit. They afford us new means of experiencing spaces "point and clic!, fly# while they deny us familiar !inesthetic means of $odily exploration.

Communication technologies can invo!e a sensation of presence at a fictional or distant experience. 5om$ard "/AAA# compiled this definition of presence8 Presence "a shortened version of the term -telepresence-# is a psychological state or su$.ective perception in which even though part or all of an individual's current experience is generated $y and,or filtered through human'made technology, part or all of the individual's perception fails to accurately ac!nowledge the role of the technology in the experience. &e defines time to $e an essential aspect of presence "5om$ard /AAA#.

Presence occurs during an encounter with technology and not $efore or after this encounter "although the conse<uences,effects of presence can occur after the encounter#. Presence occurs in an -instant $y instant- manner. (lthough it appears that presence is a continuous rather than dichotomous varia$le, it has not $een determined whether 1# presence can exist

in varying degrees at each instant "as it seems# or /# our sense that presence is continuous is the result of the cumulative effect of instants, which may $e as short as milliseconds, in which presence either does or does not exist. I suggest a slightly different definition, inspired $y 5om$ard and $uild upon the assumptions defined here so far. Presence is the sensation of $eing spatially and temporally located within a mediated experience. The sensation may $e fleeting or it may continue for a longer duration. =or example, .umping when a dinosaur on the movie screen lurches toward you suggests, in that moment, you felt spatially and temporally located with the dinosaur. The affordances changed ' at that moment one possi$le interaction $etween you and the dinosaur was to $e eaten. 6sing a flight simulator recreates the visual illusion and controls of flying, often yielding an extended period of feeling spatially and temporally present in the coc!pit of a virtual world.

&umans are not represented directly $y their physical $odies when they use communication technologies. 4ur physical voice, mediated $y telephone and phone lines, represents us in phone calls. In traditional media our $odies are represented not at all. Computer mediated experiences reduce the $ody's representation to mouse actions, !eystro!es, or low $andwidth audio. &umans and agents may $e represented $y "em$odied as# avatars in some internet and virtual reality chat systems, $ut the capa$ilities of these avatars are more constrained than a physical $ody in their range of expression and motion and means of control. "ifferentiating Self from #thers &umans interact with other disem$odied humans, or with a device, or an agent. 7eeves and 9ass' "122D# research shows that -individuals' interactions with computers, television, and new media are fundamentally social and natural, .ust li!e interactions in real life.- 7eeves and 9ass conclude, -all people, automatically and unconsciously, respond socially and naturally to media.- Even command line and text interfaces are, to a certain extent, infused with social signifiers "7eeves G 9ass 122D#. 7eeves and 9ass' explorations have $een of media. There is no $asis for setting limits to human's social orientation to o$.ects. It is li!ely we respond to our refrigerator and alarm cloc! socially, too. 4ne complication for research is that humans deny that they interact socially with media. Het research clearly shows they do treat media as social $eings.. Thus, the phenomenon cannot $e studied directly $y as!ing a$out it. Computers are not real.

Computer agents are not real. ?ut the automatic response is to accept what seems to $e real as in fact real. =or researchers and designers, distinguishing $etween real and virtual environments, and $etween human communication with other humans versus human communication with computer agents is natural. ?ut it may not $e always $e important from the human participant's perspective. (t some point...-we will no longer $e interested in whether the characters we are interacting with are scripted actors, fellow improvisers, or computer'$ased chatter$ots, nor will we continue to thin! a$out whether the place we are occupying exists as a photograph of a theatrical set or as a computer generated graphic or al$eit whether it is delivered $y radio waves or telepresence ")urray 1223 pp. /31'/3/#.-

(t least $efore they grow accustomed to using computers, humans expect entities they interact with to have awareness of the history of interaction and they expect their interaction partners to construct a picture of them in the course of interaction "9ehaniv 1222#. Het the narrative structure of our computer'human interaction is disposa$le or forgotten. Computer $ehavior and emotionally stilted, inhuman interactions may seem strange to us at first $ut we get used to it. Ee develop -calluses- after spending a lot of time using computers, so li!e a violinist who practices fingers on strings we can play without pain.

9ehaniv "1222# suggests three ways computers could improve their apparent narrative intelligence8

recogni%ing narrative structure expressing narrative structure "storytelling# having narrative structure "an auto$iography, $eing temporally grounded#

Computers and other media are changea$le. They ta!e on different personalities $ased on the program running at the time. Thus, they are schi%ophrenic, insensitive, emotionally retarded entities with poor human communication s!ills. 7o% Picard founded the (ffective Computing +roup at )IT, wor!ing to ma!e computers sense human affect, recogni%e patterns of affective expression, understand and model human emotion, and synthesi%e "have# emotions "www.media.mit.edu,pro.ects,affect,#. Diet% and 5ang "1222# endowed an onscreen computer agent with a su$stantial range of emotion using a model of expression mapping. The affect of the agent changes appropriately over time as the human accomplishes tas!s.

Creation of personas is an important part of designing experiences. Ehether or not there is intent to introduce a personality into an interface, humans respond as if technology is

human. Ehat happens if another real human is present in the mediated experience ' does that presence overshadow or eliminate the persona of the deviceF &ow many different personas can "or should# $e concurrently present in a device or experienceF Ehen there are multiple personas, such as when a communication technology is mediating human communication, I am guessing that the dominant persona can overshadow the other"s#. =or example, with the telephone, we thin! a$out interacting with the other person and not much a$out interacting with the intermediary device "the phone#. Perhaps 7eeves and 9ass would discover that we are also polite to the phone itself. 4r perhaps in the face of a real human, the device $ecomes less prominent.

Cooper "1222# descri$es desira$le characteristics of an interface designed for politeness. =rom the human participant's perspective, a polite interface should $e8

interested in me deferential to me forthcoming have common sense anticipate my needs responsive taciturn a$out its personal pro$lems well informed perceptive self'confident stay focused fudga$le give instant gratification trustworthy

9ot only are devices and other humans disem$odied, $ut so too are we when we participate in mediated experiences. ?iocca "1222# and 9owa! "9owa! and ?iocca, 1222# are studying em$odiment as representation from the perspectives of representation of self and .udgments of others $ased on their em$odiment in virtual worlds.

7eeves "1222# summari%es his predictions for what the coming increases in networ! $andwidth will do for communication technologies. Ehen the Internet's $andwidth is less limited, latency will improve and new, richer sensory channels of interaction will $e possi$le. 7eeves suggests -social- $andwidth will increase, allowing more of human physical

perception to occur over mediated channels. Emerging communication technology will $ring more socially complete exchanges. *ocial ?andwidth will ena$le compelling automated social relationships and ena$le technology to automate social interaction and to $ecome social actors themselves. Technology will ena$le different social opportunities, and new forms of interaction. Affordances Ehat are the affordances of communication technologiesF 6ses and gratifications research loo!s at affordances sought and achieved with media ' reasons why people say they watch T or read newspapers. Things li!e to $e informed, to have fun, to relax, $ecause I'm $ored,

to !now what other people in the world are doing, etc. ( telephone lets you tal! to people. The range of affordances is vast "order pi%%a, as! for information, visit socially with a friend, conduct $usiness, etc.# &umans may invent or perceive affordances not intended $y the designer. )itchell points to the example of the answering machine ' people found it could $e used to screen calls in addition to ta!ing messages.

The actions you can perform with the physical device of telephone or television are straightforward and limited. The options are to turn it on, change channels, and watch for T , or to dial, tal! and listen for telephone. The computer is confusing o$.ect $ecause it can afford so many different actions, al$eit with limited input'output through !ey$oard or mouse. Designers try to ma!e o$vious to the human what actions are possi$le at any time, and what affordances are availa$le within an application or we$ site. Information appliances are and will increasingly $e more speciali%ed, limited devices with less functionality than a computer. They will $e designed to do only one or a few things, and thus can $e optimi%ed for those functions.

Cooper "1222# advocates goal'directed design, focusing on human's goals rather than on tas!s or navigation. &e starts $y developing a precise description of a hypothetical archetype of an individual for whom the software will $e designed. $nteractivity Communication has $een modeled as flow of message from source to receiver over sensory channels, exemplified $y ?erlo's "12DA# classic *)C7 model.

S467CE ME**(+E C&(99E5 -ECEI E7

Ehen considering interaction in the context of designed experiences, I propose an alternative participant'channels'experience model.

(7TICIP(9T ' C&(99E5* ' "DE*I+9ED# EIPE7IE9CE

,igure "#

Designed experiences are created with intention to impact, involve, and,or ena$le a human participant. There is usually more availa$le to $e experienced in a designed experience than what is actually experienced $y a single participant. Thus, an individual participant parta!es of some portion of the potential experience.

The designers' goals may or may not overlap with the goals of the participant. Designers intend certain affordances for participants. Participants perceive affordances $ased on their own goals and the clarity and design of the experience. *o, there are intended, perceived, and achieved affordances. Ehether or not the designers construct personas within a mediated experience, the participant is li!ely to infer personas. 6nless the personas are either real humans or agents with human characteristics, the participant is li!ely to $e unaware of their own reaction to the hidden, em$edded persona. (nalysis of interactivity should try to define the players or personae within a designed experience. Eho or what does

the participant $elieve they are interacting withF 7eturning to &anss' "1222# list, is it other humans, data, instruments, an environment, an agent...

The actual realm of interactivity is limited to physical actions and reactions $y the participant and the experience. The actions and reactions are mediated through the $ody, and, if communication technologies intervene, through technology which limits or extends normal physical channels.

)ore interactivity is not necessarily good. ( poorly designed interface is li!ely to re<uire more separate interactions and ta!e longer to achieve a sought affordance than a well' designed interface. 9orman "122@# proposes the ultimate interface is invisi$le. Hou don't even !now you're using a computer. 9o participant interaction is needed for the system to meet the participants' needs. (n example might $e a refrigerator that !eeps trac! of the <uantities of food, and orders more online when <uantities get low. Perhaps it communicates with the participant through a -shopping list- attached to the front of the refrigerator that automatically $uilds itself, then awaits a human signature to proceed with the order. Even that small amount of participant interaction deserves a polite, friendly, efficient interface and personality.

*ome interactions have o$vious one to one action'reactions, such as navigating a menu structure. Each time the participant clic!s on a choice, the screen changes. 4thers are more hidden, where a single interaction launches lots of $ehind the scenes actions the participant never sees. If an unseen agent gathers news articles for you overnight every night, compiling them into a personal newspaper to read, you may $e aware of reading the paper $ut not particularly aware of the agent wor!ing for you. *imilarly, you might program your 7eplay T 7eplay T so. *ince I am proposing a participant'centered perspective on interactivity, I will limit what is considered an interaction on the experience side to experience actions the participant is capa$le of o$serving through one or more senses over whatever channels exist to connect the participant to the experience. to record every episode of *tar Tre!. That single action on your part will cause the to record *tar Tre! episodes every time they are on until you tell it to stop doing

4rientation to interactivity is a personality characteristic. ( participant's general dispositions help to define their overall orientation toward designed experiences. *creven "1222# studies

museum designs created for -freely moving, voluntary, leisure'oriented people in pu$lic environments.isitor research has identified different visitor dispositions at a museum8

5inear disposition Exploratory disposition isual orientation (ction orientation "visitors predispose to touch and manipulate exhi$its and ta!e part in activities involving control, goal achievement, competition, and challenge to s!ills#

*ocial orientation "visitors, usually in groups of / or C, li!e to tal!, perform, and share social context that may directly or indirectly compete with exhi$it activities.#

Time orientation physical and psychological fatigue, hunger, other commitments

In addition to overall disposition, the participant's context and history affect the level of motivation, attention, and effort they exert at particular exhi$it elements. =actors studied $y *creven include8

Environmental motivating factors which facilitate or inhi$it information processing Ehether the attention they devote is passive,casual or active "compare, as! <uestions, loo! for connections#

?ac!ground !nowledge and history Time expectations "how long will this ta!e, how long do I have right now# )indful versus mindless attention "*creven 1222 p. 1C2#

Depending on participants' goals, one form of well'designed interactivity has the characteristic C%i!s%entmihalyi "122A# descri$es as -flow.- &e derived a set of six criteria to characteri%e experiences individuals consider optimal. 4ptimal experiences8

re<uire learning of s!ills have concrete goals provide feed$ac! let the person feel in control facilitate concentration and involvement are distinct from the everyday world "-paramount reality-#

Ehat is the duration of an interactionF *tudying interactivity from the participant perspective, granularity can $e considered as small as a single interaction ' one participant's action and the experience's response. 4r an interaction can $e a single uninterrupted period of participation in a designed experience for a single participant. Depending on the focus of

interest, it might $e a single $loc! of time spent at a single we$site, or else time spent using the Internet in general. It could $e the cumulative set of time spent using a single we$ site, or a medium.

=rom the experience perspective, one can consider the total set of experiences of all participants who visited a particular museum or we$ site or T show. Computers can store

data on every participant interaction, over time. That huge flood of data is difficult to analy%e. )eaningful patterns must $e defined, usually after some exploration of the data com$ined with $ehavioral expectations. =or example, wor!ing with continuous data on T viewership from a two way ca$le system, &eeler, D'(lessio, +reen$erg, and )c oy "12@B# defined three modes of viewing $ehavior8 program viewing "at least 10 minutes without changing channels#, sampling "C to 0 minute periods of channel changes#, and extended sampling "more than 0 minutes of fre<uent channel changing#. *ome households were frenetic channel changers, spending the ma.ority of their viewing time changing channels constantly, while other households almost never changed channels.

6p front ethnographic research may loo! at how people satisfy particular goals in the real world, to help inform designs. =or example, $efore creating a porta$le handheld poc!et calendar, o$serve what people do with physical calendars ' how and when they are used, what is written in them, whether there are different types of uses of poc!et calendars for different people.

4ften researchers pic! a small num$er, perhaps C to 0 participants, and o$serve each one's interactions with the designed experience. Test participants may $e assigned a set of tas!s, and as!ed to -thin! aloud- while they use the system. 6sa$ility is a speciali%ed form of interactivity research designed to identify and correct usa$ility design flaws.

6sa$ility testing's focus is more on how easily users can accomplish assigned tas!s than on the overall gestalt of affordances and user goals. 9ielsen "12@@# descri$es a methodology of rapid usa$ility testing li!ely to detect @AJ of a site's usa$ility pro$lems $y testing with 0 users "http8,,www.useit.com,alert$ox,2@A0AC.html# *ome usa$ility research loo!s at critical incidents, videotaping test participants and editing together a compilation of exciting moments "either good or pro$lematic# to provide feed$ac! to designers.

(nother approach to interactivity is to analy%e and compare the designed experience. ?elow I have recreated 9orman's "122@ p. C3A# ta$le comparing typical television and computer

experiences, and then added my own columns for non'mediated experiences and for virtual environments.

Table .# E/perience in T$ and Computers

Television Computers

*creen resolution "amount of 7elatively poor information displayed#

aries from medium'si%ed screens to potentially very large screens

Input devices

7emote control and optional )ouse and !ey$oard sitting on wireless !ey$oard that are $est des! in fixed positions leading for small amounts of input and to fast homing time for hands user actions

iewing distance

)any feet

( few inches

6ser posture

7elaxed, reclined

6pright, straight

7oom

5iving room, $edroom &ome office "paperwor!, tax "am$iance and tradition implies returns, etc., close $y; relaxation# am$ience implies wor!#

Integration opportunities with other things on same device

arious $roadcast shows

Productivity applications, user's personal data, user's wor! data

9um$er of users

*ocial8 )any people can see *olitary8 =ew people can see the screen "often, several people screen "user is usually alone will $e in the room when the T when computing# is on#

6ser engagement

Passive8 The viewer receives whatever the networ! executives decide to put on

(ctive8 6ser issues commands and the computer o$eys

7eality

irtual Environments

*creen resolution "amount of =ull human eye capacity information displayed#

CD goggles, large screen pro.ection, or computer monitor

Input devices

&ead and $ody movement, tactile, sound, sight, smell, taste, wal!ing, running

)ouse and !ey$oard, head trac!ing, glove,gesture, wand

iewing distance

aries from inches away to miles

( few inches to six feet

6ser posture

aries from prone to sitting to *itting or standing. standing.

7oom

(nywhere

7esearch la$oratory or gaming center.

Integration opportunities with other things on same device

(nything

Can connect with physical devices, sensors, virtual devices.

9um$er of users

aries from solitary to large crowd

*olitary or small group or mass theater audience.

6ser engagement

aries from active to passive

(ctive8 not much happens unless the participant does something.

5et me conclude $y citing 9orman "122@# one last time for his advice for new and improved interactive interfaces. They should include8

( central role of language "as! for things even if not visi$le# 7icher internal representation of data o$.ects including user history of interaction with documents, applications, we$ pages

( more expressive interface Designed for expert users ' optimi%e for people with decades of computer experience *hared control proactive computers and agents without human commands.

Interactivity is situated in time and em$odied $y the participant"s# in the world even when the interaction is mediated through communication technology. There may $e a second level of virtual em$odiment within the communication technology, $ut the physical $ody's role remains part of the interaction. Interactivity re<uires physical actions. Potential interactions are affordances. Participants may accurately perceive some affordances, $e unware of other affordances, and incorrectly perceive still other potential affordances. Designing experiences may involve designer selection or construction of participants, selection or construction of the physical world, creation or construction of a mediated world

and secondary em$odiment of the participant, and creation of affordances for interaction. =ocussing on interactivity as o$serva$le and physical,external separates the construct from perception, motivation, emotions, and thoughts. Doing this gives the term interactivity a uni<ue meaning, separating it from other factors which can then also $e considered Ehen studying interactivity of a designed experience from the perspective of a participant, here are aspects of interactivity to consider. Ehat duration of interaction is of interest8 a single moment in time, a contigious $loc! of time, or a cumulative lifetime of interactingF Is there a difference $etween action and reactionF *ome interactions may $e participant'initiated, others may $e initiated $y the system. ( single interaction is usually part of a se<uence. &ow is the human participant em$odied8 through what means do they perceive the system and other players, how is the participant represented, and what actions can they ta!eF There may $e two "or more# levels of em$odiment, always $eginning with the participant's physical human $ody in the real world, controlling a virtual representation and mediated environment. Ehat are the perceived and actual affordances8 what actions and reactions are possi$le, what actions and reactions occurF 6sa$ility '' how well does the system convey its affordances, how effectively does the participant notice the affordances and act upon themF +ratifications '' what goals does the participant see! to fulfill, what goals do they actually fulfillF &ow are the environment and potential other real or artificial player"s# em$odied8 through what means do they perceive the environment, the participant, and other players, how are they represented, and what actions can they ta!eF Ehat are the perceived and designed personality characteristics of the player"s# and systemF

-eferences
?erlo, David "12DA#, The Process of Communication. 9ew Hor!8 &olt, 7inehard G Einston.

?iocca, =ran! "1222#, &uman $andwidth and the design of Internet/ interfaces8 &uman factors and psychosocial challenge,- Proceedings of the Internet/ *ocio'technical *ummit, (nn (r$or, D3'@A.

Cooper, (llen "1222#, The Inmates are 7unning the (sylum8 Ehy high'tech products drive us cr%y and how to restore the sanity, Indianapolis8 *()*, a division of )acmillan Computer Pu$lishing.

C%i!s%entmihalyi, )ihaly "122A#, =low8 The Psychology of 4ptimal Experience, 9ew Hor!8 &arper G 7ow, Pu$lishers.

Diet%, 7ichard and 5ang, (nnie "1222#, -(ffective agents8 Effects of agent affect on arousal, attention, li!ing and learning, Conference Proceedings, Third (nnual Cognitive Technology Conference, D1'3/. Evans, >ohn "1222#, -Challenges of the digital age,- Proceedings of the Internet/ *ocio' technical *ummit, (nn (r$or, 1/'/A.

&anss, Ted "1222#, -(pplication'driven technology,- Proceedings of the Internet/ *ocio' technical *ummit, (nn (r$or, 1AC'111.

&eeter, Carrie "12@2#, -Implications of interactivity for communication research,- in )edia 6se in the Information (ge8 Emerging Patterns of (doption and Consumer 6se, >erry *alvaggio and >ennings ?ryant, eds., 5awrence Erl$aum (ssociates, /13'/C0.

&eeter, Carrie, D'(lessio, David, +reen$erg, ?radley, and )c oy, *teven "12@@# -Ca$leviewing $ehaviors8 (n electronic assessment,- in Ca$leviewing, Carrie &eeter and ?radley +reen$erg, eds., 9orwood, 9>8 ($lex Pu$lishing Company, 01'DD.

&eidegger, )artin "123/#, 4n Time and ?eing, 9ew Hor!8 &arper and 7ow. 5om$ard, )atthew "/AAA#, -7esources for the study of presence,http8,,nim$us.temple.edu,Kmlom$ard,Presence,explicat.htm

)acann, Christopher "122C#, =our Phenomenological Philosophers8 &usserl, &eidegger, *atre, )erleau'Ponty, 5ondon an

(n 4fficial 4nline Pu$lication of the (merican (cademy of (dvertising L /AA@ >ournal of Interactive (dvertising