During the group project, my definition of interaction is that like a conversation, “each participant in turn listens, thinks, and speaks.”, among which the hardcore of the process is “thinking” although it’s invisible. It helps make sure that what one “speaks” is in response to what he “listens”. Namely, participants of interaction should be interdependent on each other. Of course, this is the most fundamental but also the most difficult feature of interaction.
After the experience of developing and executing my midterm project, I learned a lot and was inspired mostly by the user test section. Before that, we thought that our project was clear to understand and easy to play with, however, it was after we saw others’ reactions and received their feedbacks that we realized that our project was kind of confusing because most users are not familiar with Morse Code and some even mistook the output for the input. Also, there were many other aspects needed to be improved. So we revised our project and it turned out to be much more user-friendly. This experience makes me think of Tom Igoe’s “Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen”, where he strongly appeals to artists: Don’t interpret your own work.” Because”When you do that, you’re telling the participant what to think, and by extension, how to act.” In contrast, “listening” is an important part in an interactive project, ‘Listen to what they say through their actions, through how they understand, or misunderstand, how to manipulate the parts that you designed to respond to them. Pay attention to their reactions.If you’re making interactive artwork, that is the conversation you’re having with the people for whom you make your work.” Because a project is not designed for showing its designer’s work, but to satisfy people’s needs. How good an interactive project is is not determined by its designer, but determined by its targeted audience’s thoughts and reactions.
Project that aligns with what I think interaction is: The mood reflecting floor- interaction design project. This project caught my eyes at first because of its gorgeous colors. In its introduction, the designer says, The floor designed to pick up different body languages and react some what like fish in a pond. Agitated and angry moods expressed by fast and sharp movements will scare away the floor, while calm and relaxed moods, expressed by slow and calm movements, will draw the floor towards the user. The floor can also help change the user mood by showing playfulness and interacting more like a game of catch.” It aligns with my interaction because the process is like a back and forth conversation where people and light respond to each other according to each other’s former deeds. Also, from my perspective, the projects’ purpose of entertaining people and cheering them up is well realized. The process of interaction is very interesting,
Project that differs from what I think interaction is: Arduino-interactive project (origami). In this project, we can see the designer put most of her effect on the appearance of the lampshade. However, its essence is just an LED with a touch switch, like a boring fridge, its level of interaction is very low. Also, I think it is not impressive because either is it very useful to tackle some difficulties or satisfy our urgent needs in our daily lives nor does it has special functions like mental heal or something.
To conclude, my definition of interaction is: A process of mutual response according to each other’s former behaviors. It shouldn’t be fixed once and for all, but something that can exist in different versions. In most cases, humans are the centre of interaction, their needs are emphasized and the trend is becoming more and more obvious.
Reference List
Crawford, The Art of Interactive Design
Tom Igoe, “Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen”
The mood reflecting floor- interaction design project