More to come...
Thursday 24 January 2008
Thursday 10 January 2008
Control and Probability
'…Design boundaries can be thought of as very elaborate systems of control'.
'The users of new media are becoming the content of the form'. (P. Marshall, 2004, New Media Cultures, Arnold Press: London Pp.18)
I have decided to use symbols for the choices within the interface I am creating, instead of words. This is to increase the simplicity of the device and help the user focus on the choices to be made. Four symbols will be shown at any one time for the user to choose from. Each set of 4 symbols will be different to other sets but each set will have some sort of connection or theme.
I will make the probability of the interface selecting the correct symbol less and less as you progress through the sequence of sets of symbols. I have chosen to do this because I have tested some basic designs out on friends (people who have had no contact with project) and discovered that if the probability of the interface getting the selection correct is totally random to begin with, people seem to give up on interacting with the interface very quickly as they realise that their selections are not being registered and they have no control from the start.
This is how the selection probability will work: The first symbol selection will always be correct, the next selection will have a 1 in 2 chance of being correct, the selection after that will have a 1 in 3 chance of being correct and the final selection will have a 1 in 4 chance of being correct. This is to draw the user in and make them believe that they are in control of the selections to begin with. They will then become more and more frustrated as they progress through the sequence of selections and realise they are not in control of the interface, it is controlling them.
'The users of new media are becoming the content of the form'. (P. Marshall, 2004, New Media Cultures, Arnold Press: London Pp.18)
I have decided to use symbols for the choices within the interface I am creating, instead of words. This is to increase the simplicity of the device and help the user focus on the choices to be made. Four symbols will be shown at any one time for the user to choose from. Each set of 4 symbols will be different to other sets but each set will have some sort of connection or theme.
I will make the probability of the interface selecting the correct symbol less and less as you progress through the sequence of sets of symbols. I have chosen to do this because I have tested some basic designs out on friends (people who have had no contact with project) and discovered that if the probability of the interface getting the selection correct is totally random to begin with, people seem to give up on interacting with the interface very quickly as they realise that their selections are not being registered and they have no control from the start.
This is how the selection probability will work: The first symbol selection will always be correct, the next selection will have a 1 in 2 chance of being correct, the selection after that will have a 1 in 3 chance of being correct and the final selection will have a 1 in 4 chance of being correct. This is to draw the user in and make them believe that they are in control of the selections to begin with. They will then become more and more frustrated as they progress through the sequence of selections and realise they are not in control of the interface, it is controlling them.
Monday 7 January 2008
Interactivity Gone Wrong
Hello, and happy new year to you all! Over the holidays I’ve been emailing Simon Morse about my project and bringing all my ideas together. He’s been a great help and given me lots of inspiration and advice.
I’ve decided to go with the “wrong interface” idea, which I thought of originally, and have developed that idea over the holidays. I’ve also continued looking into optical illusions and Op art and would like to incorporate some of these graphical elements into my final piece.
I’ve taken some inspiration from the “Fonejacker” programme “Flat for Rent” episodes, as I would like to create an interface which would be similar to an automated telephone system: no matter which button you press it keeps misinterpreting what you are saying and it selects something different. The user tends to get aggravated and frustrated in these situations on the programme, as they cannot achieve their aim and there is no option to speak to a real person. It’s technology gone wrong, instead of the user being in control and being aided by technology, the technology is working against them and is stopping them from reaching their aim. This is a theme I have researched and is a main component in the book “The Design of Everyday things” by Donald Norman, which I mentioned in one of my previous blogs. Below is a clip of the “Flat to Rent” sketch from the “Fonejacker” program:
The interface which I will create will be different to this as the user will not have an aim in mind when they interact with the interface, unless I set a task for them beforehand. I’d rather not set the user a specific aim though as I’d like the interface to be more like an experimental website rather than a game. I’d like the interface to be rational yet irrational at the same time; similar to the machines created by Simon Morse. It will also incorporate the theme of repetition which I’ve been looking into as the sequence will go round in a continual loop; certain options will be random, but others will be planned and if you reach the end it will return you to the beginning. It will also be comical and interesting to interact with as the options may not always be logical and some combinations of options will not be instantly connected in your brain; this may create new pathways and stimulate mental activity. I may also incorporate a timer into the interface so that the user can see exactly how much time they have spent interacting with it.
I am considering building an input device for this piece from one of the tutorials Rhona showed us. This will limit the user even more, so they will be interacting within strict boundaries without distraction. This may help the user to focus more on the interface and make their interaction with it more enjoyable and interesting. The tutorial for the making of this device can be seen here:
www.nastypixel.com/instantsoup/?page_id=71"Z
Let me know what you think. As always, any ideas/suggestions/comments would be greatly appreciated. Sorry I haven’t got back to some of your comments over the holidays-I will do soon!
I’ve decided to go with the “wrong interface” idea, which I thought of originally, and have developed that idea over the holidays. I’ve also continued looking into optical illusions and Op art and would like to incorporate some of these graphical elements into my final piece.
I’ve taken some inspiration from the “Fonejacker” programme “Flat for Rent” episodes, as I would like to create an interface which would be similar to an automated telephone system: no matter which button you press it keeps misinterpreting what you are saying and it selects something different. The user tends to get aggravated and frustrated in these situations on the programme, as they cannot achieve their aim and there is no option to speak to a real person. It’s technology gone wrong, instead of the user being in control and being aided by technology, the technology is working against them and is stopping them from reaching their aim. This is a theme I have researched and is a main component in the book “The Design of Everyday things” by Donald Norman, which I mentioned in one of my previous blogs. Below is a clip of the “Flat to Rent” sketch from the “Fonejacker” program:
The interface which I will create will be different to this as the user will not have an aim in mind when they interact with the interface, unless I set a task for them beforehand. I’d rather not set the user a specific aim though as I’d like the interface to be more like an experimental website rather than a game. I’d like the interface to be rational yet irrational at the same time; similar to the machines created by Simon Morse. It will also incorporate the theme of repetition which I’ve been looking into as the sequence will go round in a continual loop; certain options will be random, but others will be planned and if you reach the end it will return you to the beginning. It will also be comical and interesting to interact with as the options may not always be logical and some combinations of options will not be instantly connected in your brain; this may create new pathways and stimulate mental activity. I may also incorporate a timer into the interface so that the user can see exactly how much time they have spent interacting with it.
I am considering building an input device for this piece from one of the tutorials Rhona showed us. This will limit the user even more, so they will be interacting within strict boundaries without distraction. This may help the user to focus more on the interface and make their interaction with it more enjoyable and interesting. The tutorial for the making of this device can be seen here:
www.nastypixel.com/instantsoup/?page_id=71"Z
Let me know what you think. As always, any ideas/suggestions/comments would be greatly appreciated. Sorry I haven’t got back to some of your comments over the holidays-I will do soon!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
