Report: Aesthetic Approaches to HCI

This is a report of the NordiCHI 2004 Workshop on Aesthetic Approaches to Human-Computer Interaction, which took place in October at the University of Tampere. (The workshop was organised by Olav W. Bertelsen, Marianne G. Petersen and Søren Pold), writes John Knight of User-Lab.

"With the computer we have a new paradigm of material that can be visible or invisible"

This workshop advanced HCI aesthetics into a research agenda. It concluded by formulating foundations of HCI aesthetics (chiaesthetics?). These centred on developing a new vocabulary of interactive experiences that defines the material of presence grounded in research involving experiment, analysis and intervention.

Aesthetics of Interaction – A Pragmatist Perspective
Marianne G. Petersen of University of Aarhus began the workshop by exploring the aesthetics of interaction. This was framed by Shusterman's pragmatist aesthetics. She noted that the aesthetics of interaction 'establishes a new relationship to the materials that are being manipulated.' Furthermore aesthetics and instrumentality are seen as highly interwoven and is tied to the historical and socio-cultural context and addresses the mind and the body. Developing knowledge requires analytical and empirical investigation. Analytical investigation concerns intentionality and properties of the experience while experimentation surveys users' perspective.

Searching for the Aesthetics of Everyday Technology
Konrad Tollmar of Lund University presented an ethnographic study of people's relationships with domestic artefacts. Entitled an 'Aesthetic of everyday technology' he suggested that people do not like technology, they hide their PC's rather than cherish them. In contrast he gave examples of "objects of desire" that evoke personal memories and practical objects that do things and people value. He demonstrated products where functionality was ambivalent or hidden in order to show how interventionist research can work. For example, a plant pot that roamed to find the optimum light conditions and "remote bugs" that eluded attempts to capture them. The ambiguous and provocative nature of these products chimed with most workshop presentation.

Interaction Design Aesthetics
Lars Hallnäs of The Swedish School of Textiles discussed how Interaction shifts the focus of design from things to acts and how form 'is a new temporal material' This shift requires a practice based research agenda. Like Tollmar's interventionist research he cited work by Anthony Dunne that challenges notions of functionality in provocative prototypes. Lars differentiated between function (what things do) and interaction (what we do) and suggested that HCI needs to understand spatial form, visual expression, aesthetics of act design. Build the foundations of act design. Shift from by drawing to design by act defining.

"The material is a flickering ghostlike apparition that is stabilised in an instant of metaphorical representation"

The Aesthetics of Attachment
Mads Bødker of IT University of Copenhagen demonstrated the pervasive nature of the digital world and noted a shift from computers as objects to becoming mediators of human experiences and being. Drawing on Donna Haraway and Bruno Latour, Mads looked at hybridisation of man and machine where intention and agency are difficult to ascribe to one actor. ' This interweaving , one might argue is in one sense the same as transparency…although…engagement and attachment…are the preconditions for trusting, lasting, pleasurable and rich interaction. Three properties were ascribed to experience; human, functional, semiotic and material. Focus on material not just the hardware and software but the situatedness of action ands text as material. Looks at some elements of attachment; embodiment, punctuation, presence, friction and dynamics.

The Aesthetics of Use
Michael Hammel of University of Copenhagen discussed the aesthetics of use and looked at the difference between artists and designers intentions. Michael looked 'at the intersection between interaction and art that arise from the aesthetics of use'. He argued for a symbiosis between the everyday and the sublime that should focus on the home rather than the gallery noting the rise of computer games and mediated experiences. This means that the interface has become culturally and aesthetically informed. As such it becomes subject of emotional value and taste judgements. He then looked at the notion of beauty, opacity and invisibility. He ended by suggesting that abstract expressionism points to a distinction between representation and the represented (eg looking at or looking through) and to interactive aesthethics based on Shusterman's somoaesthetics.

Aesthetic and Emotional Evaluations of Computer Interfaces
Jari Laarni of Helsinki School of Economics looked at "Pleasure of the Mind". He argued that curiosity, flow, nurturing and socialisation are critical factors in satisfying users and noted that aesthetics has been marginal in HCI because it is difficult to measure. His research aims to systematically explore the factors of use and qualities that are important to the user experience in order to develop better methods for measuring aesthetic emotional responses. He described experimental work investigating texture and pattern. His aim is to understand the relationship between aesthetics and usability, the relationship between beauty appraisal and preferences, the impact of affective experience on aesthetic appraisal and the effect of tangibility on aesthetic appraisal.

"Mental phenomena is as material as knives and forks"

Material Matters – What can HCI learn from Aesthetics
Søren Pold argued that Computers are disembodied requiring material to be discovered in the form of code, interface and hardware He demonstrated an example of a 'see through window' that floated on the screen displaying whatever was behind it, thus demonstrating the artificiality of interface metaphors. He suggested that HCI needs to look at contemporary art to discover the potential for aesthetics. Contemporary art is not concerned with pleasing but investigating material. The idea that the interface should be invisible is like realism which he contrasted with modern art's preoccupation with 'its own material and formal properties'. Søren described the history of computer arts starting with algorithms, moving to hyper-structures and culminating in dramatic interactive spaces.

What is Aesthetics anyway? Investigating the use of Design Principles
R. Parizotto-Ribeiro of York University presented an empirical study. This investigated whether Gestalt design principles influences users' evaluation of interface aesthetics. Based on the criteria of unity, proportion, homogeneity, balance and rhythm 279 participants evaluated prototype interfaces. The results suggested that design principles are an important factor in achieving pleasing computer environments. She noted that 'what I'm currently calling aesthetics is the use of design principles embodied in the interface."

"Shouldn't we dematerialise the computer?"

An anthropological Notion of Performance for the Design of Physical Interfaces
Giulio Jacucci of University of Oulu demonstrated an anthropology of performance suggesting that technology is embedded in changing landscapes that include performative elements. Giulo noted that 'The computer interface currently exploits only a limited part of human experience and expressive modalities and as with other artefacts is used to communicate a wider set of expressive acts.' In contrast a performance perspective suggests the need to consider temporality, rhythm, structures, action and interaction. He concluded by presenting a case study of a learning environment for architectural students demonstrating how staging and performing alter traditional notions of interactivity.

Aesthetics is not simply the icing on the cake rather aesthetics is the point of departure for enabling stronger focus on presence rather than use.

Introducing Excitability
Martin Sønderlev Christensen IT University of Copenhagen surveyed current technological trends and design paradigms. These all suggest the need for new approaches to HCI including consideration of the everyday, private and public spheres and richer interaction toward emotion, socialization and communication. He described how excitability is a key feature of these developments that need to engage and provide value to users. Martin noted that HCI has traditionally been oriented towards simplicity and beauty being 'a driver of usability.' He defined excitability as the ability to create and facilitate a positive user experience pertaining to emotion, critical senses or notable significant experiences. Rather than becoming seamless 'technology has become more opaque' noting that Anthony Dunne talks about how estrangement and unfriendliness 'highlight the obvious falsity of transparency.

"Making things embodies making a finite set of decisions understand that is not trying to replicate it."

An Experimental Aesthetics Approach to Evaluating Websites
John Knight and Muzeyyen Pandir of Birmingham Institute of Art and Design described a study in the new empirical aesthetics. He outlined a tradition that included Fechner and Berlyne. The study investigated subjects preference based on Berlynes' collative variable comprising interesting pleasingness and complexity. The results showed that within a framed area of exploration empirical approaches can facilitate greater understanding of the aesthetic dimensions of interaction. This led to a discussion on the efficiency of experiments in HCI and aesthetics. This divided the workshop between those who valued the critique approach and the empiricist. Both, however were united in developing "knowledge that enables us to build better systems". This raised the issue of subjectivity. With the conclusion golden rules do not work.

Tertiary Artefactness
Olav W. Bertelsen of University of Aarhus argued for redefining HCI as an aesthetic discipline. He noted the historical focus on cognition and individual users and a second generation of context based design. However, 'in both cases transparency [of the interface] was seen as ideal. Olav then sought to look at the future by investigating the nature of artefacts and Activity Theory The latter he suggested can unpick transparency by 'ensuring…that the interface sets conditions for the users' development of the relevant operations'. He then described how Wartofsky's model of perception suggests three types of artefact. Primary artefacts, such as a hammer are used 'directly' in an activity. Whereas, secondary artefacts such as books represent an activity and tertiary artefacts such as paintings transcend their direct representational function by creating new types of experience. HCI design based upon tertiary artefacts enables reconsideration of the dilemma between 'curriculum for use' and 'unanticipated use'.

John Knight
User-Lab, Birmingham Institute of Art and Design

'Internet addiction' linked to Depression
Source: BBC, 9 February 2010
 
There is a strong link between heavy internet use and depression, UK psychologists have said.

Could *You* be more Usable?
Source: UN, 8 February 2010
 
Bet you could.

Stowe Boyd on 'Steampunk' thinking about the Future of Computing
Source: Stowe Boyd's blog via Experientia, 6 February 2010
 
Are established metaphors of user experience holding us back from new ways of structuring our interaction through computers?

Nokia's User Experience Programme
Source: UN, 5 February 2010
 
Nokia has put together a rich and informative website covering the key elements of user experience.

Interfaces magazine: latest issue available now
Source: HCI News Service, 4 February 2010
 
The latest issue of Interfaces is now available in pdf format, free from the Interaction Website.

A Lighter Brigade of Chargers
Source: UN, 3 February 2010
 
Lots of gadgets, one charger. At last.

Mobile Touch Screens could soon Feel the Pressure
Source: MIT Technology Review, 2 February 2010
 
A quantum switch could add pressure sensing to mobile screens.

Usability, Usability, Usability: why the iPad will Succeed
Source: Econsultancy, 1 February 2010
 
The tech critics love it, hate it, love it again, shrug it off. What do usability experts say?

British Airways - at last some good news
Source: Loop11, 30 January 2010
 
In a recent website usability study for the world's leading airlines, the British Airways website proved to be the most user friendly, with Malaysia Airlines and Virgin Atlantic having the lowest user experience rating.

Computation of Emotions in Man and Machine
Source: Royal Society, 29 January 2010
 
Advances in computer technology now allow machines to recognise and express emotions, paving the way for improved human-computer and human-human communications.