Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
explores aspects for which the traditional usability assessment methods are incapa-
ble of providing useful information. New techniques are necessary.
As a general trend, situated experience, consensual rationale, and refl ective
practice are surfacing as key aspects of interaction aesthetics. From an aesthetically
aware perspective, Stolterman (
2008
) proposes the following methods: “(i) precise
and simple tools or techniques, (ii) frameworks that do not prescribe but that
support refl ection and decision-making, (iii) individual concepts that are intriguing
and open for interpretation and refl ection on how they can be used, (iv) high-level
theoretical and/or philosophical ideas and approaches that expand design thinking
but do not prescribe design action.” Sketching and prototyping (Buxton
2007
) are
examples of item (i). Instead of prescribing solutions for well-defi ned problems,
interaction aesthetics techniques employ design patterns, design actions, and inter-
action metaphors to handle open-ended research problems. Given that these tech-
niques reduce the development cycle ensuing multiple iterations through the design
process, they may eventually serve to fi ll the gap indicated in item (ii). Specifi c
examples are personas, scenarios, probes, and affordance-based methods. These
tools provide inspiration to deal with situated issues, fostering refl ection and under-
standing of the implications of each design decision (iii). Despite their misleading
name, design actions (De Bruijn and Spence
2008
) are high-level applications of
cognitive theories that can be used to guide aesthetically informed design deci-
sions. When similar technological solutions are observed in various contexts,
interaction patterns may provide a useful generalization. Interaction patterns can
be applied to the task of fi nding suitable techniques to deal with recurring
implementation issues. We can think of interaction metaphors and patterns as
results of opposite design trends. While metaphors provide instantiations of general
interaction mechanisms, patterns are generalizations of specifi c solutions. This
means that solutions encountered by inductive or bottom-up processes (patterns)
could eventually match solutions reached top-down - through deduction of general
principles (metaphors). These specifi c cases are the strongest candidates for
useful applications in multiple design contexts. Design actions, design patterns,
and interaction metaphors provide non-prescriptive frameworks for design
thinking (iv).
6.2
Goals of Ubimus Design
Ubiquitous music (ubimus) research (Keller et al.
2011a
) has also targeted aspects
of interaction design that have not been dealt with within the mainstream human-
computer interaction perspectives.
Ubiquitous music deals with systems of human
agents and material resources that afford musical activities through sustainable
creativity support tools
. Viewing Redström's (
2007
) interaction aesthetics proposal
from a ubiquitous music perspective, we see a convergence of interests and meth-
ods, including engagement, temporal patterns of behavior, alternative forms of
design with innovative material combinations, and user identities inserted in
