Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Each informational component of the incident can be characterized in
two ways. In terms of complication, the information is either positive (it
asks a question) or negative (it answers a question). The importance of the
information at the point at which it appears in the plot is rated on a numeric
scale from 0 (completely unimportant) to 1 (extremely important). Thus an
extremely signifi cant piece of information that answers a question has a
rating of -1, while a fairly insignifi cant piece of information that raises a
question might have a rating of +.3. Figure 3.5 shows such an evaluation of
the informational components of the example incident.
To represent the incident on a Freytag graph, the sum of the numeric
ratings shown in Figure 3.5 can be used as the value for the variable C, rep-
resenting complication. The duration of the incident in minutes (or pages of
script) is used as the value of the variable T, representing time. The formula
for computing the slope of the line segment that will represent the incident
on the graph is: slope = C/T. In this case, C = 1.6 and T = 1 (one minute or
beat of dramatic action). The sample incident is graphed in Figure 3.6.
This analytic technique can yield a detailed profi le, represented nu-
merically or graphically, of the
shape
of the dramatic action of a given
play. The fact that this aspect of structure can be expressed quantita-
tively makes it potentially more amenable to computational representa-
tion. Given an informational analysis of the potential actions involved in
a human-computer interaction, quantitative structural criteria could be
used for orchestrating those incidents into the desired overall
shape
. This
is possible because specifi c kinds of actions can be seen to have character-
istic slopes or curves.
Information
Significance
a.
James has shocking news.
0.4
b.
The news concerns Brown.
0.5
c.
Brown has been found.
-0.6
d.
Brown is dead.
0.9
e.
Brown has drowned.
-0.4
f.
Brown was a good swimmer.
0.8
Complication
1.6
Figure 3.5.
Informational analysis of a sample incident
