Transcript Interactivity

Interactivity
Heeter 2000
• Interactivity is something researchers study,
new technology commercials promote and
designers create. It’s not something people
do. People use the internet, watch TV, shop,
explore, send and receive email, look things
up… The word interactivity and its
derivatives are used to represent so many
different meaning that the word muddles
rather than clarifies the speaker’s intent.
Matrix for communication patterns
(Jensen 99)
Information produced by Information produced by
central provider
consumer
Distribution
controlled by
central
provider
Distribution
controlled by
consumer
1) Transmission
4) Registration
3) Consultation
2) Conversation
3 foundations to concept
• Sociology
• Communication and media studies
• Informatics
Interactivity as sociological concept
(reciprocal relationship between 2 or more people)
A mutual exchange and negotiation regarding
meaning takes place between partners who
find themselves in the same social context.
So, you can have communication without
interaction (watching TV) but not
interaction without communication
Interactivity in communication and
media studies (v. wide)
(Relationship between text and reader)
• In cultural studies, interactions is used to cover process
that take place between receivers and the media message.
• Reading a text can be an interactive experience
• Para-social interaction: TV etc. have ability to create an
illusion of apparently intimate face-to-face
communication.
• Often used to refer to actions of audience/recipients of
message
Interaction in telematics
(Relationship between people and machines)
• Started from HCI and batch processing and
the introduction of dialogue function
• Refers to process that takes place when user
operates a machine (but not to machinemediated human communication)
• HCI seen as analogous to communication
between people
• Importance of control
Interaction as concept in
education?
See IMS definition of interactivity and use it
to evaluate sites
Read Reeves’ dimensions of CBE and use
these, and your knowledge of effective
learning and teaching to try to identify what
interactivity should be in an educational
context.
Pedagogical
conceptions…(Group 1)
•Tutor-student relationship should be the ideal model to
which computer based pedagogical interaction should
conform to as much as possible
•Should promote constructivist approach to learning
•Should build on users prior historical conceptions of
interactivity with the computer, ie, sound HCI principles
•Should not merely be “ bells and whistles” multimedia, but
should harness multimedia in a functional manner, ie,
graphics etc. is integrated into the software.
•Ease of learnability, should be immediately apparent how to
use the software
•Interface should be transparent
Pedagogical conceptions - group 2
Outcome-driven?
= some kind of learning that cannot (easily) be
replicated in the real world – in terms of time it would
take to replicate in the real world
= degree of customisation for user
- memory for score or progress etc
- some kind of target-setting – the degree to
which this is specific to the learner
= some measure of how easy it is to learn to use? (the
question of the average user?)
= powerful features can be accessed easily
= degree to which it would enable meta-learning
= degree to which it would accept feedback from the
user
= degree to which it might subsume the role of the
teacher (the most likely basis for the purchase of
software)
= the kind of interactivity that is supported
(monocursal, polycursal, rhizomatic)
Socratic dialogue
SOC: But if excellence is some sort of knowledge,
it’s clear that it will be teachable.
MENO: Of course
SOC: Then we’ve quickly finished with this point:
if it’s of one sort, it’s teachable, and if of another,
not.
MENO: Certainly
SOC: Then, it seems, we must consider what
comes next, whether excellence is knowledge or
different from knowledge.
Interactivity as prototype
• Durlak - typology for interactive media
–
–
–
–
–
–
telephone
two-way television
audio conferencing systems
computers used for communication
electronic mail
videotext
• …??? Why and why not?
Durlak 87
Interactivity as Criteria
• Reciprocal dialogue between user and
system
• Involves active participation of the user in
directing the flow of the computer of video
program
• A system which exchanges information with
the viewer, processing the viewer’s input in
order to generate the appropriate response
within the context of the program
• But tied to media, exclusive
Miller 87
Interactivity as a continuum
• Rogers (86): Interactivity as the capability
of new communication systems to talk back
to the user almost like an individual
participating in a conversation.
Low
Degree of interactivity
Press, Radio
TV, Film
Teletext
Hi
Bulletin boards
Interactive Cable
TV
Teleconferencing
Rafaeli & Sudweeks 97
Definition centres on concept of responsiveness, or a
measure of a media’s ability to be receptive and react in
response to a given user, or more precisely, a measure of
how much one message in an exchange is based on
previous messages.
Two-way communication
Reactive communication
Interactive communication
Responsiveness requires that media registers and stores
information about a user’s input and actions and adjusts
to users wishes
Rafaeli & Sudweeks 97
Steuer 95
• 2-dimensional concept of interactivity
• vividness (ability of a technology to
produce a sensorially rich mediated
environment)
• interactivity (degree to which users of a
medium can influence the form or content
of the mediated environment.)
• ?subjective/arbitrary criteria
Szuprowicz 95
• 2-dimensional concept
• interactivity is defined by the type of
multimedia information flows
1) user-to-documents
2) user-to-computer
3) user-to-user
• 2nd dimension is made up of other aspects
which these flows are dependent on
Szuprowicz 95
Object-oriented
Manipulation
Broadcast
Interactive
Access
Mail
Database
Newsletter
Hypermedia
Information Kiosk
GUI
User-to-documents
User-to computer
Groupware
Presentation
Conferencing,
training
User-to-user
Laurel (90)
• 3-dimensional concept
• interactivity exists on a continuum that
could be characterized by 3 variables:
1) frequency (how often you can interact)
2) range (how many choices available)
3) significance (how much choices really
affected matters)
Goertz (95)
• 4-dimensional model
1) degrees of choice available
2) degree of modifiability
3) the quantitative number of selections and
modifications available
4) degree of linearity or non-linearity
Heeter 1989
• N-dimensional concept
– selectivity (extent to which users are provided with a
choice of available information)
– amount of effort users must exert to access
information
– degree to which a medium can react responsively to a
user
– potential to monitor system use
– degree to which users can add information that a
mass audience can access
– degree to which a media system facilitates
interpersonal communication between users
Jensen 99
•
•
•
•
Transmissional interactivity
Consultational interactivity
Conversational interactivity
Registrational interactivity
Heeter 2000
Worked from definition of human experience
as foundation for theory of interactivity
•
•
•
•
situated in time
situated in space
differentiating self from others
affordances
Situated in time
• ICT enable human mediated interaction and
human machine interaction to occur
asynchronously. But we always interpret
communication in the present
• Problem of latency
– 0.1 s. limit for user to feel that system is
reacting instantaneously
– 1 s limit for users flow of thought to be
uniterrupted
– 10 s limit for keeping user’s attention focused
on dialogue.
Situated in space (embodied)
ICTs can invoke a sensation of presence
• Presence is the sensation of being spatially
and temporally located within a mediated
experience.
Differentiating self from others
• People tend to attribute human, self-like
qualities not just to other humans but also to
other animate and inanimate objects.
People’s interactions with new media are
fundamentally social and natural, just like
interactions in real life.
• Creation of personas is important
Polite interface... (Cooper 99)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Interested in me
deferential to me
forthcoming
have common sense
anticipate my needs
responsive
taciturn about its personal problems
Polite interface (Cooper 99)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Well informed
perceptive
self-confident
stay focused
fudgable
give instant gratification
trustworthy
Affordances
• Very difficult as ICT can afford so many
different actions
• What happens when designers goals and
those of user do not match?
• Analysis of interactivity should try to define
the players within a designed experience.
Who does the participant they are
interacting with?
• Orientation to interactivity is a personality
characteristic
Bandura 2001 - agentic perspective
Main agentic features are:
• Intentionality. Agency refers to acts done
intentionally, resting on plans of action
• Forethought: people motivate and guide their
actions in anticipation of future events
• Self-reactiveness: ability to give shape to
appropriate courses of action and to motivate and
regulate their execution
• Self-reflectivenss: metacognitive capacity to
reflect upon oneself and the adequacy of one’s
thoughts and actions
Bandura, A. (2001), Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52, 1-26.
Heeter, C. (2000), Interactivity in the Context of Designed Experiences. Journal of Interactive
Advertising, 1. <http://jiad.org/vol1/no1/heeter/>
Jensen, J. (1999), 'Interactivity'. In P. Mayer (ed.), Computer Media and Communication.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Koper, R. (2001), Modelling Units of Study from a Pedagogical Perspective: Dutch Open
University. <http://eml.ou.nl/introduction/docs/ped-metamodel.pdf>
Rafaeli, S. and Sudweeks, F. (1997), Networked Interactivity. Journal of Computer Mediated
Communication, 2. <http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol2/issue4/rafaeli.sudweeks.html#Rafaeli88>
Rose, E. (1999), Deconstructing Interactivity in Educational Computing. Educational
Technology, 39.
Roberto Baggio games site
http://www.robertobaggio.com/games/index.asp
2 other game sites
http://www.oddworld.com/ow_downloads.html
http://oddworld.au.com/paramonia/
Visit other sites at
http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsd/4_resource/t&lonlin_examples.html
Other useful sites
Theory of games - includes Jensen http://www.jesperjuul.dk/thesis/3-theoreticalintroduction.html
Interactivity and Interaction Between Avatars, Autonomous Agents, and Users
http://www.staging.dk/pdf/03_JFJ_fin.pdf
Part of the Staging Project http://www.staging.dk/html/about/about.html