What Is Interaction - Lukas LaLiberte

RE-READING What is Interaction? Are There Different Types? LUKAS LALIBERT, lukas.laliberte@gmail.
com
CH.01 CH.02 CH.03 CH.04 CH.05 CH.06 CH.07 CH.08 CH.09 CH.10 CH.11 CH.12 CH.13 CH.14 CH.15 CH.16 CH.17 CH.18 CH.19 CH.20 CH.21 CH.22 CH.23 CH.24
WHAT IS INTERACTION? ARE THERE DIFFERENT TYPES? Hugh Dubberly, Paul Pangaro, and Usman Haque
1. Text Summary and Analysis In the article What is Interaction? Are There Different Types? the authors seek to challenge our concepts of interaction, and show that interaction can occur in a variety of systems. Understanding how these systems work may also inform how interactive systems are conceptualized and designed in the future. The first point the authors touch upon is that the common perception of interaction intrinsically being one that involves a computer system is inherently flawed. Some argue that we are able to interact with any man-made object, and that any attempt at design is a consideration for interaction. Thus design and interaction are tightly intertwined. It is key, however, to distinguish between the interaction between systems that are static (ie, a chair) versus dynamic (ie, a computer). The typical form of human-computer interaction is based on the feedback loop - wherein information moves from a person through a system, and back to a person. The person then interprets the returning information and by comparing this with their goals can decide the next input. This type of input-output-comparison-input method is thus a self-regulating system (based on feedback), and is referred to as a first-order cybernetic system. This model of a feedback loop is a good basis to begin viewing interactive systems. However, it is somewhat oversimplified as it neglects to take into account the specific nature of both the system as well as
the nature of the human. Different dynamic systems enable different responses and system interactions. A dynamic system can take the form of an open loop or a closed loop; the first being merely reactive, the second being interactive. In a reactive system, the input/output is in a fixed state. In interactive systems, however, the way that input affects output may change, or the distinction of inputs and outputs may vary. Some (but not all) dynamic systems have a property of self-regulation. Self-regulating systems have a goal that defines a desired relationship with the environment. The maintenance of this relationship informs the particular input. First-order self-regulating systems rely on goals which come from input outside of the system. A more complex self-regulating system is called a learning system. Learning systems create a nested order of self-regulating systems, wherein the second system measures the effect of the first system on the environment, and adjusts the first systems goals based on its own goals. These are known as second-order systems, and can be continuously nested within each other. This large-scale nesting of interactive systems allows the second order system to judge how its past actions have affected the environment, and make conscious decisions based on this information. In some large-scale systems, the secondorder system may choose which first order systems to activate based on prior feedback it has gained. A more complex way of looking at interaction is through the variety of possible combinations of sys-
tems. This starts with separating types of interaction into three main systems: linear systems (0 order); self-regulating systems (1st order); learning systems (2nd order). The systems can then be combined as six pairs: 0-0, 0-1, 0-2, 1-1, 1-2, 2-2. These pairs as thus defined as follows: 0-0: this pair is a reacting system, where one linear system becomes the input for a second. 0-1: This is a regulating system, in which output from a linear system becomes input for a self-regulating system. Typically this input is in the form of a disturbance, rather than a goal. 0-2: This is a learning system, wherein a linear systems output provides input for a learning system. This is the typical type of human-computer interaction, where we learn out computer system but the computer fails to learn from us. 1-1: This is a balancing system, in which the output of one self-regulating system becomes the input for another self-regulating system. These can come in the form of competing systems or redundant systems, and can be used to characterize political or economic systems. 1-2: This is a managing/entertaining system, in which the output for a self-regulating system becomes the input for a learning system. This could describe the maintenance of an automatic system, or a system which seeks to keep a user engaged. 2-2: This is a system of two learning systems using the output of the other as input, and learning
from that. This is a system used to describe conversing, in which both parties learn from one another, but can also describe the work of teams or networks. By examining the variety of interactive systems, the implications of their differences become apparent. This shows us that a basic reactive system is not the same as interaction - ie, pushing a button is not the same as a system which is learning or conversing. Our current interpretations of interaction has led us to systems which are still relatively rigid and basic. Our typical systems for interaction, based on the model of the feedback loop, may be inadequate for future uses. By replacing this standard model with more interactive and conversational learning systems, we may change the approach to how interactive systems are designed in the future.
WHAT IS INTERACTION? ARE THERE DIFFERENT TYPES? Hugh Dubberly, Paul Pangaro, and Usman Haque
2.Questions and Challenges 1. What is the difference between reactive systems and interactive systems? And where do the systems we use fit in? 2. Are computers a simply linear process? Or are they also capable of being learning systems? 3. As the gulf between humans and their interface systems becomes smaller and smaller, will we see the types of interactions begin to evolve? 4. How can we fit architectural design into this conceptual framework? Is interactivity a key part of any design approach, or is architecture only about static relationships?
3. Documentation of Responses
WHAT IS INTERACTION?
Interaction is a way of framing the relationship between people and objects designed for them - and thus a way of framing the activity of design.
STATIC SYSTEMS
DYNAMIC SYSTEMS
Static systems are systems which are entirely linear. The interaction between a simple object, like a chair, and the user provides no feedback. Thus, the system remains static - an open-loop system.
Dynamic systems work on a feedback loop. In a computer-human interaction, the human provides input which is processed by the computer and creates an output. The human then reacts to this output and provides new input - a closed-loop system.
http://www.free-press-release.com/members/members_pic/200907/ img/1248730418.jpg
http://alliosnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/MacBook-Pro-withRetina-Display-Front.png
FEEDBACK LOOPS: PEOPLE AND GOALS A feedback loop model places a person in the center of a dynamic system. This is a basic approximation of a simple interactive system. This model is important because it stresses the value of the goal as a driving factor in determining input within the system. Peoples interaction with a system is based on their intent and goals. Don Norman argues that goals are not always present at the start, and that not all behavior begins with a goal. Don Normans gulf of execution and evaluation (p. 70)
...behavior can be bottom up... or top-down...people tend to think that all behavior starts with a goal. It doesnt - it can be a response to the environment.
-Don Norman (p 70)
Don Normans seven stages of action (p. 70)
SELF-REGULATING SYSTEMS Closed-loop systems have the ability to be defined by goals, but not all closed-loop systems have a goal (see the Water cycle chart, right). Closed-loop systems with a goal are known as selfregulating systems. This goal defines a desired relationship with the environment; the maintenance of this relationship informs the particular input.
Water cycle (p. 72) A closed-loop, non-self-regulating system.
Self-regulating system (p. 72)
LEARNING SYSTEMS Learning systems create a nested order of self-regulating systems, wherein the second system measures the effect of the first system on the environment, and adjusts the first systems goals based on its own goals. These are known as second-order systems, and can be continuously nested within each other. This large-scale nesting of interactive systems allows the second order system to judge how its past actions have affected the environment, and make conscious decisions based on this information. In some largescale systems, the second-order system may choose which first order systems to activate based on prior feedback it has gained.
...behavior can be bottom up... or top-down...people tend to think that all behavior starts with a goal. It doesnt - it can be a response to the environment.
-Don Norman (p. 70)
Learning Systems (p. 72)
SYSTEM COMBINATIONS Coupling together different pairs of systems shows us ways in which different interactions can be fostered. This divides interactive systems into three types: 0: Linear Systems 1: Self-regulating Systems 2: Learning Systems There are six possible system combinations: 0-0, 0-1, 0-2, 1-1, 1-2, 2-2. 0-0: Reacting this pair is a reacting system, where one linear system becomes the input for a second. 1-1: Balancing This is a balancing system, in which the output of one self-regulating system becomes the input for another self-regulating system.
0-1: Regulating This is a regulating system, in which output from a linear system becomes input for a self-regulating system.
1-2: Managing and Entertaining This is a managing/entertaining system, in which the output for a self-regulating system becomes the input for a learning system.
0-2: Learning This is a learning system, wherein a linear systems output provides input for a learning system.
2-2: Conversing This is a group of two learning systems using the output of the other as its own input, and learning from past inputs and their effects.
INTERACTION AND DESIGN By examining the variety of interactive systems, the implications of their differences become apparent. This shows us that a basic reactive system is not the same as interaction - ie, pushing a button is not the same as a system which is learning or conversing. Our current interpretations of interaction have led us to systems which are still relatively rigid and basic. Our typical systems for interaction, based on the model of the feedback loop, may be inadequate for future uses.
Conversing Systems (p. 74)
By looking beyond common notions of interactions for a more rigorous definition, we increase the possibilities open to design. And by replacing simple feedback with conversation as our primary model of interaction, we may open the world to new, richer forms of computing.
-Dubberly, Haque, and Pangaro (p. 75)

What Is Interaction - Lukas LaLiberte

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

What Is Interaction - Lukas LaLiberte

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

RE-READING What is Interaction? Are There Different Types? LUKAS LALIBERT, lukas.laliberte@gmail.

Don Normans seven stages of action (p. 70)

Water cycle (p. 72) A closed-loop, non-self-regulating system.

Self-regulating system (p. 72)

Learning Systems (p. 72)

Conversing Systems (p. 74)

S-ar putea să vă placă și