An essay about InTouch
InTouch is a social computing device allows us to connect with each other via a tangible interface with temperature and color changing. Compare to other social computing device always can only transfer text, image, video, and sound, InTouch try to send the perception of temperature from our palm to others and evoke the memory between each other.
From the 1st paradigm: engineering/human factors point of view, InTouch provides a functional/innovative interface to send information/signal from one to another, instead of using keyboard/mouse. The size of InTouch is about A4, it is easy to get all the visual detail within one’s reach. The facade was split into four square, and covered with elastic Lycra, which can diffuse the light from the inside, and provide a gentle sense of touch simultaneously.
The 2nd paradigm stems from cognitive science, focus on the improvement of computer usage efficiency, and emphasise the importance of how human minds process information. From the 2nd paradigm’s aspect, InTouch can provide a function similar to the “poke” button on Facebook, with an extra sense of temperature, and light effect. When she wants to communicate with another friend, she needs to physically “poke” the corresponding square repeatedly. As the square is “poked” over 5 times, the color of the square will become red and the corresponding square on friend’s InTouch will become warmer and warmer. However, on the other hand, she won’t notice that someone is “poking” her unless she keep touch all the four square and feel if the temperature changes. The input and output has been reduced to minimum, therefore the communication among this is obscure. Compare to common social computing device/software, such as instant messenger on mobile device, InTouch delivers one kind of “fuzzily signal”, creates a cryptical atmosphere which interferes the information flow.
Obviously, a design artifact like InTouch cannot be described/interpretation very well via the previous two paradigms, no matter from the 1st paradigm: engineering/human factors point of view, or the 2nd paradigm: cognitive science aspect. The existence of InTouch is embodied in the interaction between the participants and the device. InTouch is not a task-oriented interaction device, we cannot use 1st and 2nd paradigm to evaluate the efficiency and check if the task is completed or not. Therefore we need a 3rd paradigm to describe and “addressing issues that are bad fits to prior paradigms, ranging from embodiment to situated meaning to values and social issues.”(Harrison, 2007)
The 3rd paradigm, proposed by Steve Harrison, draws the attention on phenomenology, treats interaction as a meaning-making process, the context and the artifact within it are defining and interpret to each other. From the 3rd paradigm point of view, InTouch expresses our emotion in some certain situation. Occasionally, we are eager for an ambiguous interaction with someone, to experience “the beauty of distance”. From the moment we “poke” one of the squares, an extraordinary journey begins in our mind. All kinds of thoughts was emerged. The “felt experience” won’t end even though we feel the temperature of the square changed.
沒有留言:
張貼留言