towards a socially adaptive digital playground dr consortium

Towards a Socially Adaptive Digital Playground

Robby van DeldenUniversity of TwenteHMI

Outline

• Example of “Digital Playgrounds”• A quick intro to synchrony of body movement• One of our interactive playgrounds• Results of observational study• Design methodology• Future Plans

Digital PlaygroundsBased on Sturm et al. (2008)

1) floors 2) walls

3) props 4) installations

Floor: STUMP Wyeth, Adkins and Summerville (2011)

Crop from Figure 8

Wall: SUTUYalp & KiTT

Props: FeetupRosales et al. (2011)

Crop from Figure 2

Installation: interactive slideSoler-Adillon and N. Parés (2009)

social interaction & synchrony measurement

Synchrony measure

Figure is part of Fig 1, p337 Ramseyer&Tschacher(2008)

Synchrony measure

|||||||||||||||||

|||||||||||||||||

window size

lag

Pearson correlation

Figure is part of Fig 1, p337 Ramseyer&Tschacher(2008)

Design MethodologyTetteroo et al (2009)

GOALSe.g. physical, social

_____________________

DIMENSIONS OF PLAYe.g. time limit, item possesion

_________________________________INTERACTIONS

e.g. switch a colour surrounding a personwhen users are close to each other

Design MethodologyRoozendaal et al. (2009)

Transformation (goals)e.g. Increase social interaction

measured by conversations______________________________

Experience (psychological needs)e.g. need for discovery

or competition ______________________________

Interaction (motor-sensory)e.g. Jump to seea piece of puzzle

______________________________

Systeme.g. dancing on a musical staircase

Crop from Table 1

Design Methodology[L] Tetteroo et al (2009), [R] Roozendaal et al. (2009)

Transformatione.g. Increase social interaction

measured by conversations_________________________

Experience (psychological needse.g. need for discovery

or competition __________________________

Interaction (motor-sensory)e.g. jump to seea piece of puzzle

_________________________

Systeme.g. dancing on a musical staircase

HIGHER END GOALSe.g. increase social interaction

__________________________

RATIONALEe.g. gives opportunity for

competitive behaviour__________________________

INTERACTIONuser action – system response

e.g. when users come closechange item possession

__________________________

IMPLEMENTATIONe.g. change colour of shape

surrounding the players when they are within 2m

GOALSe.g. physical, social

__________________

DIMENSIONS OF PLAY

e.g. time limit, item possesion

_____________________________

INTERACTIONS

e.g. switch colour when close to each other

Interactive PlaygroundTetteroo et al (2009)

Interactive PlaygroundTetteroo et al (2009)

ObservationsMoreno et al. (2012, in press)

Agreement: = .27 to .37 κ“Item agreement”: = .67 - .92κ

Future plans: play analyses

Future plans: digital playgrounds

HIGHER END GOALS

e.g. increase social interaction

__________________________

RATIONALE

e.g. gives opportunity for

competitive behaviour

__________________________

INTERACTION

user action – system response

e.g. when users come close

change item possession

__________________________

IMPLEMENTATION

e.g. change colour of shape

surrounding the players when

they are within 2m?

design methodology“destructive” elements

Synchrony (measurement)

adaptive play mechanics

A socially adaptive playground

Two questions

1) How does one select a suitable metaphor for a design/installation for children in a structured, efficient and effective way?

2) Should we make use of existing fantasy contexts (from trends and hypes) like the Smurfs and Disney movies?