# Apolaine_PhD_thesis_final_230410_reduced ![rw-book-cover](https://readwise-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/static/images/article4.6bc1851654a0.png) URL:: https://readwise.io/reader/document_raw_content/36037818 Author:: readwise.io ## Highlights > The only future-proof approach to designing for and > dealing with an environment of constant change in these systems and forms is to look for a > mechanism and theoretical framework that underpins them all. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gsz5atfxmtdx2xsbzb9da55c)) > I consider myself both a interaction designer and an artist and there are no neat boundaries to these > divisions. I am, after all, a complete person. When I create an interactive artwork I tend to feel that I > am really designing it. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gsz5fjb16t14p2zec9rc4emz)) > Action is indeed the primary component of human-computer activity – not > environments, interfaces, or objects. But environments, interfaces, and objects are > traditionally much easier to conceive of and represent than a quality that is > fundamentally invisible, and the structure of which is contested at best (Laurel, 1993, > p. 135). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gsz9tqw173h5c2rpd35df9gn)) > Competition and goal-based gameplay > tends to overshadow the interaction itself and interface is again reduced to a functional role. This is > essentially the progress rhetoric of Huizinga’s Homo Ludens (Huizinga, 1955) which focuses on play > as the development of civilisation. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gsz9w0tycbgsj1n7sj6pbfw6)) > Cameras and the body as affordance ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gszxdxjwbbyrm85snzvc53fg)) ### CHAPTER 2 – Flow, Interactivity & Suspension of Disbelief #### Interactive Flow versus Narrative Flow > Narrative works are usually concerned with immersing the reader or audience in the story and the > narrative suffers when interaction is simply grafted onto it. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gszxg4w2x2yckt6xzqww67p6)) - Note: Esto fue antes de regresar a D&D? > Videogames are one genre in which narrative and interaction have been relatively successfully > combined to engage audiences. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gszxkfh1xvt5xgdfmjp9mk4d)) #### Willing Suspension of Disbelief and Interactivity > Willing suspension of disbelief in traditional narrative is the audience’s > willingness to “play along” and pretend that the fictional world presented to them really exists in > order to become engrossed in the story. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gszxmdpacfvf3qe264hewgs3)) > One area of our daily lives in which we regularly suspend our disbelief is in the use of metaphors. > Metaphors require a kind of dual processing of meaning – one of the superficial level of the > metaphor’s imagery, the other of the underlying concepts. Some metaphors become so commonly > used that they do not feel like metaphors at all and unpicking them provides excellent insights into > interactivity. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gszxr6ga3nacd65apb0crswj)) ### CHAPTER 3 - Interactivity, Metaphors and the Mind #### The role of metaphors #### Interfaces are both metaphorical and physical > Yet dragging a file to a folder on the computer’s desktop also requires me to move my body. In my > case I am clicking on the mouse button to click on the file and both physically and virtually dragging > the mouse across the screen to move the file into the folder. At this point the metaphor is both literal > and conceptual, both of which reinforce the neural connections involved with that action. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt019npym8wvqphz0pmzs493)) - Note: Dice as physical objects with virtual effects on the game. #### A metaphor too far > I ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt044y6d22t0q6zsgan750f5)) > This already exists in Apple's OS X interface with their innovation called > Exposé. > Instead of the visual metaphor of the desktop being given greater attention and detail as in the > Bumptop example with little book icons bouncing around with simulated physics, Exposé breaks the > desktop metaphor without breaking the flow of intention. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt0453hzd3fp0kdzedzzbk5a)) #### Direct control and manipulation in interfaces ### CHAPTER 4 - Thinking Outside of the Brain #### Scripts, Schemata, Mental Models and Automotive Action > Habituation is one aspect of interaction that plays a significant role in our perception and use of an > interactive interface. It is how interaction design conventions arise and why they are very useful > design elements to pay attention to (Krug, 2006; Saffer, 2006), such as an element being highlighted > when ‘rolled over’ by the cursor or buttons looking like 3D ‘physical’ buttons. This is true even when > the aim of a piece is to disorient and/or surprise the interactor – you have to know the rules in order to > break them. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt04k3s0rqr7h5jdfjvgwf29)) #### Scripts > Scripts are prototypes for events that allow us to piece together the memory of events because we > have experienced something similar before, such as going into a restaurant. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt04q8yc4njdam5d4d6egpqz)) - Note: high context communication > Another theory of memory and cognition is that of the mental model, something that Norman > examined in Mental Models (Norman, 1983) and expanded upon in The Design ofEveryday Things > (1998) (where he called them conceptual models). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt04rsa8a6pvf47ykbnytygs)) > Mental models > are predictive and thus evince the expectations of the user. They usually simulate systems and are > open to sudden change in the light of new knowledge as well as ad-hoc adjustments, combinations of > models and rationalisations to describe the associated behaviour (Kempton, 1986). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt04rzv46z2hdw11ajbxa0ac)) #### Schemata > An overarching theory of memory and cognition is that of schemata, or schema theory, of which > frames and scripts are essentially subsets. As we have seen, schemata are also knowledge structures > that allow us to reduce the amount of cognitive processing in order to focus on, usually, more > important tasks. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt04y7zgsvdhmz3kayjdk398)) #### The embodiment of AI > for the purposes of interaction and interaction > design it should by now be clear that embodiment is a key component. Not only that, but our > necessarily embodied impression of the world is lossy, selective and constantly changing: > Humans construct an understanding of the world that is very different from the > analogue flow of sensation the world presents to them. They package their experience > into objects and events. They assemble these objects and events into propositions, > which they take to be characterizations of real and possible worlds. The > characterizations are highly schematic: they pick out some aspects of a situation and > ignore others, allowing the same situation to be construed in multiple ways (Pinker, > 2008, p. 428). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1n2zk7gjb8c4sw7tcder26)) #### Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain > Such is the nature of design and interaction, that when done well it feels ‘intuitive’, but when it > breaks, crashes or is badly designed, the metaphor becomes all too apparent and we are completely > aware of it again. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1n4wtk1ehfvc57ycmxyxvx)) #### Are we automata? > i ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1n6dm1b9ewsrx1fsafbz8y)) > Thus, if one is designing an interaction with the idea of inducing a flow > state in the interactor, or even just a suspension of disbelief in order to engage with the experience > more deeply, the more those unconscious motivations and goals can be primed and activated by the > trappings of the interaction, the more they can become transparent to the experience. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1n6n8ax251gm0a1pprtk30)) > On an interface design level, it may be > (and often is) difficult to override the conventions that an interactor has internalised as part of their > interaction process, leading them to complain that something “should” be designed one way or > another, even if the designs are comparable or the new mode of interaction is better than the old. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1n9s3064a9ngryxe80gz6k)) #### Not today, Iʼm not in the mood > , those in good or elated moods tend towards more heuristic and “playful exploration of > novel solutions, which fosters creative problem solving during good moods” (Ibid., p. 123). The > approaches also require less cognitive effort, especially if the general situation is considered safe: ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nc2psw6ta07s6f6dn0qzg)) - Note: Another condition for [[Play]]: a good, non-stressed mood. > For interaction design it shows that interfaces that have an element of playfulness to them – or at least > put interactors in a good mood through their design – stand a much higher chance of being played > with and used, even if they might be functionally more challenging than non- or badly-designed > simpler interfaces. One might make an analogy to evolution here – the more attractive the markings, > the more likely the chance of a sexual interaction and the passing on of genes. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nejjbc8ys7yaz3fnm3mhm)) #### The Mojave Experiment > Microsoft’s approach to much of its software and interface design has been task-oriented, functional > but not beautiful, with work prioritised. Apple, by contrast, has focused on aesthetics – sometimes at > the cost of functionality – and lifestyle more than ‘business’ in the sense of mundane tasks. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1ng7kvax6m5gb4sycea4sd)) > It is not in any way functionally necessary to have semi-transparent widgets or animations of > windows sliding, genie-like back to folders, but it does add to the playfulness of the experience. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nh97ngmzpb2bz7apz8qhh)) > Apple fans have, in general, a much stronger emotional bond with the Apple brand than > Windows users, who might be equally passionate about Windows and Microsoft as a company. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nhnhnnksc6jh2jerr3stq)) ### CHAPTER 5 – The State of Play #### Homo Ludens > play is extremely serious for Huizinga who cites > several examples (such as players risking their lives) to show that seriousness and play are not > mutually exclusive. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nnz9g6qjpqzc5tp26v3gm)) > In sum, although Huizinga’s Homo Ludens is an important stake in the ground for play and its > consideration in culture – to be “taken seriously”, as it were – it falls short of moving play beyond > something that, whilst important to the building of civilisation is, paradoxically, unproductive. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nq50379cj538se5fxc3h0)) #### Les Jeux et les Hommes > Huizinga does not include material interest in his definition ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nrr3xec5ajrvfv4k459w5)) > Separateness is one of the key aspects of Caillois’s definition of play, one that he takes from Huizinga > (who terms this the ‘magic circle’ – one of the ideas that has become central to videogame theory) and > extends to this set of qualities: > 1. Free: in which playing is not obligatory; if it were, it would at once lose its > attractive and joyous quality as diversion; > 2. Separate: circumscribed within limits of space and time, defined and fixed in > advance; > 3. Uncertain: the course of which cannot be determined, not the result attained > beforehand, and some latitude for innovations being left to the player’s initiative; > 4. Unproductive: creating neither goods, nor wealth, nor new elements of any kind; > and, except for the exchange of property among the players, ending in a situation > identical to that prevailing at the beginning of the game; > 5. Governed by rules: under conventions that suspend ordinary laws, and for the > moment establish new legislation, which alone counts; > 6. Make-believe: accompanied by a special awareness of a second reality or of a free > unreality, as against real life (Caillois, 1961, p. 10). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1ns88gg1q1mst0t8gaw86w)) > Mimicry is “the > temporary acceptance, if not of an illusion [...] then at least of a closed, conventional, and, in certain > respects, imaginary universe” (Ibid., p. 19). This can be our own mimicry, when playing a role or a > character in a game or a play, as well as our acceptance of others doing the same when the play is > entertainment – the willing suspension of disbelief. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nvvp92ac49feyjasphy0k)) > Caillois is quite specific that “the proper function of play is never to develop capacities. Play is an end > in itself” (Caillois, 1961, p. 167). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nyk4dbbfax0ffzeh9xnj5)) #### Love is... > ambiguity, tension and metaphor are important ingredients in an engaging, > playful interactive work, even one that we might think of as being tool-based. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1p1hv4tw2c5d3nq8nft7wx)) - Note: Does high-context communication make for more enjoyable play? > Interactivity is not simply about a user’s cognitive behavioural responses, nor is it only about > psychological interaction, it is about an embodied experience of a complex interplay of motion, > perception, reaction and emotion. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1whfqr5ffsmwag35qdwmkg)) > Play incorporates many of these same complex and paradoxical elements as love: metaphor > (sometimes complex and contradictory), interaction, structure, rules, boundaries, freedom, heightened > emotion, special language as well as physical and emotional forces. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1wjb08dpayqcz6cr98gsqd)) #### From Physics Lab to Living Room to the Bus #### Game Studies #### The Magic Circle > The magic circle and the rules of play suggest that all play is metaphorical or, at least, all games are > metaphorical. As we will discover in the following principles of interactivity, this informs how we > approach, interact with and leave (or break) interactive systems. Our starting point is the first > principle of interactivity – Pesce’s invitation to play (Pesce, 1996). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1x1zjcz70ax44p7kyj60xq)) ### CHAPTER 6 – Principle 1: The Invitation to Play > An important note here is that Norman acknowledges the value of deliberately violating the principles > of “good design”, something that usability experts often fail to appreciate (Nielsen & Tahir, 2002). > The deliberate violation of conventions, of our normal state of being, is central to games and play. As > Sutton-Smith reminds us when speaking of the playful versus play (a point we will return to): “The > key is that the playful is disruptive of settled expectations. It is the genre of comedians and tricksters, > of wits and dilettantes.” (Sutton-Smith, 1997, p. 148) ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt2trmraqs2zv08trefkdnkn)) - Note: [[Thought Leadership Content]]: You can't be a thought "leader" if you don't understand the zeitgeist. > Design of all kinds, but particularly interaction design, is a combination of experimentation, play, > considered thought and iterative prototyping. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt2vax8s0svk2d6xgvj0wdxb)) > Before we even decide that we want to understand the rules or play the game, however, we have to be > enticed and seduced into the process and this is the invitation to play. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt2vv885c88zewrmb61fpj21)) > Within any design project that also involves some kind of engineering (computer-based or industrial), > there is often a tension between the designers and the engineers. Even if these roles may be played by > the same person, that tension often still exists in an internal creative struggle. Complex programming > does not always give rise to a deeply engaging interactive experience – often the simplest sketch can > draw interactors in for a considerable time. On the other hand, something that should be simple can be > boring or frustrating if the engineering and programming does not adequately support the idea. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt2w00w5fv90sxf2c2dqzqhe)) > research has shown that users > find interfaces that are pleasurable to use are also easier to use (Norman, 2005; Krug, 2006; Saffer, > 2006). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt2w18xysjxn4kbkczbb0r96)) > Paying close attention to the emotional response to the invitation to play is essential > and one of the ways of eliciting it is to get rid of the interface entirely. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4293qvt4gjqq2men8ey3as)) #### Case Study: Time Sketches #### Case Study: Body Movies – public play and interaction ### CHAPTER 7 – Principle 2: The Playing Field & the Rules > As the games theory analysis of Huizinga’s ‘magic circle’ demonstrated, games and play spaces as > well as ‘open’ play utilise rules in order to release the players from everyday life and allow them to > temporarily adopt another persona or way of acting. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt42k5drwf5yjw5pbych0qwb)) > As Mark Pesce points out (2000), the more we are confronted by interfaces everywhere, > on every surface, the more it will be necessary to be able to learn how to use them through play > because we have no time to read a manual. Those interfaces that do not invite us to play and, once we > start playing, quickly reveal their rules and boundaries are likely to fall by the wayside regardless of > how clever the underlying technology is. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt42kwryzkhqqfj12ztbzcza)) > Once the invitation to play has been successful, there are two key aspects to further engaging the > player, interactor or user – the playing field (the “magic circle”) and the rules. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4896pg9r03cdafnpqp8q0c)) #### The Rules of Play > Rules and constrictions are often paradoxical – they often lead to greater freedom by nature of their > giving structure. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt48bbcj81c5mpqrdxey6hbh)) #### The Lusory Attitude > On the other > hand, we can play games and reach a mostly un-stated consensus without disappearing down the > relativist’s black hole: > Perhaps the single most important ‘rules’ that are literally unstatable, then, are those > that define the context of the game and answer the question, ‘When is the game being > played?’ None of us can say how we know that we are in fact playing a particular > game (rather than, say, just practicing), but we generally have no trouble knowing that > we are (Ibid., p. 484). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt48e6cmqsg7rf48dwjstsb0)) > Bernard Suits in his philosophical treatise on play and games, The Grasshopper (2005), conducts a > dialectical analysis of the definition of games with particular attention to rules. Rules, he argues, “are > accepted for the activity they make possible” (Suits, 2005, p. 181) and in connection with the world > outside of the game he has this to say: “In morals, obedience to rules makes the action right, but in > games it makes the action” (Ibid., p. 182). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt48qskkq4qj4exy9f7gp8mw)) #### Using the lens of gameplay > The second insight that we can take from this analysis of gameplay is that it is essential to understand, > predict and manipulate the lusory attitude of the interactor. In user-centered and experience design > terms this is akin to working from the user’s perspective through techniques such as insights field > research and personas (Krug, 2006; Saffer, 2006; Mulder & Yaar, 2006). To understand the > interactor’s lusory attitude is to understand the set of rules that the interactor or user is ‘playing’ by or > what mental schemas they have of the system they are part of and interacting with. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt49wny69cb79fjmvyjnn7ya)) > If we focus on the user as a player instead of a worker or task achiever the approach is much more > flexible. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt49xt6cfa2stm12jgahh8xn)) > It is also present in most > “training” or “set-up” modes for applications where the user is unable to proceed to the next step until ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt49y4dcex55kkp9z2w47fpt)) > the current one has been completed. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt49y7ecfxpvkcs6awev2e0z)) #### We are all hackers > A key aspect of play is hacking, prodding the system we are playing in, testing its boundaries and the > rigidity, flexibility and integrity of its rules. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a1wh2veg06mmx73zz528v)) ### CHAPTER 8 – Principle 3: Challenge, Boredom and Anxiety > The relationship of interactivity to flow becomes even more apparent when coupled with an > understanding of play, both in terms of games and playing for its own sake. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a43spnf30dzyxqtm16wwg)) > Csikszentmihalyi outlines the eight conditions for the flow experience based on hundreds of > interviews over many years. Participants reported at least one and often all of the following (laid out > here as a list for clarity): > First, the experience usually occurs when we confront tasks we have a chance of > completing. > Second, we must be able to concentrate on what we are doing. > Third and fourth, the concentration is usually possible because the task undertaken has > clear goals and provides immediate feedback. > Fifth, one acts with a deep but effortless involvement that removes from awareness the > worries and frustrations of everyday life. > Sixth, enjoyable experiences allow people to exercise a sense of control over their > actions. > Seventh, concern for the self disappears, yet paradoxically the sense of self emerges > stronger after the flow experience is over. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a53mh9mavzbdtbcqcpcc1)) > Finally, the sense of the duration of time is altered; hours pass by in minutes, and > minutes can stretch out to seem like hours. The combination of all these elements > causes a sense of deep enjoyment that is so rewarding people feel that expending a > great deal of energy is worthwhile to be able to feel it (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p. 49). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a593xhxqr3qmxj5p2jf9z)) > Flow is induced by a relationship between goals, competence and feedback ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a6jxrc2r9q2tjmecje680)) > When the invitation to play and the rules and playing field are clearly discernable by the interactor, > the goals usually become clear as well as the competencies required in order to achieve them. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a7rfe07w5t7n4ve848bky)) > Hoffman, Novak, and Yung (2000) found that the speed of interaction had a “direct > positive influence on flow” on feelings of challenge and arousal (which directly > influence flow), and on importance. Skill, control, and time distortion also had a direct > influence on flow. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a8754n1e4apw8b1fdzqa8)) #### The border between boredom and anxiety > Throwing stones into a lake is satisfying to me because of the smoothness of the stones, their > weight in the hand, the satisfying “plop” as they drop into the water, and the ripples that the stones > create. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4abdgc0s6xqx821pwm5mf1)) > In general, usability theory and user experience design makes an > effort to make the steps required to achieve a task as obvious to the user as possible. Yet there is a > tension here in terms of catering for a range of skill levels and abilities. “Power users” of operating > systems often complain that a simplified interface does not allow them enough flexibility and > customisation. Beginners find interfaces with too many options bewildering and don’t know where to > start, which is one of the reasons why many people turn to search as their main way of navigating > websites (Krug, 2006). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4ejvdsqhcpwpjmrh9x2rme)) > A layered approach can move a user or ‘player’ (this > combination is best described by the word ‘interactor’) through the skill levels without them being > aware of it. In this scenario the invitation to play is the first, obvious and simple layer, then the > playing field and rules are exposed and later further challenges and options. Ideally these stages of the > experience unfold without the interactor even being aware of the learning process and it is this that > makes a ‘deep’ or complex interactive experience feel like an intuitive flow experience. Striking this > balance is the essence of interaction design. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4enmkd335z0hg3xa31tq24)) ### CHAPTER 9 – Principle 4: Triviality, Open-endedness, Promises #### Playing in the Gallery > I have argued that engaging interactivity is based on play and play is based in such ideas as physical > movement (Winnicott, 2001; Brown & Vaughan, 2009), humour, noise, activity and transgressive > behaviour – something set apart from ‘real world’ rules (Huizinga, 1955; Caillois, 1961; Sutton- > Smith, 1997). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4er4kv8aygam27rrm5ccbx)) #### Delivering the promise > In many respects, delivering the promise is the culmination of all the other principles. Delivering the > promise is the other end of an invitation – what is set up in those first principles of interactivity needs > to be delivered throughout the process. There’s nothing worse than turning up to a party in fancy dress > only to discover everyone is wearing chic suits. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4ewpc7mapdc3pqxh18z530)) > Failing to deliver the promise is recognisable in > many situations and relationships between two ‘agents’, whether they are people or machines, in our > everyday lives. It is the reason people have arguments with their partners, it is the reason that > network transactions fail or why services and interfaces create dissonance. If one agent or interactor is > expecting one thing and receives something different, then it’s usually a dissonant experience, which > is usually unpleasant. Spoken and written language exchanges are full of these kinds of issues ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4ex9g768qgay4fa9avj1cd)) #### Case Study: Eavesdrop – an opportunity missed > The powerful aspect to these four principles – the invitation to play, the playing field and rules of > play, the creation of flow and delivering the promise – is that they can be applied to such a diverse > range of interactions, yet they can integrate other methodologies where the appropriate specificity is > required. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4f942p4vv9h8h4gjqx00j0)) ### CHAPTER 10 – Social Interaction and Playing with Friends > The first is quite literally an invitation to play. For early adopters this stems from an interest in these > emerging technologies and forms and the appeal of the new ‘new thing’. For many the invite is the > invitation to take part in the private beta-testing phase of an online application. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fd1s1tpbga7n4qvx0324e)) #### APIs as invitations ### CHAPTER 11 - Understanding Interactivity Through Play > The only future-proof approach to designing for and dealing with an environment of constant change > in interactive interfaces, technologies and systems is to look for a mechanism and theoretical > approach that underpins them all. A cross-disciplinary, inter-disciplinary or, perhaps, discipline > agnostic approach. As play is such a fundamental building block of culture, society, technology and > cognition, it is an ideal lens through which to examine the interactive experience. It is versatile > enough to cross boundaries and fundamental enough to be understood universally, at least in terms of > experience even when it defies concrete explanation (which is part of its power and charm). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fhk7smrkm37rx9qyv9qb6)) > As we have seen, play is also highly metaphorical, requiring an agreed belief in the potency of rules > and the boundaries of the “magic circle”. Sometimes these spaces are physical (such as lines on the > ground), often they are metaphorical and intangible (such as the boundaries of good sportsmanship or > social expectations), sometimes they are both (such as a child deciding a cardboard box is a boat and > thus the kitchen floor is shark infested water upon which one cannot walk). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fjepcmcab1a8zpz99cxmc)) > Like metaphors, rules of play are agreed forms and codes of understanding – the willing suspension of > disbelief is essential to both. We must be able to understand, for example, that disbelief is not really a > machine whose running can be suspended, but that we can understand it as such. We know there is no > ultimate set of rules for every eventuality in a game, even though we play as if there is (Sniderman, > 2005). Players also take on metaphorical roles, from being the operator or interactor through to being > the lion or pirate, or even the judge or the devout lover in our cultural and social ‘games’. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fjw7gs9k7501wfsb5xejb)) > Play begins as a physical and movement-based form. We explore the boundaries and workings of our > own bodies, we explore the world around us and its affordances, including those of social > relationships. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fkg2fh8sh0jbv42w04c98)) ### POSTSCRIPT > Both Kane (2004) and Pesce (2000) point to the shift in education that the Industrial Revolution > created, from teaching in the home or immediate community to a regimented, very unplayful, mass > education based on a theory of the transmission of knowledge from the broadcasting teacher to the > receiving students. Playful discovery is largely killed off and certainly discouraged in this form of > education – a form that has merely changed its technological clothes over the last 200 years but whose > structure has essentially remained the same until now. Even now change is largely being driven by the > generation of pupils and students rather than the governments, teachers or lecturers (Polaine, 2007). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fq77ztkyp2jmqcq9mvbd9)) --- Title: Apolaine_PhD_thesis_final_230410_reduced Author: readwise.io Tags: readwise, articles date: 2024-01-30 --- # Apolaine_PhD_thesis_final_230410_reduced ![rw-book-cover](https://readwise-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/static/images/article4.6bc1851654a0.png) URL:: https://readwise.io/reader/document_raw_content/36037818 Author:: readwise.io ## AI-Generated Summary None ## Highlights > The only future-proof approach to designing for and > dealing with an environment of constant change in these systems and forms is to look for a > mechanism and theoretical framework that underpins them all. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gsz5atfxmtdx2xsbzb9da55c)) > I consider myself both a interaction designer and an artist and there are no neat boundaries to these > divisions. I am, after all, a complete person. When I create an interactive artwork I tend to feel that I > am really designing it. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gsz5fjb16t14p2zec9rc4emz)) > Action is indeed the primary component of human-computer activity – not > environments, interfaces, or objects. But environments, interfaces, and objects are > traditionally much easier to conceive of and represent than a quality that is > fundamentally invisible, and the structure of which is contested at best (Laurel, 1993, > p. 135). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gsz9tqw173h5c2rpd35df9gn)) > Competition and goal-based gameplay > tends to overshadow the interaction itself and interface is again reduced to a functional role. This is > essentially the progress rhetoric of Huizinga’s Homo Ludens (Huizinga, 1955) which focuses on play > as the development of civilisation. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gsz9w0tycbgsj1n7sj6pbfw6)) > Cameras and the body as affordance ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gszxdxjwbbyrm85snzvc53fg)) ### CHAPTER 2 – Flow, Interactivity & Suspension of Disbelief #### Interactive Flow versus Narrative Flow > Narrative works are usually concerned with immersing the reader or audience in the story and the > narrative suffers when interaction is simply grafted onto it. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gszxg4w2x2yckt6xzqww67p6)) Note: Esto fue antes de regresar a D&D? > Videogames are one genre in which narrative and interaction have been relatively successfully > combined to engage audiences. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gszxkfh1xvt5xgdfmjp9mk4d)) #### Willing Suspension of Disbelief and Interactivity > Willing suspension of disbelief in traditional narrative is the audience’s > willingness to “play along” and pretend that the fictional world presented to them really exists in > order to become engrossed in the story. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gszxmdpacfvf3qe264hewgs3)) > One area of our daily lives in which we regularly suspend our disbelief is in the use of metaphors. > Metaphors require a kind of dual processing of meaning – one of the superficial level of the > metaphor’s imagery, the other of the underlying concepts. Some metaphors become so commonly > used that they do not feel like metaphors at all and unpicking them provides excellent insights into > interactivity. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gszxr6ga3nacd65apb0crswj)) ### CHAPTER 3 - Interactivity, Metaphors and the Mind #### The role of metaphors #### Interfaces are both metaphorical and physical > Yet dragging a file to a folder on the computer’s desktop also requires me to move my body. In my > case I am clicking on the mouse button to click on the file and both physically and virtually dragging > the mouse across the screen to move the file into the folder. At this point the metaphor is both literal > and conceptual, both of which reinforce the neural connections involved with that action. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt019npym8wvqphz0pmzs493)) Note: Dice as physical objects with virtual effects on the game. #### A metaphor too far > I ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt044y6d22t0q6zsgan750f5)) > This already exists in Apple's OS X interface with their innovation called > Exposé. > Instead of the visual metaphor of the desktop being given greater attention and detail as in the > Bumptop example with little book icons bouncing around with simulated physics, Exposé breaks the > desktop metaphor without breaking the flow of intention. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt0453hzd3fp0kdzedzzbk5a)) #### Direct control and manipulation in interfaces ### CHAPTER 4 - Thinking Outside of the Brain #### Scripts, Schemata, Mental Models and Automotive Action > Habituation is one aspect of interaction that plays a significant role in our perception and use of an > interactive interface. It is how interaction design conventions arise and why they are very useful > design elements to pay attention to (Krug, 2006; Saffer, 2006), such as an element being highlighted > when ‘rolled over’ by the cursor or buttons looking like 3D ‘physical’ buttons. This is true even when > the aim of a piece is to disorient and/or surprise the interactor – you have to know the rules in order to > break them. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt04k3s0rqr7h5jdfjvgwf29)) #### Scripts > Scripts are prototypes for events that allow us to piece together the memory of events because we > have experienced something similar before, such as going into a restaurant. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt04q8yc4njdam5d4d6egpqz)) Note: high context communication > Another theory of memory and cognition is that of the mental model, something that Norman > examined in Mental Models (Norman, 1983) and expanded upon in The Design ofEveryday Things > (1998) (where he called them conceptual models). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt04rsa8a6pvf47ykbnytygs)) > Mental models > are predictive and thus evince the expectations of the user. They usually simulate systems and are > open to sudden change in the light of new knowledge as well as ad-hoc adjustments, combinations of > models and rationalisations to describe the associated behaviour (Kempton, 1986). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt04rzv46z2hdw11ajbxa0ac)) #### Schemata > An overarching theory of memory and cognition is that of schemata, or schema theory, of which > frames and scripts are essentially subsets. As we have seen, schemata are also knowledge structures > that allow us to reduce the amount of cognitive processing in order to focus on, usually, more > important tasks. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt04y7zgsvdhmz3kayjdk398)) #### The embodiment of AI > for the purposes of interaction and interaction > design it should by now be clear that embodiment is a key component. Not only that, but our > necessarily embodied impression of the world is lossy, selective and constantly changing: > Humans construct an understanding of the world that is very different from the > analogue flow of sensation the world presents to them. They package their experience > into objects and events. They assemble these objects and events into propositions, > which they take to be characterizations of real and possible worlds. The > characterizations are highly schematic: they pick out some aspects of a situation and > ignore others, allowing the same situation to be construed in multiple ways (Pinker, > 2008, p. 428). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1n2zk7gjb8c4sw7tcder26)) #### Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain > Such is the nature of design and interaction, that when done well it feels ‘intuitive’, but when it > breaks, crashes or is badly designed, the metaphor becomes all too apparent and we are completely > aware of it again. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1n4wtk1ehfvc57ycmxyxvx)) #### Are we automata? > i ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1n6dm1b9ewsrx1fsafbz8y)) > Thus, if one is designing an interaction with the idea of inducing a flow > state in the interactor, or even just a suspension of disbelief in order to engage with the experience > more deeply, the more those unconscious motivations and goals can be primed and activated by the > trappings of the interaction, the more they can become transparent to the experience. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1n6n8ax251gm0a1pprtk30)) > On an interface design level, it may be > (and often is) difficult to override the conventions that an interactor has internalised as part of their > interaction process, leading them to complain that something “should” be designed one way or > another, even if the designs are comparable or the new mode of interaction is better than the old. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1n9s3064a9ngryxe80gz6k)) #### Not today, Iʼm not in the mood > , those in good or elated moods tend towards more heuristic and “playful exploration of > novel solutions, which fosters creative problem solving during good moods” (Ibid., p. 123). The > approaches also require less cognitive effort, especially if the general situation is considered safe: ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nc2psw6ta07s6f6dn0qzg)) Note: Another condition for [[Play]]: a good, non-stressed mood. > For interaction design it shows that interfaces that have an element of playfulness to them – or at least > put interactors in a good mood through their design – stand a much higher chance of being played > with and used, even if they might be functionally more challenging than non- or badly-designed > simpler interfaces. One might make an analogy to evolution here – the more attractive the markings, > the more likely the chance of a sexual interaction and the passing on of genes. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nejjbc8ys7yaz3fnm3mhm)) #### The Mojave Experiment > Microsoft’s approach to much of its software and interface design has been task-oriented, functional > but not beautiful, with work prioritised. Apple, by contrast, has focused on aesthetics – sometimes at > the cost of functionality – and lifestyle more than ‘business’ in the sense of mundane tasks. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1ng7kvax6m5gb4sycea4sd)) > It is not in any way functionally necessary to have semi-transparent widgets or animations of > windows sliding, genie-like back to folders, but it does add to the playfulness of the experience. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nh97ngmzpb2bz7apz8qhh)) > Apple fans have, in general, a much stronger emotional bond with the Apple brand than > Windows users, who might be equally passionate about Windows and Microsoft as a company. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nhnhnnksc6jh2jerr3stq)) ### CHAPTER 5 – The State of Play #### Homo Ludens > play is extremely serious for Huizinga who cites > several examples (such as players risking their lives) to show that seriousness and play are not > mutually exclusive. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nnz9g6qjpqzc5tp26v3gm)) > In sum, although Huizinga’s Homo Ludens is an important stake in the ground for play and its > consideration in culture – to be “taken seriously”, as it were – it falls short of moving play beyond > something that, whilst important to the building of civilisation is, paradoxically, unproductive. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nq50379cj538se5fxc3h0)) #### Les Jeux et les Hommes > Huizinga does not include material interest in his definition ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nrr3xec5ajrvfv4k459w5)) > Separateness is one of the key aspects of Caillois’s definition of play, one that he takes from Huizinga > (who terms this the ‘magic circle’ – one of the ideas that has become central to videogame theory) and > extends to this set of qualities: > 1. Free: in which playing is not obligatory; if it were, it would at once lose its > attractive and joyous quality as diversion; > 2. Separate: circumscribed within limits of space and time, defined and fixed in > advance; > 3. Uncertain: the course of which cannot be determined, not the result attained > beforehand, and some latitude for innovations being left to the player’s initiative; > 4. Unproductive: creating neither goods, nor wealth, nor new elements of any kind; > and, except for the exchange of property among the players, ending in a situation > identical to that prevailing at the beginning of the game; > 5. Governed by rules: under conventions that suspend ordinary laws, and for the > moment establish new legislation, which alone counts; > 6. Make-believe: accompanied by a special awareness of a second reality or of a free > unreality, as against real life (Caillois, 1961, p. 10). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1ns88gg1q1mst0t8gaw86w)) > Mimicry is “the > temporary acceptance, if not of an illusion [...] then at least of a closed, conventional, and, in certain > respects, imaginary universe” (Ibid., p. 19). This can be our own mimicry, when playing a role or a > character in a game or a play, as well as our acceptance of others doing the same when the play is > entertainment – the willing suspension of disbelief. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nvvp92ac49feyjasphy0k)) > Caillois is quite specific that “the proper function of play is never to develop capacities. Play is an end > in itself” (Caillois, 1961, p. 167). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1nyk4dbbfax0ffzeh9xnj5)) #### Love is... > ambiguity, tension and metaphor are important ingredients in an engaging, > playful interactive work, even one that we might think of as being tool-based. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1p1hv4tw2c5d3nq8nft7wx)) Note: Does high-context communication make for more enjoyable play? > Interactivity is not simply about a user’s cognitive behavioural responses, nor is it only about > psychological interaction, it is about an embodied experience of a complex interplay of motion, > perception, reaction and emotion. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1whfqr5ffsmwag35qdwmkg)) > Play incorporates many of these same complex and paradoxical elements as love: metaphor > (sometimes complex and contradictory), interaction, structure, rules, boundaries, freedom, heightened > emotion, special language as well as physical and emotional forces. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1wjb08dpayqcz6cr98gsqd)) #### From Physics Lab to Living Room to the Bus #### Game Studies #### The Magic Circle > The magic circle and the rules of play suggest that all play is metaphorical or, at least, all games are > metaphorical. As we will discover in the following principles of interactivity, this informs how we > approach, interact with and leave (or break) interactive systems. Our starting point is the first > principle of interactivity – Pesce’s invitation to play (Pesce, 1996). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt1x1zjcz70ax44p7kyj60xq)) ### CHAPTER 6 – Principle 1: The Invitation to Play > An important note here is that Norman acknowledges the value of deliberately violating the principles > of “good design”, something that usability experts often fail to appreciate (Nielsen & Tahir, 2002). > The deliberate violation of conventions, of our normal state of being, is central to games and play. As > Sutton-Smith reminds us when speaking of the playful versus play (a point we will return to): “The > key is that the playful is disruptive of settled expectations. It is the genre of comedians and tricksters, > of wits and dilettantes.” (Sutton-Smith, 1997, p. 148) ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt2trmraqs2zv08trefkdnkn)) Note: [[Thought Leadership Content]]: You can't be a thought "leader" if you don't understand the zeitgeist. > Design of all kinds, but particularly interaction design, is a combination of experimentation, play, > considered thought and iterative prototyping. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt2vax8s0svk2d6xgvj0wdxb)) > Before we even decide that we want to understand the rules or play the game, however, we have to be > enticed and seduced into the process and this is the invitation to play. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt2vv885c88zewrmb61fpj21)) > Within any design project that also involves some kind of engineering (computer-based or industrial), > there is often a tension between the designers and the engineers. Even if these roles may be played by > the same person, that tension often still exists in an internal creative struggle. Complex programming > does not always give rise to a deeply engaging interactive experience – often the simplest sketch can > draw interactors in for a considerable time. On the other hand, something that should be simple can be > boring or frustrating if the engineering and programming does not adequately support the idea. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt2w00w5fv90sxf2c2dqzqhe)) > research has shown that users > find interfaces that are pleasurable to use are also easier to use (Norman, 2005; Krug, 2006; Saffer, > 2006). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt2w18xysjxn4kbkczbb0r96)) > Paying close attention to the emotional response to the invitation to play is essential > and one of the ways of eliciting it is to get rid of the interface entirely. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4293qvt4gjqq2men8ey3as)) #### Case Study: Time Sketches #### Case Study: Body Movies – public play and interaction ### CHAPTER 7 – Principle 2: The Playing Field & the Rules > As the games theory analysis of Huizinga’s ‘magic circle’ demonstrated, games and play spaces as > well as ‘open’ play utilise rules in order to release the players from everyday life and allow them to > temporarily adopt another persona or way of acting. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt42k5drwf5yjw5pbych0qwb)) > As Mark Pesce points out (2000), the more we are confronted by interfaces everywhere, > on every surface, the more it will be necessary to be able to learn how to use them through play > because we have no time to read a manual. Those interfaces that do not invite us to play and, once we > start playing, quickly reveal their rules and boundaries are likely to fall by the wayside regardless of > how clever the underlying technology is. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt42kwryzkhqqfj12ztbzcza)) > Once the invitation to play has been successful, there are two key aspects to further engaging the > player, interactor or user – the playing field (the “magic circle”) and the rules. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4896pg9r03cdafnpqp8q0c)) #### The Rules of Play > Rules and constrictions are often paradoxical – they often lead to greater freedom by nature of their > giving structure. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt48bbcj81c5mpqrdxey6hbh)) #### The Lusory Attitude > On the other > hand, we can play games and reach a mostly un-stated consensus without disappearing down the > relativist’s black hole: > Perhaps the single most important ‘rules’ that are literally unstatable, then, are those > that define the context of the game and answer the question, ‘When is the game being > played?’ None of us can say how we know that we are in fact playing a particular > game (rather than, say, just practicing), but we generally have no trouble knowing that > we are (Ibid., p. 484). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt48e6cmqsg7rf48dwjstsb0)) > Bernard Suits in his philosophical treatise on play and games, The Grasshopper (2005), conducts a > dialectical analysis of the definition of games with particular attention to rules. Rules, he argues, “are > accepted for the activity they make possible” (Suits, 2005, p. 181) and in connection with the world > outside of the game he has this to say: “In morals, obedience to rules makes the action right, but in > games it makes the action” (Ibid., p. 182). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt48qskkq4qj4exy9f7gp8mw)) #### Using the lens of gameplay > The second insight that we can take from this analysis of gameplay is that it is essential to understand, > predict and manipulate the lusory attitude of the interactor. In user-centered and experience design > terms this is akin to working from the user’s perspective through techniques such as insights field > research and personas (Krug, 2006; Saffer, 2006; Mulder & Yaar, 2006). To understand the > interactor’s lusory attitude is to understand the set of rules that the interactor or user is ‘playing’ by or > what mental schemas they have of the system they are part of and interacting with. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt49wny69cb79fjmvyjnn7ya)) > If we focus on the user as a player instead of a worker or task achiever the approach is much more > flexible. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt49xt6cfa2stm12jgahh8xn)) > It is also present in most > “training” or “set-up” modes for applications where the user is unable to proceed to the next step until ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt49y4dcex55kkp9z2w47fpt)) > the current one has been completed. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt49y7ecfxpvkcs6awev2e0z)) #### We are all hackers > A key aspect of play is hacking, prodding the system we are playing in, testing its boundaries and the > rigidity, flexibility and integrity of its rules. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a1wh2veg06mmx73zz528v)) ### CHAPTER 8 – Principle 3: Challenge, Boredom and Anxiety > The relationship of interactivity to flow becomes even more apparent when coupled with an > understanding of play, both in terms of games and playing for its own sake. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a43spnf30dzyxqtm16wwg)) > Csikszentmihalyi outlines the eight conditions for the flow experience based on hundreds of > interviews over many years. Participants reported at least one and often all of the following (laid out > here as a list for clarity): > First, the experience usually occurs when we confront tasks we have a chance of > completing. > Second, we must be able to concentrate on what we are doing. > Third and fourth, the concentration is usually possible because the task undertaken has > clear goals and provides immediate feedback. > Fifth, one acts with a deep but effortless involvement that removes from awareness the > worries and frustrations of everyday life. > Sixth, enjoyable experiences allow people to exercise a sense of control over their > actions. > Seventh, concern for the self disappears, yet paradoxically the sense of self emerges > stronger after the flow experience is over. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a53mh9mavzbdtbcqcpcc1)) > Finally, the sense of the duration of time is altered; hours pass by in minutes, and > minutes can stretch out to seem like hours. The combination of all these elements > causes a sense of deep enjoyment that is so rewarding people feel that expending a > great deal of energy is worthwhile to be able to feel it (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p. 49). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a593xhxqr3qmxj5p2jf9z)) > Flow is induced by a relationship between goals, competence and feedback ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a6jxrc2r9q2tjmecje680)) > When the invitation to play and the rules and playing field are clearly discernable by the interactor, > the goals usually become clear as well as the competencies required in order to achieve them. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a7rfe07w5t7n4ve848bky)) > Hoffman, Novak, and Yung (2000) found that the speed of interaction had a “direct > positive influence on flow” on feelings of challenge and arousal (which directly > influence flow), and on importance. Skill, control, and time distortion also had a direct > influence on flow. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4a8754n1e4apw8b1fdzqa8)) #### The border between boredom and anxiety > Throwing stones into a lake is satisfying to me because of the smoothness of the stones, their > weight in the hand, the satisfying “plop” as they drop into the water, and the ripples that the stones > create. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4abdgc0s6xqx821pwm5mf1)) > In general, usability theory and user experience design makes an > effort to make the steps required to achieve a task as obvious to the user as possible. Yet there is a > tension here in terms of catering for a range of skill levels and abilities. “Power users” of operating > systems often complain that a simplified interface does not allow them enough flexibility and > customisation. Beginners find interfaces with too many options bewildering and don’t know where to > start, which is one of the reasons why many people turn to search as their main way of navigating > websites (Krug, 2006). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4ejvdsqhcpwpjmrh9x2rme)) > A layered approach can move a user or ‘player’ (this > combination is best described by the word ‘interactor’) through the skill levels without them being > aware of it. In this scenario the invitation to play is the first, obvious and simple layer, then the > playing field and rules are exposed and later further challenges and options. Ideally these stages of the > experience unfold without the interactor even being aware of the learning process and it is this that > makes a ‘deep’ or complex interactive experience feel like an intuitive flow experience. Striking this > balance is the essence of interaction design. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4enmkd335z0hg3xa31tq24)) ### CHAPTER 9 – Principle 4: Triviality, Open-endedness, Promises #### Playing in the Gallery > I have argued that engaging interactivity is based on play and play is based in such ideas as physical > movement (Winnicott, 2001; Brown & Vaughan, 2009), humour, noise, activity and transgressive > behaviour – something set apart from ‘real world’ rules (Huizinga, 1955; Caillois, 1961; Sutton- > Smith, 1997). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4er4kv8aygam27rrm5ccbx)) #### Delivering the promise > In many respects, delivering the promise is the culmination of all the other principles. Delivering the > promise is the other end of an invitation – what is set up in those first principles of interactivity needs > to be delivered throughout the process. There’s nothing worse than turning up to a party in fancy dress > only to discover everyone is wearing chic suits. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4ewpc7mapdc3pqxh18z530)) > Failing to deliver the promise is recognisable in > many situations and relationships between two ‘agents’, whether they are people or machines, in our > everyday lives. It is the reason people have arguments with their partners, it is the reason that > network transactions fail or why services and interfaces create dissonance. If one agent or interactor is > expecting one thing and receives something different, then it’s usually a dissonant experience, which > is usually unpleasant. Spoken and written language exchanges are full of these kinds of issues ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4ex9g768qgay4fa9avj1cd)) #### Case Study: Eavesdrop – an opportunity missed > The powerful aspect to these four principles – the invitation to play, the playing field and rules of > play, the creation of flow and delivering the promise – is that they can be applied to such a diverse > range of interactions, yet they can integrate other methodologies where the appropriate specificity is > required. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4f942p4vv9h8h4gjqx00j0)) ### CHAPTER 10 – Social Interaction and Playing with Friends > The first is quite literally an invitation to play. For early adopters this stems from an interest in these > emerging technologies and forms and the appeal of the new ‘new thing’. For many the invite is the > invitation to take part in the private beta-testing phase of an online application. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fd1s1tpbga7n4qvx0324e)) #### APIs as invitations ### CHAPTER 11 - Understanding Interactivity Through Play > The only future-proof approach to designing for and dealing with an environment of constant change > in interactive interfaces, technologies and systems is to look for a mechanism and theoretical > approach that underpins them all. A cross-disciplinary, inter-disciplinary or, perhaps, discipline > agnostic approach. As play is such a fundamental building block of culture, society, technology and > cognition, it is an ideal lens through which to examine the interactive experience. It is versatile > enough to cross boundaries and fundamental enough to be understood universally, at least in terms of > experience even when it defies concrete explanation (which is part of its power and charm). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fhk7smrkm37rx9qyv9qb6)) > As we have seen, play is also highly metaphorical, requiring an agreed belief in the potency of rules > and the boundaries of the “magic circle”. Sometimes these spaces are physical (such as lines on the > ground), often they are metaphorical and intangible (such as the boundaries of good sportsmanship or > social expectations), sometimes they are both (such as a child deciding a cardboard box is a boat and > thus the kitchen floor is shark infested water upon which one cannot walk). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fjepcmcab1a8zpz99cxmc)) > Like metaphors, rules of play are agreed forms and codes of understanding – the willing suspension of > disbelief is essential to both. We must be able to understand, for example, that disbelief is not really a > machine whose running can be suspended, but that we can understand it as such. We know there is no > ultimate set of rules for every eventuality in a game, even though we play as if there is (Sniderman, > 2005). Players also take on metaphorical roles, from being the operator or interactor through to being > the lion or pirate, or even the judge or the devout lover in our cultural and social ‘games’. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fjw7gs9k7501wfsb5xejb)) > Play begins as a physical and movement-based form. We explore the boundaries and workings of our > own bodies, we explore the world around us and its affordances, including those of social > relationships. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fkg2fh8sh0jbv42w04c98)) ### POSTSCRIPT > Both Kane (2004) and Pesce (2000) point to the shift in education that the Industrial Revolution > created, from teaching in the home or immediate community to a regimented, very unplayful, mass > education based on a theory of the transmission of knowledge from the broadcasting teacher to the > receiving students. Playful discovery is largely killed off and certainly discouraged in this form of > education – a form that has merely changed its technological clothes over the last 200 years but whose > structure has essentially remained the same until now. Even now change is largely being driven by the > generation of pupils and students rather than the governments, teachers or lecturers (Polaine, 2007). ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01gt4fq77ztkyp2jmqcq9mvbd9))