Understanding movement for interaction design: Frameworks and approaches

Personal and Ubiquitous Computing

Volumn 11, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 691-701

  Loke, Lian ^a   Larssen, Astrid T ^a   Robertson, Toni ^a   Edwards, Jenny ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Body; Embodied; Framework; Interaction; Movement

Indexed keywords

MAN MACHINE SYSTEMS; MOTION COMPENSATION; PRODUCT DESIGN;

DESIGN FRAMEWORK; INTERACTION ANALYSIS; LABAN MOVEMENT ANALYSIS;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

EID: 35449007985     PISSN: 16174909     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00779-006-0132-1     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. Merleau-Ponty M (1962) Phenomenology of perception. Trans. Smith C. Routledge, London
2. Sony (2003) Playstation2® and Eyetoy™, hardware and computer program, London
3. Suchman L (1987) Plans and situated action: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
4. Benford S, Schnädelbach H, Koleva B, Anastasi R, Greenhalgh C, Rodden T, Green J, Ghali A, Pridmore T, Gaver B, Boucher A, Walker B, Pennington S, Schmidt A, Gellersen H, Steed A (2005) Expected, sensed, and desired: A framework for designing sensing-based interaction. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact 12(1):3-30
5. Bellotti V, Back M, Edwards WK, Grinter RE, Henderson A, Lopes C (2002) Making sense of sensing systems: Five questions for designers and researchers CHI 2002. ACM Press, Minneapolis, pp 415-422
6. Laban R (1980) The mastery of movement. 3rd edn revised by Lisa Ullmann. Play Inc, Boston
7. Robertson T (1997) Cooperative work and lived cognition. a taxonomy of embodied actions. In: Proceedings of E-CSCW'97, pp 205-220
8. Robertson T (2002) The public availability of actions and artefacts. Comput Support Coop Work 11:299-316
9. Dourish P (2001) where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge
10. Svanæs D (2001) Context-aware technology: A phenomenological perspective. HCI J, special issue on context-aware computing, pp 379-400
11. Hornecker E (2005) A design theme for tangible interaction: Embodied facilitation. In: Proceedings of the 9th European conference on computer supported cooperative work, Paris September 18-22 2005
12. Badler NI, Smoliar SW (1979) Digital representations of human movement. ACM CSUR 11(1):19-38
13. Gavrila DM (1997) The visual analysis of human movement: A survey. Comput Vis Image Underst 73(1):82-98
14. Aggarwal JK, Cai Q (1999) Human motion analysis: A review. Comput Vis Image Underst 73(3):428-440
15. Pinhanez C (1999) Representation and recognition of action in interactive spaces. Doctoral dissertation, Media Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
16. Rogers Y, Muller H (2003) Stop making sense: Designing sensor-based interactions to facilitate exploration and reflection. Technical Report Equator-03-002, Equator
17. Camurri A, Hashimoto S, Ricchetti M, Trocca R, Suzuki K, Volpe G (2000) Eyesweb-toward gesture and affect recognition. in interactive dance and music systems. Comput Music J 24(1):57-69
18. Chi D, Costa M, Zhao L, Badler N (2000) The Emote Model for Effort and Shape. In: Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 2000, pp 173-182
19. Schiphorst T, Lovell R, Jaffe N (2002) Using a gestural interface toolkit for tactile input to a dynamic virtual space. In: CHI '02 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. ACM Press, New York, pp 754-755
20. Fagerberg P, Ståhl A, Höök K (2003) Designing gestures for affective input: An analysis of shape, effort and valence. In: 2nd International conference on mobile and ubiquitous multimedia, Norrköping
21. Neagle RJ, Ng K, Ruddle RA (2003) Studying the fidelity for a virtual ballet dancer. In: Hall P, Willis P (eds) Video, vision, graphics, The Eurographics Association
22. Brereton M, Bidwell N, Donovan J, Campbell B, Buur J (2003) Work at hand: An exploration of gesture in the context of work and everyday life to inform the design of gestural input devices. In: Proceedings of 4th Australian user interface conference on user interfaces, 18 2003, Adelaide
23. Buur J, Jensen MV, Djajadiningrat T (2004) Hands-only scenarios and video action walls: Novel methods for tangible user interaction design. In: Proceedings of 2004 conference on designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques. ACM Press, New York, pp 185-192
24. Larssen AT, Loke L, Robertson T, Edwards J (2004) Understanding movement as input for interaction-a study of two eyetoy™ games. In: Proceedings of OZCHI 2004, Wollongong
25. Hutchinson A (1977) Labanotation or kinetography laban: The system of analyzing and recording movement. Theatre Arts Books, New York
26. Buxton W (1986) There's more to interaction than meets the eye: Some issues in manual input. In: Borman DA, Draper SW (eds) user centered system design: New perspectives on human computer interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 319-337
27. Jacob RJK, Sibert LE, McFarlane DC, Mullen MPJ (1994) Integrality and Separability of Input Devices. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact 1(1):3-26
28. Bartenieff I, Lewis D (1980) Body movement: Coping with the environment. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, New York
29. Newlove J (1993) Laban for actors and dancers: Putting laban's movement theory into practice: A step-by-step guide. Routledge Nick Hern Books, New York
30. Loke L, Larssen AT, Robertson T (2005) Labanotation for design of movement-based interaction. In: Proceedings of IE'05 interactive entertainment, Sydney
31. Merleau-Ponty M (1969) The visible and the invisible. Trans. Lingis A. Northwestern University Press, Evanston