HH - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 44
About This Presentation
Title:

HH

Description:

Spatiality of reference. People and objects have known spatial locations. Easy to spatially reference both people and objects. Individual control ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:33
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 45
Provided by: hakangul
Category:
Tags: spatiality

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: HH


1
H-H Interaction
  • Chapter 9 of the book
  • Human Information Thing
  • Interaction and technology

2
H-H cooperation, competition
H-H The reference, something we know about (but
does not fully understand) Understand more by
studying technology, YES! If we understand more,
-gt better technology? Yes!
H-H
T-T, T-H, I-H ...
3
H-H cooperation, competition
Look at Hardy, mimic, posture, clothing -gt
superior Look at Stan, mimic, posture, eye brows,
jaw, hat, lapel Is it possible for a computer to
perceive (and interprete) this? Pixels -gt
Emotions
4
H
  • The interactor we know best (we think)
  • Can we use this knowledge for better technology?
    Yes!
  • Can we by building technology understand
    ourselves better? Yes (Signal processing, AI,
    MDI, Design)

H
T, I
5
Context for H-H
  • Situated in time
  • Adapt message to reader
  • Limited capacity (ms)
  • Situated in space
  • Meeting lasted from 10 to 15
  • Limited capacity (sensors)

6
Social context
  • Hierarchical structures
  • Control
  • Social comparison
  • Group polarization
  • Social faciliation

7
Taxonomy for interaction
  • Identification
  • Navigation
  • Choice
  • Manipulation
  • Read
  • Write
  • (System control, reset, reload, change
    environment, change OS)

8
Alt. taxonomy for interaction
  • Information use
  • Create
  • Gather
  • Process
  • Retrieve
  • Communicate
  • Write

9
Identification H-H
  • Identity?
  • More than our external representations
  • Soul?

10
Identification H-H
  • Face, Mood OH
  • More?

11
Human sensitivity is high
  • Once learnt it is difficult to re-learn.
  • A swedish rock singer

12
Inner or outer features?
  • It appears that children and adults fixate more
    on internal features of the face
  • So, are the internal features the most important
    in recognition?

13
(No Transcript)
14
Sinha Poggio, quite similar features
15
(No Transcript)
16
1 Cristina Stenbeck, 2 Lena Olin, 3 Kirsten
Belin, 4 Maria Wetterstrand, 5 Sahlene
1 Carl Philip, 2 Göran Persson, 3 Fredrik
Ljungberg, 4 Timbuktu, 5 Alexander Skarsgård
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
Facial expressions
  • Subtle signalling system
  • 180 different smiles (Ekman 1978)

20
Identification H-H
  • Face, Mood,
  • More?
  • Gait (Move), Trait (Character), Fingerprint,
  • More?
  • Clothes, Car,
  • COMBINATIONS! (Messy)

21
Navigation H-H
Interpret social position (social
characteristics) How? Decide on course (attack,
retreat, smile,) Unstable environment
22
Navigation H-H
Interpret social position (social
characteristics) How? Suit and tie, Car,
Straight back, ad for mens clothes Decide on
course (attack, retreat, smile,) Unstable
environment
23
Navigation H-H
A lost Tokyo
Mr A.
Miss Yoto
Represent. of self
Represent. of person B
Context
Policeman (????)
Represent. of context
Represent. of
24
Social manipulation
  • Avoid by knowledge about
  • Social psychology
  • Attitude change
  • Philosoph, physics,
  • Self
  • Minor request, concern, sincere, friendly, just
    right challenge, (disoriented, confused,
    embarrassed)
  • Flattery, adopt predefined role, attractiveness,
    reciprocity,

25
Language
Efficiency Ease of use Expressiveness I hope I
will feel as good tomorrow
26
Why eyebrows?
  • Only for preventing sweat from dripping?
  • (Cmp. Botox)

27
Eyebrow raising
Eyebrow-flashing evolved from friendly surprise
expressing a yes to social contact either
requesting or approving a request
Surprise-eyebrow-lift
Greeting
Flirting
Opening of the eye, accompanying attention, the
eyebrows being lifted as a epiphenomenon
Factual yes (e.g. in Polynesia)
Approving
Eyebrow-lift evolved from surprise
Seeking confirmation
Thanking
Emphasizing
Eyebrow-raising when asking questions
Expression of indignation
Expression of arrogance
Factual no (e.g. in Greece)
Expression of curiosity
Rejection Disapproval
28
Pragmatics
  • Language use
  • Problems
  • Ambiguity
  • Word do not mean what they say
  • Speak indirectly
  • Irony
  • Humour

29
Speech acts (Searle 1969)
  • Illocutionary
  • Performative (verb content)
  • Perlucotion
  • Illocutionary taxonomy
  • Assertive, commit speaker to truth
  • Directive, persuade listener
  • Promissive, commit speaker to act
  • Expressive, express speakers feelings about
    state of affairs
  • Declarative, perform act by the utterance

30
Speech acts, ctd
31
Social dynamics
  • Discours
  • Talk exchange
  • Turn-taking
  • Conversation

32
Meaning and inferential model
  • Shared context
  • Cmp PASS! (Bridge Football)
  • Come to the same conclusion given facts
  • Indirect Its getting late, The door is over
    there

33
CSCW
Chairman (far away)
Bad lighting
Bored participant (close to camera)
Remote participants (small images)
34
H-H Interction
35
H-H Interction
 
36
H-H Interction
 
37
Communication depth
38
(No Transcript)
39
Hole in space, 1980
NY - LA
40
Canberra
41
Social QoS
  • Who is allowed to join
  • Who has joined and left
  • Who is allowed to do what and with whom
  • Doctor
  • Who is allowed to see the results
  • Who is viewing and has viewed

42
Social QoS
Fourth graders
Lady Bountiful
43
Social QoS, ctd
  • Social-technical gap

Logic
Human society
Neural network
Neural network
Human brain
Fuzzy logic
Control
Flexibility
44
Design for H-H
  • Who, What, When, How (medium)
  • Evaluation
  • User part of the design
  • Tailorability
  • Awareness of others lt-gt Privacy
  • Exception handling
  • User interface?

45
Cliff hangers
  • Which applications that combine video, text,
    speech and animation can you think of and how do
    you grade them in communication depth.
  •  
  • How could an application that facilitates
    communication harm teamwork? Are there new
    sources of friction among participants when using
    computer-based co-operation?
  •  
  • Does video really improve remote conversations?
    Does it give any added value at all over using
    only audio for distance work? Seeing lips move
    maybe gives some additional clues to what a
    person says?
  •  
  • Who will earn money and who will loose them when
    computer based co-operation is commonplace?
  •  
  • Does Internet and current web-based equipment
    provide a sufficient infrastructure for
    videoconference? If not, what is missing?
  •  
  • Why is videoconference not used to a greater
    extent at Ericsson and Nokia?
  •  
  • Is privacy threatened by video conferencing?
  •  
  • Computer games such as CounterStrike have started
    to use voice for communication among players.
    This means that thousands of families will be
    listened to in real time, all of the time. Is
    this good or bad for society as a whole? Maybe
    this is not something more than the ordinary
    phone? When the phone was introduced one
    objection was Will anyone be able to call me up
    for a shilling?
  •  
  • Face to face communication now also includes face
    to animated face communication. This is an area
    where much research is needed. When and why (if
    ever) do we trust an animated face?
  •  
  • What would chapter HI-HI contain (hihi)?
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com