Comparison of Tangible User Interfaces with Enactive
InterfacesTangible User
InterfaceEnactive Interface
Tangible User Interfaces
• “give physical form to digital information, employing physical artefacts both as representations and controls for computational media” (Ullmer and Ishii 2000)
• Frameworks include:– Model-Control-Representation(physical/digital)
with 4 instances (Ullmer and Ishii 2000)– Fishkin’s embodiment/metaphor taxonomy.
(2004)
Spatial (AudioPad) Constructive (BlockJam)
Relational (Logo slot-machine) Associative (MusicBottles)
Why Tangible User Interfaces?
• Longer history than Enactive Interfaces. • Greater practical knowledge in their
design.• The tangibility gives a direct link to
bodily learning. • Is it possible to draw from this
experience to inform the design of new Enactive Interfaces?
Enactive Interfaces
• Expression and transmission of enactive knowledge.
• Bodily knowledge as opposed to iconic or symbolic knowledge.
• Direct and Immediate form of interaction between human and computer.
• Promotes tighter coupling between perception and action
Criteria of Embodied/Enactive Interaction
1. Embodied activity is Situated2. Embodied activity is Timely3. Embodied activity is Multimodal4. Embodied activity is Engaging.5. The sense of embodiment is an
emergent phenomenon. (Armstrong 2006)
Comparison using Embodied Interaction Criteria
Tangible User Interface
Enactive Interface
Situated
Timely ?
Comparison using Embodied Interaction Criteria
Tangible User Interface
Enactive Interface
Situated
Timely ?
Multimodal
Comparison using Embodied Interaction Criteria
Tangible User Interface
Enactive Interface
Situated
Timely ?
Multimodal
Engaging ?
Comparison using Embodied Interaction Criteria
Tangible User Interface
Enactive Interface
Situated
Timely ?
Multimodal
Engaging ?
Emergent ?
Comparison using Embodied Interaction Criteria
Tangible User Interface
Enactive Interface
Situated
Timely ?
Multimodal
Engaging ?
Emergent ?
Timeliness
Engagement
non-timely timely
non-engaging
engagingenactive TUI
non-enactive TUI
pebblebox [6]
illuminating-
clay [15]
urp [17]
logo slot-
machine [14]
topographic torch [2]
marble answering-
machine [5]
audiopad [13]
blockjam [12]
bottles [9]
DAMPER [3]
Timeliness
Engagement
non-timely timely
non-engaging
engagingenactive TUI
non-enactive TUI
pebblebox [6]
illuminating-
clay [15]
urp [17]
logo slot-
machine [14]
topographic torch [2]
marble answering-
machine [5]
audiopad [13]
blockjam [12]
bottles [9]
DAMPER [3]
Timeliness
Engagement
non-timely timely
non-engaging
engagingenactive TUI
non-enactive TUI
pebblebox [6]
illuminating-
clay [15]
urp [17]
logo slot-
machine [14]
topographic torch [2]
marble answering-
machine [5]
audiopad [13]
blockjam [12]
bottles [9]
DAMPER [3]
Timeliness
Engagement
non-timely timely
non-engaging
engagingenactive TUI
non-enactive TUI
pebblebox [6]
illuminating-
clay [15]
urp [17]
logo slot-
machine [14]
topographic torch [2]
marble answering-
machine [5]
audiopad [13]
blockjam [12]
bottles [9]
DAMPER [3]
Timeliness
Engagement
non-timely timely
non-engaging
engagingenactive TUI
non-enactive TUI
pebblebox [6]
illuminating-
clay [15]
urp [17]
logo slot-
machine [14]
topographic torch [2]
marble answering-
machine [5]
audiopad [13]
blockjam [12]
bottles [9]
DAMPER [3]
Use of the Tangible-Enactive design space.
• Guide the design of new enactive interfaces.
• Does an enactive TUI make a better TUI?• Do all TUI’s allow enactive interaction?
• Design Enactive Interfaces that have the Immediacy & Richness of Tangible Interaction.
Current Work
• ‘BeatBearing’ rhythm sequencer.• How to move around the design space?• When is an enactive TUI desirable?
Timeliness
Engagement
non-timely timely
non-engaging
engagingenactive TUI
non-enactive TUI
pebblebox [6]
illuminating-
clay [15]
urp [17]
logo slot-
machine [14]
topographic torch [2]
marble answering-
machine [5]
audiopad [13]
blockjam [12]
bottles [9]
DAMPER [3]