A Brief History of Interaction Design: Where Does Interaction Come From?

cybernetic concepts

Performing a "purposeful act", such as picking up a book on a desk, is not a simple one-way process in which neurons in the brain send instructions to muscles that they must act to achieve expected goal. Instead, in any "system" (a combination of components that work together to perform a specific goal), at each stage, information is fed back to the central nervous system to initiate the next phase known as the "state of system" action. This process continues until the originally desired goal is reached. This feature is associated with both living things and some man-made machines and is known as "feedback".

This is the concept of "Cybernetics" ; it was created by Norbert Wiener for the study of control and communication systems. Cybernetics and feedback are integrated concepts, in the sense that we can conclude that any particular system that has the ability to generate and study constant feedback is using cybernetic methods that allow it to adapt to unpredictable Variety. Stafford Beer deftly shifts words from systems to cybernetics, saying:

“When I say any system is in control, I mean it is hyperstable: able to adapt smoothly to unpredictable changes. It deploys the necessary diversity appropriately within its structure.” (When I say that any system is in control, I mean that it is ultra-stable: capable of adapting smoothly to unpredicted changes. It has within its structure a proper deployment of requisite variety.)

A system is called a "static" system if its current output depends only on its current inputs. On the other hand, a system is "dynamic" when its current output depends on its past inputs. "In a dynamic system, the output changes with time if the system is not in a state of equilibrium." (In a dynamic system, the output changes with time if the system is not in a state of equilibrium.) Cybernetics allows a dynamic system to Self-regulation and self-correction without any end state or clear predetermined goal.

Cybernetics and Interactivity

The budding concept of interactive art began with the goal of artists to share their former position of authority not only with the audience, but also with the machine.

Marcell Duchamp's Rotary Glass Plates of the 1920s were the first steps in interactive art. In 1938, Duchamp also attempted to obliterate the painting with a light that would only turn on automatically when a visitor activates a light sensor.

Before the 1960s, the work of some Dada artists was the first step into the tradition of interactive art. Max Ernst has placed an axe next to his sculpture for visitors to use "when they don't like the object". Some Dada painters also invited viewers to complete incomprehensible Dada paintings or drawings on free spaces that were intentionally left empty.

Dual Origins: Computer Science and Art

Interactive art has two different origins, one is the development path of participatory art forms such as performances, episodic art and site-specific works. The other is the technology-oriented approach of artists/computer scientists (such as Myron Krueger and David Rokobey ) and video artists (such as Nam June Paik ) Methods.

The many roots of interactive art can be identified in the 1960s, from removing barriers between life and art, "dematerialization of the art object" (an idea in conceptual art), process art [process art] (actual action and how to define action as a real work of art; see art as pure human expression), participation art (participation art is the creation of art that engages the viewer directly in the creative process ways to make them co-authors, editors and observers of the work), and the Fluxus movement (an international interdisciplinary group of artists, composers, designers and poets formed in the 1960s and the 1970s), to the Happening movement (a form of performing art in streets, garages and shops, as opposed to the generally exclusive approach of art galleries and exhibitions) and Situationism , Art and Technology, Kinetic art and cybernetic art. They are part of a process that has a profound impact on the relationship between artworks and their audiences.

In 1960, JCR Licklider (JCR Licklider) with his unusual background, in engineering and behavioral science, proposed the concept of "man-computer symbiosis" as the relationship between man and electronic machine. Cooperative interaction. He proposed that "human-machine symbiosis" is relative to an extension of a human or a semi-automatic system in which a machine is only a mechanical (or computational) extension of a human, and he envisages the purpose of such a (fully automatic) system, mainly It is about enabling humans and computers to cooperate without rigid reliance on predetermined procedures when making decisions and controlling complex situations.

In 1961, Allan Kaprow defined "Happenings" as a form of [performance] art in the streets, garages and shops, rather than the usual galleries and exhibitions. In parallel with Happenings, reactive kinetic art is also developing, replacing instructions given by Happenings leaders with technical communication and pre-programmed engagement.

In the early 1960s, Nicolas Schoffer created a series of "CYSP" (Cybernetic-Spatiodynamic) sculptures that responded to changes in the audience's voice, light intensity, color and movement . CYSP sculpture is a prime example of the cybernetic art movement. In 1965, Nicolas Schoffer also presented plans for a cybernetic city at the Jewish Museum in New York, showing that Schoffer was able to program not only sculptures, but entire urban areas. Programming, which provides ideas for dialogue between technology and the environment.

In 1966, a series entitled "Nine Evenings: Theater and Engineering" was held in New York. In a performance variation of "Nine Nights," John Cage and Merce Cunningham employ a sound system that uses photocells and microphones for voices and dancers action to respond. John Cage used a wireless system to turn the speakers on and off, and the speakers responded to movement via photocells. In Variations VII , John Cage also used a contact microphone to make normally inaudible bodily functions, such as the heartbeat and sounds from the stomach and lungs, audible.

In 1968, Robert Rauschenberg, a key figure in the art and technology movement, developed a visual reactive environment to engage non-professional, unprepared visitors Among them, named Soundings . Soundings consists of three sheets of plexiglass placed one after the other. The front glass has a mirror, and two smaller ones show different screen-printed views of a chair. If visitors remain quiet in the exhibition space, they will only see a mirror image of themselves. However, whenever someone speaks or makes a sound, the lights are activated, making different views of the chair visible.

"Happenings" mean a stage situation and are confined to a specific performance time, while reactive environments take place in the context of exhibitions in galleries and museums.

Television as a creative medium: Nam June Paik 's Participation TV (I & II) was another among other reactive environment projects , 1969, the first video group exhibition at Howard Wise Gallery, New York try. In Participation TV I , visitors use two microphones to produce sound, which can then be seen on the display. In Participation TV II , the three-color display and three cameras are aligned with each other, creating endless visual feedback. If the visitor walks between the camera and the display, their image appears on the display and endless visual feedback.

Also avant-garde and pioneer, Myron Krueger continues to make influential strides towards participatory spatial interactive art . His interactive art exhibitions (proposed responsive environment ); GLOWFLOW (1969, in an environmental exhibition where lines of light could glow according to the movements of participants in the exhibition space), METAPLAY (1970, via a digital screen, live video images of the audience and computer graphics images drawn remotely by the artist are superimposed on this screen), PHYSIC SPACE (1971, an environment dominated by a program that automatically reacts to the footsteps of people entering the room ), and VIDEOPLACE (1975, a video screen that allows participants to interact through the medium of video in unexpected ways in a common visual experience) can be considered a cornerstone of spatial interactive art , where the use of computer algorithms is which played a key role. He has also developed a theoretical framework for what others and himself have been doing for nearly a decade, describing reactive environments as an art form:

"The described [responsive] environment suggests a new artistic medium based on the promise of real-time interaction between humans and machines. This medium is composed of sensing, display and control systems. It accepts input from participation input to or about the participant, and then output in a way that it can identify, corresponding to its behavior. The relationship between input and output is arbitrary and variable, allowing the artist to determine the behavior and perception of the participant The [responsive] environments described suggest a new art medium based on a commitment to real-time interaction between men and machines. The medium is comprised of sensing, display and control systems. It accepts inputs from or about the participant and then outputs in a way he can recognize as corresponding to his behavior. The relationship between inputs and outputs is arbitrary and variable, allowing the artist to intervene between the participant's action and the results perceived. )

Myron Krueger believes that the audience of a responsive environment must actively participate in shaping his environment. Participants were given new behavioral revelations about their limbs, allowing them to express themselves in new ways. Instead of simply appreciating the work of art, he has to deal with the moment in his own way, thereby co-creating a unique experience of time and space.

The main difference between interactive art traditions, reactive or responsive environments, and most events themed around theatrical engagement is the leadership of the artist in the participatory art form versus the leadership of the event (or mechanism) in the interactive art project . Soke Dinkla considers the socio-political dimensions of this art form:

"Art materials for interactive art are automated dialogues between programs and users. Interactive artworks provide a critical analysis of automated communication that replaces human-to-human relationships in more and more areas of society. Therefore, the distribution of power between users and systems is not only a technical issue, but also a social and political issue. (The artistic material of interactive art is the automatized dialogue between program and user.” Interactive artworks provide a critical analysis of the automatized communication that is replacing inter-human relationships in more and more social fields. Thus the distribution of power between user and system is not just a technological issue but a social and political one as well.)

Interaction in the context of space and environment

Speaking of space and cybernetics, one does need to mention a landmark project by Cedric Price in the early 1960s called Fun Palace . In addition to incorporating the fundamental laws of cybernetics, Cedric Price synthesized various contemporary discourses of his era (such as information technology, game theory, and situationism) to produce a new type of "improvisational" architecture . "Fun Palace" originated from the architect Price who valued the "inevitability of change, chance, and indeterminacy" in the human environment, and the avant-garde theatre producer Joan Price A collaboration between Joan Littlewood . Joan Littlewood dreamed of a theater where people could experience the "transcendence and transformation" of theater, not as spectators, but as actors. "Fun Palace" doesn't have a single program, its format adapts to "constantly changing and unpredictable", ad hoc programs determined by users. In the Fun Palace, contrary to traditional architectural practice, architects often formulate problems in terms of "permittivity", in terms of events rather than objects.

As Fun Palace's approach gradually shifted from theatrical thinking to cybernetics, project planners placed more emphasis on mathematical models based on statistics, psychology, and sociology. Later, Gordon Pask worked on the project as head of the Cybernetics Committee. Even Price wanted the computer program to relocate movable walls and walkways to suit the layout of the Fun Palace, as usage changes. The "Fun Palace" was never built. The "Fun Palace" was never built, but it was widely admired and imitated, especially by the young architecture students who formed the core of the avant-garde architectural group.

Archigram , a magazine supported by a group of architects and designers, published nine issues in the 1960s. The magazine's name is a mix of the words " Architecture " and " Telegram ". Each issue is also a hybrid that crosses between structure and communication. The magazine is now considered a reaction to the emergence of " electronically driven technologies within the popular domain of consumer products and services" . Archigram provides images from system design to cybernetic planning.

Their most notable works include "Plug-In City" and "Walking City" . In "Plug-In City", Peter Cook proposes a city of permanent infrastructure and circulation networks with temporary spaces and services that can be added or removed. The proposal addresses urban issues such as population growth, transportation, and land use by treating the entire city as a system. The "Walking City" in Herron , consisting of a huge walking structure, may have been used for human settlements after nuclear war. These structures will be able to connect to each other, or to a network of circulation infrastructure for the exchange of passengers/residents and goods.

Mark Weiser coined the term "Ubiquitous Computing" in 1988. Taking writing as an example, as the first information technology for long-term storage of spoken words, he describes the persistence of "literacy technology" products in the background. Although they do not require active attention, "the information to be transmitted is ready for use in a glance".

Mark Weiser recognized that (at the time) silicon-based technology was far from this concept. He proposes that ubiquitous computers always operate in an invisible, non-intrusive way, and are contextualized and integrated into everyday life. It is important to understand that at the core of this concept are devices connected through a network, and information will be everywhere because people don't put information on their devices, they put their devices on an information network. He emphasized that the power of the concept does not come from any one of these devices, but the intersection of many.

Ubiquitous computing considers the social dimension of the human environment. Later, designs for embedded (rather than just portable), location-aware, localized (rather than general-purpose), and adaptive (rather than unified) systems emerged.

Malcolm McCullough states in his book Digital Ground :

" When most of objects boot up and link to networks designers have to understand the landscape of technology enough to take a stand on their designs." in order to take a position about the design of them.)

A major contribution of ubiquitous computing is its changes to computer interfaces . Malcolm McCullough argues that Ubiquitous computing is far from a form of portable or mobile computing because it is embedded in the spaces we live in. He advocated for a new ubiquitous location-aware computing to replace existing desktop computers. This new calculation "is based on the assumption that what you need now, and who you wish to contact, depends on where you are." (emerge[s] on the assumption that what you need, and with whom you wish to be connected at the moment, is based on where you are.)

Malcolm McCullough also proposed the elements that made this new form of computing possible. These elements include microprocessors, sensors to detect motion, communication links between devices, tags to identify actors, and actuators to close feedback loops. He also proposed controllers, displays, position tracking devices, and software components to complete the set of components needed for ubiquitous computing.

In the 1970s, Nickolas Negroponte spoke about various aspects of the designer-machine dialogue and its several by-products that emerged in the fields of architecture and urbanization in the late 1960s and early 1970s, such as: "Flexible flexible , adaptive , reactive , responsive, and manipulative [architectural style or approach] . His project ' SEEK ' is a manifesto exhibition/installation pioneering the concept of digital composition in architecture. He considers the boundaries between two types of interaction; one is passive and "manipulative," that is, "moved as opposed to move," and the other is Responsive, the environment plays an active role in the computing process. Negroponte goes far beyond simple feedback loops in control systems in the traditional sense. His responsive architecture moves in the direction of artificial intelligence because of its intentional and contextualized cognition, and its ability to dynamically change its goals. In his book Soft Architecture Machines , Negroponte proposed a model of architecture without an architect. He believes that construction machines transcend some aids in the process of designing buildings. Instead, in his view, they are buildings in and of themselves. Intelligent machines or cognitive physical environments that respond to the immediate needs and desires of residents.

The democratization of microcomputers and interaction design

Making interactive [artistic] projects, prototyping technical products, and technical embedded systems, as Malcolm McCullough suggests, requires core electronics and engineering skills. With the simplest technology, such as simple control mechanisms, sensors, or motors, artists and designers can either buy a consumer version (if there is one) and let them control the system the way they want, hire an engineer, or invest in Time and money to learn the skills needed to research and develop a solution on your own.

However, this obstacle was overcome in two steps in the first decade of the 21st century. The first step was in 2001 , when Processing - an open source computer programming language and integrated development environment (IDE) - was released for the electronic arts, new media arts and visual design communities. The second time was in 2005 , when Arduino - an open source electronics platform (microcontroller) developed by the Ivrea Institute of Interaction Design in Italy - entered the market with the goal of creating a low-cost, simple platform for non-engineers, at the time for For art students who want to create interactive electronic art projects.

Arduino quickly became a tool for artists and designers and found its way into art museums and galleries. Growing in popularity in mainstream society and museums, artists and designers are using this new potential as a tool for their art projects. Processing and Arduino, alone or in combination, have contributed to the development of interactive art, design, and in many ways architecture and urbanism. These two platforms blazed a trail and are emulated and supported by some similar hardware/software platforms such as Raspberry Pi boards, Intel Galileo boards, BeagleBoards, openFrameworks, and Pure Data.

Analytical statistics from search engine queries show that there is a lot of interest in these platforms. In 2009, the term Arduino appeared on 1.9 million websites. A search for "Arduino and Design" turned up 613,000 sites, and a search for "Arduino and Art" yielded 603,000 sites.

Many user groups use these platforms simultaneously, resulting in overlapping research areas. The possibilities of these new tools and platforms, traditionally held by engineers and computer programmers, are now available to artists, interaction designers, educators, and more. These diverse groups are constantly working and sharing their codes, materials and techniques. The spin-offs of these revolutionary products have democratized the interaction design tradition and opened up a new, exploitable field for artists and designers.

Interaction and experience design are similar but different

The key is to distinguish between the roots of interaction (interaction design and interaction art) and user experience . While there are many similarities between the two concepts (art and/or design fields), the main difference is that experience design has been a topic for a long time, whereas interaction design can be thought of as one less than one century concept.

The concept of interaction design is shaped by various artists and computer scientists. It can be understood as the entanglement of computer science and art. However, from the beginning of the history of modern architecture and industrial design, user experience is an important topic. User experience is user-centric and focuses on ways to solve users' problems, while interaction design is concerned with questioning the authoritativeness of the creator/designer and encouraging the importance of the system.

Finally, in 1995, Don Norman coined the term "User Experience" after all the activities of companies like Toyota and Apple Computer and Henry Dreyfus. Dreyfuss) and other scholars proposed after the idea.

UX design

Today, with the rise of digital products, "user experience design" comes specifically in the form of "UX design". In today's design world, user experience is a controversial topic. Many people consider interaction design to be a part of user experience design. However, most of these are just popular opinions of well-known product/UX designers or design agencies, without considering the actual history of interaction design and its development path.

I think UX design is a form of experience design, similar to the digitization of a given product. Interaction design is almost born through digital technology, without it there is no meaning. To me, when people use the term UX design, their purpose is to emphasize the interaction design aspect of user/customer experience (user/customer experience from a human-computer interaction perspective). User experience does not necessarily require the use of [digital] technology, but in interaction design, technology is not just a key player . For example, user experience remains a valid concern when designing the hammer. On the other hand, in some very rudimentary examples of interactive art, the presence of digital technology gives meaning to the concept of interaction itself. One might say that when one thinks of UX, there is always some kind of [digital] interaction design, and designers often use the term "user experience design" in a more generic and inclusive way to describe any given specified product, regardless of its technical properties.

Compiled from: Where did this interaction come from? — a brief history of interaction design