← previous section: Home

We live in a society where interaction with products is mostly mediated by GUIs, button arrays, touch screens and, more recently, gestures and speech. Efficiency and multi-functionality are becoming increasingly common [8]. Due to the flexibility of these interfaces, their functionality tends to expand limitlessly, leaving the user with meaningless generic action possibilities and overwhelming amounts of features. The multi-functionality of these interfaces has its benefits, but at the cost of a fit with the context-of-use, thereby disrupting the use flow. What’s more, interaction with these interfaces relies almost completely on cognitive skills [4,6,12]. In contrast, I think the context-of-use is an essential element for good design. I am interested in designing immersive experiences and interactions that take advantage of human skills beyond cognition. This means that interaction fits the context-of-use and seamlessly integrates into the use flow, thereby becoming more meaningful. This relates to being “ready-to-hand”: the product moves to the periphery of attention while it is being used to complete a (attention demanding) task [5,7]. My approach to achieve this is combining technology with creativity to break free from generic interaction paradigms (pressing buttons, rotating dials, and tapping displays) and create new, innovative action possibilities. For instance, using AI to convert writing to text prevents the need to pull up a keyboard during sketching (figure 1), or fingerprint and face ID for seamless, yet secure, unlocking a device.


Developments in AI are especially valuable, as they can be used to accurately interpret nuanced and complex contexts that the interface can adapt upon, making it possible to create a fit in a dynamic context (see Apto, my FMP project (.pdf)) (figure 2 & figure 3). Other interesting domains are tangible and embodied interaction, since we can build on the meaningfulness of feedforward and affordances [9]. This makes the interaction more intuitive and available for use in the periphery of attention [1,9]. In addition, the physical world allows for expressive and multi-sensorial interaction (such as weight, sound, haptics, texture) that enrich the experience by addressing our perceptual-motor -and emotional skills [5,12].


In short, I believe designers distinguish themselves from other engineers by creating value from bridging people and technology within a certain context. Fundamentally, they ensure the goals of a user match the product's functionality and that the functionality is accessible through a usable interface. Altogether, this creates a good fit between the product, user, and context-of-use (figure 4). Additionally, I think designers are responsible for shaping the application of new technologies, such as AI. Designers can build the foundation for innovative applications of (new) technology that considers the needs of users and context first, instead of being technology driven.


next section: Identity
References
  1. Saskia Bakker and Karin Niemantsverdriet. 2016. The interaction-attention continuum : considering various levels of human attention in interaction design. Retrieved from www.ijdesign.org
  2. Jonathan Ball. 2019. The Double Diamond: A universally accepted depiction of the design process - Design Council. Retrieved from https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-work/news-opinion/double-diamond-universally-accepted-depiction-design-process/
  3. Richard W. Brislin. 1980. Cross-Cultural Research Methods. Environment and Culture: 47–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0451-5_3
  4. Tom Djajadiningrat, Kees Overbeeke, and Stephan A G Wensveen. 2002. But how, Donald, tell us how ? On the creation of meaning in interaction design through feedforward and inherent feedback.
  5. Paul Dourish. 2001. Seeking a Foundation for Context-Aware Computing.
  6. Joep W Frens. 2006. Designing for rich interaction : integrating form, interaction, and function. https://doi.org/10.6100/IR608730
  7. Martin Heidegger. 2020. Martin Heidegger (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy/Fall 2020 Edition). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2020/entries/heidegger/
  8. John. Maeda. 2006. The laws of simplicity. MIT Press.
  9. Donald A. Norman. 2013. The design of everyday things.
  10. Sensel Inc. Sensel Morph. Retrieved from https://morph.sensel.com/
  11. Studio Philip Ross. Fonckel One. Retrieved from https://studiophilipross.nl/work#/fonckel-one/
  12. S A G Wensveen, J P Djajadiningrat, and C J Overbeeke. 2004. Interaction Frogger: A Design Framework to Couple Action and Function through Feedback and Feedforward.

Figure references:

figure 1: AppleInsider. n.d. Apple’s Scribble feature on Ipad. https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/09/19/how-to-use-scribble-on-ipados-14-on-your-ipad

figure 1: Apple’s Scribble feature on Ipad

figure 2: Apto in use

figure 3: Close up of the dynamic interface of Apto

figure 4: Intersections of essential elements for Good Design