2017
Rui Pan, Carman Neustaedter, Alissa N. Antle, Brendan Matkin. 2017. Puzzle Space: A Distributed Tangible Puzzle for Long Distance Couples Proceedings Article . In Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, CSCW '17 Companion Association for Computing Machinery, Portland, Oregon, USA, 271–274, .
Abstract | BibTeX | Tags: collaboration over distance, computer vision, jigsaw puzzle, long-distance relationships, tangible user interface
@inproceedings{10.1145/3022198.3026320,
title = {Puzzle Space: A Distributed Tangible Puzzle for Long Distance Couples},
author = {Rui Pan and Carman Neustaedter and Alissa N. Antle and Brendan Matkin},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/3022198.3026320},
doi = {10.1145/3022198.3026320},
isbn = {9781450346887},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
booktitle = {Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing},
pages = {271–274},
publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery},
address = {Portland, Oregon, USA},
series = {CSCW '17 Companion},
abstract = {Long-Distance Relationships (LDRs) are fairly common nowadays where couples rely on computer-mediated tools to stay connected. Yet few systems have explored how couples can share fun and playful activities together over distance. In this paper, we present the design of Puzzle Space, a distributed tangible jigsaw puzzle that allows LDRs to play remotely and synchronously. With Puzzle Space, couples move puzzle pieces on a table surface where movements are shown on the remote partner's screen. We expect that Puzzle Space could enable us to explore if the hybrid of physical and digital content in shared playful activities can help long-distance couples to stay connected and maintain a strong relationship.},
keywords = {collaboration over distance, computer vision, jigsaw puzzle, long-distance relationships, tangible user interface},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Long-Distance Relationships (LDRs) are fairly common nowadays where couples rely on computer-mediated tools to stay connected. Yet few systems have explored how couples can share fun and playful activities together over distance. In this paper, we present the design of Puzzle Space, a distributed tangible jigsaw puzzle that allows LDRs to play remotely and synchronously. With Puzzle Space, couples move puzzle pieces on a table surface where movements are shown on the remote partner's screen. We expect that Puzzle Space could enable us to explore if the hybrid of physical and digital content in shared playful activities can help long-distance couples to stay connected and maintain a strong relationship.
2009
Alissa N. Antle, Milena Droumeva, Daniel Ha. 2009. Hands on What? Comparing Children's Mouse-Based and Tangible-Based Interaction Proceedings Article . In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, IDC '09 Association for Computing Machinery, Como, Italy, 80–88, .
Abstract | BibTeX | Tags: children, comparative experiment, digital tabletop, embodied interaction, evaluation, input methods, interaction styles, jigsaw puzzle, Methodology, object manipulation, tangible computing, tangible interaction, video analysis
@inproceedings{10.1145/1551788.1551803,
title = {Hands on What? Comparing Children's Mouse-Based and Tangible-Based Interaction},
author = {Alissa N. Antle and Milena Droumeva and Daniel Ha},
url = {https://doi-org.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/10.1145/1551788.1551803},
doi = {10.1145/1551788.1551803},
isbn = {9781605583952},
year = {2009},
date = {2009-01-01},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children},
pages = {80–88},
publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery},
address = {Como, Italy},
series = {IDC '09},
abstract = {We investigate the similarities and differences -- in terms of quantitative performance and qualitative behaviors -- between how children solve an object manipulation task using mouse-based input versus tangible-based input. This work examines the assumption common in tangible computing that direct physical manipulation is beneficial for certain spatial tasks. We describe an ecologically valid comparison of mouse-based versus tangible-based input for a jigsaw puzzle task in order to better understand the tradeoffs in choosing input and interaction styles. We include a traditional cardboard puzzle for comparative purposes. The results of an experiment with 132 children indicate children are more successful and faster at solving puzzles using a tangible-based approach. Detailed temporal analysis indicates that pairs in the tangible group spend most of their time using a combination of epistemic and pragmatic actions which support mental problem solving. Conversely, pairs in the mouse group use an ineffective trial and error strategy.},
keywords = {children, comparative experiment, digital tabletop, embodied interaction, evaluation, input methods, interaction styles, jigsaw puzzle, Methodology, object manipulation, tangible computing, tangible interaction, video analysis},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
We investigate the similarities and differences -- in terms of quantitative performance and qualitative behaviors -- between how children solve an object manipulation task using mouse-based input versus tangible-based input. This work examines the assumption common in tangible computing that direct physical manipulation is beneficial for certain spatial tasks. We describe an ecologically valid comparison of mouse-based versus tangible-based input for a jigsaw puzzle task in order to better understand the tradeoffs in choosing input and interaction styles. We include a traditional cardboard puzzle for comparative purposes. The results of an experiment with 132 children indicate children are more successful and faster at solving puzzles using a tangible-based approach. Detailed temporal analysis indicates that pairs in the tangible group spend most of their time using a combination of epistemic and pragmatic actions which support mental problem solving. Conversely, pairs in the mouse group use an ineffective trial and error strategy.