Tangible Artifacts and the Evaluation of Affective States by children
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5753/rbie.2019.27.01.58Keywords:
Tangible interfaces, Evaluation, Affective states, LudicAbstract
Modern and ubiquitous computational systems increasingly demand more evaluations, which consider aspects beyond ergonomy, usability and accessibility to include means of understanding the affective states of those involved in the interaction. Nevertheless, whenever the involved parties are predominantly children, it becomes necessary to promote ludic and accessible means of involving people in the evaluation activities, because it is expected that the assessment tool used allows all stakeholdersto express themselves according to their age and understanding. Existing studies have proposed abstract solutions that difficult the comprehension and participation of those involved in the expression of affective states. In this article, we developed and evaluated the TangiSAM environment, which includes sets of tridimensional concrete manikins that take advantage of tangible technologies, allowing the assessment of affective states in a ludic manner. We conducted an evaluation in a real-world educational setting, including both children and teachers, in order to understand whether the TangiSAM’s tangible artifacts favor a better selfevaluation experience. We found that TangiSAM was more frequently assigned as the most favorite by the participants in the comparison to other affective-state representation proposals.
Downloads
References
Baranauskas, M. C. C. (2014). Social awareness in HCI. Interactions, XXI, 66–69. DOI: 10.1145/2621933. [GS Search].
Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1994). Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 25(1), 49–59. DOI: 10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9. [GS Search].
Comesaña, M., Soares, A. P., Perea, M., Piñeiro, A. P., Fraga, I., & Pinheiro, A. (2013). ERP correlates of masked affective priming with emoticons. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 588–595. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.020. [GS Search].
Desmet, P. (2005). Measuring Emotion: Development and Application of an Instrument to Measure Emotional Responses to Products. In M. A. Blythe, A. F. Monk, K. Overbeeke, & P. C. Wright (Eds.), Funology: From usability to enjoyment (pp. 111–123). [GS Search].
Dos Reis, J. C., Jensen, C. J., Bonacin, R., Hornung, H., & Baranauskas, M. C. C. (2016). Expressive icons for the communication of intentions. In 18th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (pp. 388–399). Rome, Italy. [GS Search].
González-González, C. S., Cairós-González, M., & Navarro-Adelantado, V. (2013). EMODIANA: Un instrumento para la evaluación subjetiva de emociones en niños y niñas. Actas Del XIV Congreso Internacional de Interacción Persona-Ordenador, (September). DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.5112.2169. [GS Search].
Hayashi, E. C. S., Posada, J. E. G., Maike, V. R. M. L., & Baranauskas, M. C. C. (2016). Exploring new formats of the Self - Assessment Manikin in the design with children. In Simpósio Brasileiro sobre Fatores Humanos em Sistemas Computacionais (Vol. 8, pp. 1–10). [GS Search].
Ishii, H. (2008). Tangible bits: beyond pixels. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (TEI ’08), (November), 15–25. DOI: 10.1145/1347390.1347392. [GS Search].
Laurans, G., & Desmet, P. (2012). Introducing PREMO2: New directions for the non-verbal measurement of emotion in design. In Out of Control: Proceedings of the 8th International Design and Emotion Conference (pp. 11–14). Retrieved from [Link]. [GS Search].
Lövheim, H. (2012). A new three-dimensional model for emotions and monoamine neurotransmitters. Medical Hypotheses, 78(2), 341–348. DOI: 10.1016/j.mehy.2011.11.016. [GS Search].
Moreira, E. A., dos Reis, J. C., & Baranauskas, M. C. C. (2017). TangiSAM : Tangible Artifacts for Evaluation of Affective States. In Simpósio Brasileiro sobre Fatores Humanos em Sistemas Computacionais (Vol. 2, pp. 451–460). [GS Search].
Norman, D. A. (2008). Design emocional: por que adoramos (ou detestamos) os objetos do dia-a-dia. Rocco. [GS Search].
Plutchik, R. (2002). Emotions and Life: Perspectives from Psychology, Biology, and Evolution. Washington, DC, USA: APA (American Psychological Association). [GS Search].
Russell, J. A., & Mehrabian, A. (1977). Evidence for a three-factor theory of emotions. Journal of Research in Personality, 11(3), 273–294. DOI: 10.1016/0092-6566(77)90037-X. [GS Search].
Russell, J. A., Weiss, A., & Mendelsohn, G. A. (1989). Affect Grid: A single-item scale of pleasure and arousal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(3), 493–502. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.57.3.493. [GS Search].
Scherer, K. R. (2005). What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Social Science Information, 44(4), 695–729. DOI: 10.1177/0539018405058216. [GS Search].
Scherer, K. R., Shuman, V., Fontaine, J. R. J., & Soriano, C. (2013). The GRID meets the Wheel: Assessing emotional feeling via self-report. In J. R. J. Fontaine, K. R. Scherer, & C. Soriano (Eds.), Components of emotional meaning: A sourcebook (Vol. 53, pp. 1689–1699). Oxford University Press. [GS Search].
Tomkins, S. S., & McCarter, R. (1964). What and Where Are the Primary Affects? Some Evidence for a Theory. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 18, 119–158. DOI: 10.2466/pms.1964.18.1.119. [GS Search].
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Eliana Alves Moreira, Julio Cesar dos Reis, M. Cecília C. Baranauskas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
