Advertisement

Evaluation of four models for the sonification of elite rowing

  • Gaël DubusEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

Many aspects of sonification represent potential benefits for the practice of sports. Taking advantage of the characteristics of auditory perception, interactive sonification offers promising opportunities for enhancing the training of athletes. The efficient learning and memorizing abilities pertaining to the sense of hearing, together with the strong coupling between auditory and sensorimotor systems, make the use of sound a natural field of investigation in quest of efficiency optimization in individual sports at a high level. This study presents an application of sonification to elite rowing, introducing and evaluating four sonification models. The rapid development of mobile technology capable of efficiently handling numerical information offers new possibilities for interactive auditory display. Thus, these models have been developed under the specific constraints of a mobile platform, from data acquisition to the generation of a meaningful sound feedback. In order to evaluate the models, two listening experiments have then been carried out with elite rowers. Results show a good ability of the participants to efficiently extract basic characteristics of the sonified data, even in a non-interactive context. Qualitative assessment of the models highlights the need for a balance between function and aesthetics in interactive sonification design. Consequently, particular attention on usability is required for future displays to become widespread.

Keywords

Sonification Rowing Sculler Sports Accelerometer 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Swedish Research Council, Grant Nr. 2010-4654, by the Olympic Performance Center (OPC) SONEA project, and by the EU-ICT SAME project (FP7-ICT- STREP-215749) http://www.sameproject.eu. The author would like to thank the rowers and trainers who took part in the experiments. Many thanks to the people who helped spreading the online survey among the community of rowers and to the rowers and researchers who answered.

References

  1. 1.
    Barrass S, Schaffert N, Barrass T (2010) Probing preferences between six designs of interactive sonifications for recreational sports, health and fitness. In: Bresin R, Hermann T, Hunt A (eds) Proceedings of ISon 2010, 3rd interactive sonification workshop. KTH, Stockholm Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bonebright TL, Miner NE, Goldsmith TE, Caudell TP (2005) Data collection and analysis techniques for evaluating the perceptual qualities of auditory stimuli. ACM Trans Appl Percept 2(4):505–516 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Effenberg AO (2005) Movement sonification: Effects on perception and action. IEEE Multimed 12(2):53–59 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eriksson M, Bresin R (2010) Improving running mechanics by use of interactive sonification. In: Bresin R, Hermann T, Hunt A (eds) Proceedings of ISon 2010, 3rd interactive sonification workshop. KTH, Stockholm Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Farnell A (2012) Personal website. http://obiwannabe.co.uk. Accessed 12 Jan 2012
  6. 6.
    Fernström M, Brazil E, Bannon L (2005) HCI design and interactive sonification for fingers and ears. IEEE Multimed 12(2):36–44 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Godbout A, Boyd JE (2010) Corrective sonic feedback for speed skating: a case study. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on auditory display, Washington, DC Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Halpern DL, Blake R, Hillenbrand J (1986) Psychoacoustics of a chilling sound. Percept Psychophys 39(2):77–80 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hansson SO (2005) Aesthetic functionalism. Contemp Aesthet 3, online publication Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hayward C (1992) Listening to the Earth sing. In: Kramer G (ed) Auditory display—sonification, audification and auditory interfaces. SFI studies in the sciences of complexity. Addison-Wesley, Longman, pp 369–404 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Henkelmann C (2007) Improving the aesthetic quality of realtime motion data sonification. Tech Rep CG-2007-4, Universität Bonn Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hermann T (2008) Taxonomy and definitions for sonification and auditory display. In: Susini P, Warusfel O (eds) Proceedings of the 14th international conference on auditory display. IRCAM, Paris Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hermann T, Höner O, Ritter HJ (2006) In: Gibet S, Courty N, Kamp JF (eds) AcouMotion—An interactive sonification system for acoustic motion control. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3881. Springer, Berlin, pp 312–323 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hermann T, Zehe S (2011) Sonified aerobics—Interactive sonification of coordinated body movements. In: Wersényi G, Worrall D (eds) Proceedings of the 17th international conference on auditory display. OPAKFI Egyesület, Budapest Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hofmijster MJ (2010) Mechanics and energetics of rowing. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hummel J, Hermann T, Frauenberger C, Stockman T (2010) Interactive sonification of German wheel sports movements. In: Bresin R, Hermann T, Hunt A (eds) Proceedings of ISon 2010, 3rd interactive sonification workshop. KTH, Stockholm Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kleiman-Weiner M, Berger J (2006) The sound of one arm swinging: a model for multidimensional auditory display of physical motion. In: Stockman T, Nickerson LV, Frauenberger C, Edwards ADN, Brock D (eds) Proceedings of the 12th international conference on auditory display. Queen Mary University of London, London Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kleshnev V (2005) Technology for technique improvement. In: Rowing faster. Human Kinetics, Champaign, pp 209–225. Chap 18 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    McBride M (2005) Rowing biomechanics. In: Rowing faster. Human Kinetics, Champaign, pp 111–123. Chap 10 Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Repp BH, Penel A (2004) Rhythmic movement is attracted more strongly to auditory than to visual rhythms. Psychol Res 68(4):252–270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schaffert N, Gehret R, Effenberg AO, Mattes K (2008) The sonified boat motion as the characteristic rhythm of several stroke rate steps. In: World congress of performance analysis of sport VII, Magdeburg Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schaffert N, Mattes K, Barrass S, Effenberg AO (2009) Exploring function and aesthetics in sonifications for elite sports. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on music communication science, Sydney Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schaffert N, Mattes K, Effenberg AO (2009) A sound design for the purposes of movement optimisation in elite sport (using the example of rowing). In: Aramaki M, Kronland-Martinet R, Ystad S, Jensen K (eds) Proceedings of the 15th international conference on auditory display. Re:New—digital arts forum, Copenhagen Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schaffert N, Mattes K, Effenberg AO (2010) Listen to the boat motion: acoustic information for elite rowers. In: Bresin R, Hermann T, Hunt A (eds) Proceedings of ISon 2010, 3rd interactive sonification workshop. KTH, Stockholm Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schaffert N, Mattes K, Effenberg AO (2011) The sound of rowing stroke cycles as acoustic feedback. In: Wersényi G, Worrall D (eds) Proceedings of the 17th international conference on auditory display. OPAKFI Egyesület, Budapest Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Soper C, Hume PA (2004) Towards an ideal rowing technique for performance: The contributions from biomechanics. Sports Med 34(12):825–848 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sturm D, Yousaf K, Eriksson M (2010) A wireless, unobtrusive kayak sensor network enabling feedback solutions. In: O’Conner L (ed) Proceedings of the international conference on body sensor networks. IEEE Computer Society, Singapore Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vickers P, Hogg B (2006) Sonification abstraite/Sonification concrète: an ‘æsthetic perspective space’ for classifying auditory displays in the ars musica domain. In: Stockman T, Nickerson LV, Frauenberger C, Edwards ADN, Brock D (eds) Proceedings of the 12th international conference on auditory display. Queen Mary University of London, London Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vogt K (2011) A quantitative approach to sonifications. In: Wersényi G, Worrall D (eds) Proceedings of the 17th international conference on auditory display. OPAKFI Egyesület, Budapest Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vogt K, Pirrò D, Kobenz I, Höldrich R, Eckel G (2009) Physiosonic—Movement sonification as auditory feedback. In: Aramaki M, Kronland-Martinet R, Ystad S, Jensen K (eds) Proceedings of the 15th international conference on auditory display. Re:New—digital arts forum, Copenhagen Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Walker BN (2007) Consistency of magnitude estimations with conceptual data dimensions used for sonification. Appl Cogn Psychol 21:579–599 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Worrall D (2009) Sonification and information: Concepts, instruments and techniques, Chap 2: An overview of sonification. PhD thesis, University of Canberra, Canberra Google Scholar

Copyright information

© OpenInterface Association 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Speech, Music and Hearing, School of Computer Science and CommunicationKTH Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations