1 Introduction

Interaction is not exclusive of digital systems, if we regard studying it as a concept. Digital artifacts are built in a way where both software and hardware are prepared from the start to allow action-reaction. But the majority of them are actually based on a physical use that precedes the digital universe. What we use today within any digital electronic device is mostly a replication of our material, concrete tasks into a virtual setting. However, it is undisputed that the environment produced by digital artifacts became a very specific experience, yielding phenomena which otherwise would not be possible.

Nevertheless, this capacity has not been adequately explored in the opposite direction. By having served as the basis for the digital development, printed matter has been influenced only sparingly by the involvement with the binary system. The study of interaction in printed matter can bring a purpose not yet obtained, which is the understanding of behavior within this technology and related areas, namely graphic design.

In this sense, we may retrieve information from digital artifacts and their interactive possibilities to compare with printed matter, in order to understand how can print be considered an interactive system and in which way can it be conceived in accordance.

We follow a qualitative methodology for exploration and description, comprising a case study method based on a review of the main literature and on participant observation. This allowed us to perform a multiple cases group for digital artifacts. The observation of elements and actions that shape interaction in graphic systems arising from digital artifacts, allows us to generate a framework of results. Some of these artifacts are the GUI (Graphical User Interface) for operating systems in personal computers, the influence of hypertext on the Web or the development of online applications. All of them allow various interactive options and also user participation. They can be compared to objects, whose production technology is print and that carry with them a strong visual tradition used in graphic design.

Printed matter already has a strong visual organization and hierarchy. What is missing in a lot of production is the ability to reach their users in an interactive way, and to enable a set of solutions that make printed matter innovative. Thus, the existing graphic organization and materialization can be considered the working basis, where we may conceive an interactive system.

2 Static and Dynamic Systems

Objects that undergo a printing process are often referred to as just ‘prints’. They are mostly the work result that graphic designers carry out and are based on a large tradition of graphic arts and printing techniques. They are nonetheless, objects in their own right that we can use through their material presence. Still, they have not been conceived in a way to include an interactive concern and the straightforward understanding of these objects leaves to visual creation the responsibility to distinguish them [1–3], focusing on visual elements, mainly pictures, typography, shapes and colors [4–7]. This, somehow narrow perspective, inhibits an analysis of the material relationship printed matter has with any user. Graphic designers, who develop most of printed materials, do not usually consider any disruption in most outcomes [8]. But there are still space and time factors not well thought-out and consequently, no way to improve them. This seems a neglected aspect, since printed matter is tactile and requires a certain amount of time to be useful.

To discuss whether or not printed matter can be an interactive system, we should first understand the concept of interaction and what sort of interactive characteristics would be considered.

Bonsiepe [9] argues that interaction is something present in every design activity, in order to connect the user and an artefact, thus forming the context for user participation [10, 11]. But Heeter [12] does not consider the newspaper, for instance, as interactive, since its audience is passive. Both Davis [13] and Buchanan [14] envision an understanding of interaction in many design projects and Tapia [15] even relates some printed materials with hypertext organization, but there is no study or sufficient information about the notion of interaction when considering print. Dubberly et al. [16] take it even further, claiming a difference must be made between interaction and reaction, placing an opposition between static and dynamic systems.

If printed matter is static and non-interactive, is there ways to create, interfere or modify it, in order to pursue an interactive existence? We can seek to explore a relation between printed matter and the establishment of an interactive capacity. However, this relation implies a different approach to printed matter. No longer based on the exclusive graphic assessment of the object in hand, since design will no longer be about creating the object, but rather conceiving an encounter [17]. The attention should be transferred from the relationship between graphic elements to the relationship that the design may have with people who use those objects [18], or a shift may occur, from designing artifacts to experiences [19].

Digital media provide a rich source for the observation of these features, [20–22], since interaction is immediately implied in them [10, 22]. Also Stolterman [23] suggests improving research in HCI in order to contribute to design related areas. The user is understood as a central point in planning actions and functions and his presence in front of graphic interfaces dictates the real meaning of a digital artifact.

This paper discusses the ways in which we can envision an interactive approach for objects that use print technologies for their production. This interpretation is enabled by two specific and complementary situations. First we draw an understanding of interaction as a context, rather than an end by itself, linked with the need for user participation. Second, we studied some of the ways in which digital technologies have been producing interaction, in order to know their suitability for printed matter.

3 Interaction and User Participation

Different perspectives on interaction exist, depending on the field of study. Designers tend to consider interaction as a part of the relation artifacts establish with people; while in human-computer interaction is regarded as a feedback based process.

Interaction design brought something not considered by other design practices, the focuses on behavior [19]. This area can be explained as a process of giving the user control over the machine [20]. Although being mainly dedicated to computer systems, interaction design became aware of how to interpret its users [24].

When using an object or a system, we fulfill a number of steps that determine a certain experience. We make objects function through several requests and they serve us through their form, material and behavior. We interact with them and we do so through a continuing exchange of messages or actions. It is something that happens in time and is not related to visual composition [25]. We may consider interaction, not as exclusive or prevalent in a specific area of expertise, but rather as a context that can be enabled in several situations [26, 27].

The purpose of interaction however, is for the user to become somehow content generator [11]. This allows for the inclusion of the user in the final stages of object development. But it can also refer, in same cases, to a participation of the user in modifying or handling the object. An experience supposes a participation of someone in a certain time and space [10]. Being that interaction is positioned in time and in the ability to make a narrative construction in the relation our body has with the surrounding environment, then it is interaction that allows in fact such participation.

Technologies, in their own way, allow a mediated interaction, which can be understood as a designed experience [24], where a person is participant through the affordances present in a system. Some technologies, as digital ones make full advantage of the possibilities of interaction and consequently make us aware of the experiences they provide. Others, like printing technologies, originate from a time where interaction was not an issue and perhaps not considered.

4 Print as Devoid of Interaction

The invention of the printing press with movable types defined printed matter ever since. The printing press, which marked an important technology transition, dictated a status of reproduced product. From this point, printed material would be repeatable and equal in every copy [28].

It also influenced a shift from the use of multiple senses to a preponderance of vision. This predominance is reflected nowadays in the importance that graphic designers establish in developing their projects and consequently, in assuming what makes their business relevant. It is essentially a creation for the eye. As a result, there is little study of a three dimensional, time-driven set of actions to engage a user in what we can call, an experience.

Objects such as books, magazines, newspapers, letterheads, posters, signage, are a traditional printed accomplishment, conceived with procedures that are based on a long track record of examples and that take for granted a certain production and distribution to people. They fulfill several functions individually and yet have so much in common. They all have a potential to enhance the level of interaction, so any user can be a physical part of discovering information and increasing the emotional attachment to the object in hand. Of course print technology must rely on graphic elements to convey messages and to make them distinct. But their qualities and effects do not end here.

If printed matter that arises from the practice of graphic design has a concern for formal organization [2, 3] but disregards interaction; digital artifacts are becoming increasingly personal and well prepared not just to be viewed or received.

5 Digital Interaction

What can best define a digital artifact is to be available to the demands of users, to execute a request and send the response to that request. The electronic encoding for all information allows that all graphic elements in a system can be connected [14]. This experience is improved almost from the start by offering user choices instead of an imposed order.

We can observe this in personal computers operating systems. They have a rich set of interactive features, added along their history with a strong visual composition, that allow the use of the personal computer through the desktop, by means of manipulation of graphics. They do however present an imposed limitation, which are the computer resources where it works.

In a different way, the Web enables movement. Browsing implies going from screen to screen, with connections between them. This happens with Web 2.0 and its expansion of interactive possibilities, as well as user participation in Internet. Digital cases such as blogs and social networks change the perception and the need for interaction. From a common thing they become a requirement. This ability that users now have to save, create and spread information, translates a strong presence of interaction, made possible by a broad set of characteristics, such as search within digital artifacts; to create and update content in different formats; or to categorize information [29].

As printed matter and consequently graphic design can become more interactive, we are able to use these digital media cases to know how can we include interaction in print media and in what way.

6 Case Study

In order to reach a relevant knowledge of interaction features, a case study method was developed to analyze three digital artifacts. These cases provide a group of common categories of interaction. These categories may be the simplest and basic when considering their presence in digital media, but may be of relevance in the use of printed matter in a near future. The choice of cases was done to be representative of important ways to produce interaction and to indicate a transverse characterization of it [20, 29, 30]. So by comparing different cases we can summarize close ideas employed in a significant number of digital artifacts.

The main reason of using the case study method is to realize how digital artifacts are made available to users, allowing alternating messages, constant action and reaction and how they permit the generation of content by any user. This method aims to understand and interpret and it is based on the collection and comparing of relevant information, especially the one retrieved from observation as user.

The method was structured from Yin [31], supported by Tellis [32] and Baxter and Jack [33] and adapted to the specific needs of this study. As a principle of quality, each individual case is presented by a description and an explanation, synthesized from an examination on a diverse set of sources.

The information processing of each case and its transposition for a comparative conclusion of all the cases is based on the notions of grounded theory as described by Strauss and Corbin [34] and explained by Gibbs [35]. Thus, codes are given to groups of information collected in each case, which aggregate in common concepts and produce categories. The encoding process relies on identifying collected excerpts, accompanied by their designations and descriptions. Then, relationships are formed between the various codes, looking for similarities that help to explain certain experience. Finally, we try to explain what develops around these created categories.

6.1 Case 1 – Operating System

For the first case we regard Mac OS X, an operating system of Apple®. As an operating system it is based, like others, in the desktop metaphor, presenting the elements that suit this notion.

The first action in which it was possible to verify interaction is a routine in several computer media and executable via a pointing device, commonly the mouse. The operation we call ‘point and click’ allows tasks with a click, double click, select and drag or drop movements. It became trivial, but it is profoundly effective. Such as ‘drag and drop’, that allows any element, once selected, to be placed in a different location.

The system includes different types of menus that provide access to information. They display lists of items that the user can select without having to memorize the information contained therein. One of the most important is a set of pull down menus on top of the screen in the system’s desktop. By pressing them we are offered commands and tasks options. After pointing and selecting an item it becomes highlighted and an action will occur after pressing the mouse.

A different menu, called Dock, is located at the bottom or at the side of the screen and consists of icons that act as shortcuts to open files, folders or applications. Each user can compose the Dock with the icons he wants. The row of icons will be adjustable to the amount of elements in it, to stay within the limits of the screen. By going through this menu with the cursor, each icon is enlarged.

Some of the most used elements are windows, as a resource for the presentation and organization of documents, applications and panels. There are several types of windows, which are distinguished by appearance and behavior. Windows have a title bar, important to move the window and a button to close it. They may also have buttons to minimize and expand, a scrollbar and a control to resize it. Main windows in Mac OS X are usually accompanied by source lists or sidebars, which are lateral and separate areas that indicate and enable browsing. The selection of an element in on of these sidebars, displays the information contained in it, in the larger area of the window.

The idea of revealing what is contained in a given element was expanded to the concept of ‘quick look’. In the desktop the user can select a file and press the spacebar on the keyboard and see the contents of that file. This is possible without having to open any application to do so.

The ease in controlling the work and tasks is also allowed by the use of the keyboard, in which almost all keys have assigned roles. In terms of interaction, this feature is not significant, with the exceptions of F9, F10 and F11 function keys, which the company refers to as Exposé. When you press each key, the screen rearranges to show all windows in use on the computer, all windows within an application, or to hide all windows in the sides of the screen, respectively.

From the gathered information, it is possible to identify and bring together a group of actions and elements that introduce interaction. Table 1 presents each by its name, with a description of the provided interaction and user participation.

Table 1. Actions and elements of interaction in Mac OS X
Full size table

6.2 Case 2 – Website

The chosen case to present a website example was the BBC’s® homepage, available between 2008 and 2010. It was first launched as a beta version in 2007 and later replaced by a new one in 2011. The interesting aspect of this homepage was to be based on a module system, similar to widgets that allowed a high level of customization. Each module contained information about certain subject areas and each user could choose and compose the group that would form the homepage. The analysis was done only on this homepage and on the various elements that improve interaction.

The layout of the homepage demonstrated a dominance of horizontal browsing for the key information, compiled into a horizontal menu. A smaller, secondary menu named ‘More’ was placed to the right of the screen, completing the information not present in the main menu.

The most important visual element was the group of modules, which could be changed to different arrangements. Each user could change, through drag and drop, the position of a given module. The similarity with typical elements of an operating system and non-standard in the Web continued with attributes, such as a cross to close the module on the right side and an arrow to minimize it on the left. In each of these modules, information was customizable by choosing the ‘Edit’ option that allowed adding or removing information topics.

Customization was enlarged by the presence of a panel through which the user could modify the information modules, in number and order. The user could also pick the color for the homepage. After performing these individual choices, changes should be saved and then the ‘reset homepage’ option should be pressed. Table 2 presents the main actions and elements present in this homepage.

Table 2. Actions and elements of interaction in BBC’s homepage
Full size table

6.3 Case 3 – Social Network

The chosen case was Twitter’s® profile page. This case was chosen because it is an example of Web 2.0. The analysis was developed on what came to be called ‘New Twitter’, available online through a website, between 2010 and 2011.

The interface had a structure defined by three areas: a horizontal menu at the top; below this, the screen was divided by a vertical timeline and an area for various information such as the list of users that follow us, users that we follow, most discussed topics and more links related to the service.

Both the horizontal menu and the timeline were permanent, while the area on the right could be filled with other information, such as for visualizing a selected message. Each message (tweet) was possible to be pressed and if so, on the right side, it would appear with additional aggregate information, such as the profile data of the author or recent tweets.

All users could customize some visual elements that would make up their interface and communicate to others their profile. The color code, as well as the background could be controlled and depending on these options, profiles would be presented in very different ways.

Despite the limited number of available characters, terms were created to fit some needs. For instance, placing ‘@username’ in a tweet, automatically generates a hyperlink to another user profile. Another example is the hashtag, words preceded by the symbol ‘#’ that have become markers of concepts. The hashtag phenomenon represents a strong way for users to participate. They have identified a need, came up with a solution and the company incorporated it.

Table 3 lists and summarizes the main actions and elements that enhance interaction in this case.

Table 3. Actions and elements of interaction in Twitter’s profile page
Full size table

6.4 Case Study Results

One of the difficulties involved in comparing the various cases was to group the interaction factors around its characteristics, since these, although sometimes similar, are present with different names in each case.

The three tables of codes and descriptions were then reviewed. Similar descriptions in different cases were matched and their ID codes put together to form a single category. This has resulted in Table 4 of interactive categories. Each one of these comprises the descriptions that came from different actions and elements of the studied cases and are now defined by a set of properties.

Table 4. Interactive categories from the case study
Full size table

This table confirms the existence of common characteristics among the various cases. Some notions of interaction seem to be common in all, although different actions unfold. But it is always a user decision, to reorganize information and advance to fulfill a certain task.

The horizontal browsing menu seems to be the preferred solution to make available a set of several accesses to extend the experience, promoting a space saver.

Elements arranged in the GUI have both spatial and time concerns. Several areas of the screen appear and disappear, depending on the needs to increase information view and consequently, more browsing possibilities. But they also show an anticipation of desirable functions to perform, giving all the options and sometimes, transforming elements in order to execute actions.

Also helpful is the amount of entries related to the unfolding of options when hidden at first. The pull down menu is perhaps the most notable one. By accessing a visual element, it extends to various directions, showing several options to accomplish tasks or to access new information.

Most situations show the course of a task from an initial request. This demonstrates the preparation of the artifact to execute. But we can also note that interaction is not only due to existing elements in the system or interface, but also and especially due to activities, which require user participation.

7 Conclusion

Considering printed matter as an interactive system may benefit print technology and graphic design. While product and interaction design are almost combined from the very beginning, the large production of printed matter has been keen on deploying such an interactive approach. Their nature and technologies have origins in many past habits that do not seem to encompass concerns we have in present days. And yet, the everyday purpose of most printed matter is still to reach its users.

Digital artifacts deviate from a purely visual concern, unlike printed matter. Never denying the importance of visual elements, digital artifacts are more concerned with time of action and behavior. We can observe it in the studied cases and in the list of interactive categories hat we present, which function as principles for inclusion in graphic design.

The main condition of interaction seems to be the availability for use and therefore, interaction requires the proximity of a person. Printed matter should become a material result able to respond, to transform the information contained in it and its configuration in order to reach and relate to people.

To carry out this transformation, printed matter may adopt the mentioned categories. Not in the sense of a graphic transposition, but a behavioral one. Printed matter can then be an interactive system if it allows users to reorganize information and move elements of the layout; if it takes advantages of folding and unfolding schemes to communicate and most of all, if it conceives time and space for user to became a participant in completing the experience.

These interactive categories are instrumental in pursuing the research intention, but they are however still basic. The results derive from a set of cases that are representative, but the digital realm is increasing everyday. We can expect to further develop the study in other digital media, especially in mobile devices and probably obtain more specific results. They also need to be tested in a print media model, with its own properties.

We have generated an initial source for the development of print interactive-based solutions by studying digital media in some detail. From this point it seems possible to develop print media, in different dimensions, formats or materials and to improve its material connection to its users.