Designerly Pick and Place: Coding Physical Model Making to Inform Material-Based Robotic Interaction
To study how designers explore ideas when making physical models we ran an experiment in which architects and undergraduate students constructed a dream house made of blocks. We coded their interactions in terms of robotic pick and place actions: adding, subtracting, modifying and relocating blocks. Architects differed from students along three dimensions. First, architects were more controlled with the blocks; they used fewer blocks overall and fewer variations. Second, architects appear to think less about house features and more about spatial relationships and material constraints. Lastly, architects experiment with multiple block positions within the model more frequently, repeatedly testing block placements. Together these findings suggest that architects physically explore the design space more effectively than students by exploiting material interactions. This embodied know-how is something next generation robots will need to support. Implications for material-based robotic interaction are discussed.
KeywordsModify Interaction Perceptual Action Material Interaction Interaction Sequence Verbal Protocol
The authors would like to thank the MIT-SUTD International Design Center for funding this research.
- Anderson M (2003) Embodied cognition: a field guide. Artif Intell 1–40Google Scholar
- Kirsh D (2011) Thinking with the body. In: Proceedings from the 30th annual cognitive science societyGoogle Scholar
- Kohler M, Gramazio F, Willmann J (2014) The robotic touch: how robots change architecture. Park Books, ZurichGoogle Scholar
- Maher M, Gonzalez A, Grace, K, Clausner T (2014) Tangible interaction design: can we design tangibles to enhance creative cognition? In: Sixth international conference on design computing and cognition, London, UK, 23–25 June 2014Google Scholar
- Mills C (2011) Designing with models. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Schon D (1992) Designing as reflective conversation with the materials of a design situation. Behav Res 5(1):3–14Google Scholar
- Willis K et al (2011) Interactive fabrication: new interfaces for digital fabrication. Tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction Conference, PortugalGoogle Scholar
- Zoran A, Paradiso J (2013) FreeD—a freehand digital sculpting tool. In: The 31st international conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar