A Review of Proxemics in ‘Smart Game-Playing’

  • Liliana Vale Costa
  • Ana Isabel Veloso
  • Óscar Mealha
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 80)


Recent developments in the game industry and in the paradigm of Internet of Things (IoT) have heightened the need for developing innovative solutions to foster movement-based interactions and bring people together in both physical and digital (phygital) environments. Although the existing knowledge on interaction design in game experience is quite extensive, little is known about proxemics in game design and how it can be explored to conceive “smart game-playing”. This paper reports on the use of proxemics in digital games and its utility in enhancing game-mediated interactions applied to ‘smart ecosystems’. Eight papers published between 2003 and 2016 in English-language publications related with proxemics in digital games were reviewed and met inclusion criteria. This review presents a set of recommendations for applying proxemics in game-mediated interactions and; discusses its role in enabling informational literacy to foster smart learning ecosystems.


Proxemics Learning Game-mediated interactions Design recommendations Smart learning ecosystems Phygital place 



Research reported in this publication was supported by FCT (Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia) and ESF (European Social Fund) under Community Support Framework III SFRH/BD/101042/2014 and also supported by the grant SFRH/BSAB/128152/2016 (Fundo Social Europeu and Portuguese financial resources from the Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education - MCTES).


  1. Albino V, Berardi U, Dangelico RM (2015) Smart cities: definitions, dimensions, performance, and initiatives. J Urban Technol 22:3–21. doi: 10.1080/10630732.2014.942092 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aslerd (2016) Timisoara declaration on better learning for a better world through people centred smart learning ecosystems, pp 1–9Google Scholar
  3. Caragliu A, Del Bo C, Nijkamp P (2011) Smart cities in Europe. J Urban Technol 18:65–82. doi: 10.1080/10630732.2011.601117 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Garner J, Wood G, Danilovic S, et al (2014) Intangle: exploring interpersonal bodily interactions through sharing controllers. In: Proceedings of the first ACM SIGCHI annual symposium on computer-human interaction in play, pp 413–414Google Scholar
  5. Garner J, Wood G, Pijnappel S, et al (2013) Combining moving bodies with digital elements. In: Proceedings of the 9th Australasian conference on interactive entertainment matters of life and death - IE 2013, pp 1–10. doi: 10.1145/2513002.2513014
  6. Gibson JJ (1986) The ecological approach to visual perception. J Soc Architect Historians 39:332. doi: 10.2307/989638 Google Scholar
  7. Giovannella C, Jansen D, Maillet K, Texeira A, Vasiu R, Koch G Timosara declaration Better Learning for a Better World through People Centred Smart Learning Ecosystems, 19th of May 1–9Google Scholar
  8. Given LM (2008) The sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods, p 1043. MIT Press. doi: 10.4135/9781412963909
  9. Greenberg S (2011) Opportunities for proxemic interactions in ubicomp (keynote). In: Campos P, Graham N, Jorge J, Nunes N, Palanque P, Winckler M (eds) Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2011. INTERACT 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6946, pp 3–10. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  10. Grønbæk JE, Jakobsen KB, Petersen MG, Rasmussen MK, Winge J, Stougaard J (2016) Designing for children’s collective music making: how spatial orientation and configuration matter. In: Proceedings of the 9th nordic conference on human-computer interaction. ACM, New York. doi: 10.1145/2971485.2971552
  11. Grubert J, Morrison A, Munz H, Reitmayr G (2012) Playing it real : magic lens and static peephole interfaces for games in a public space. In: Proceedings of MobileHCI 2012, vol 10. doi: 10.1145/2371574.2371609
  12. Hall E (1969) The hidden dimension. Anchor Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Holling CS (2001) Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems 4:390–405. doi: 10.1007/s10021-001-0101-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Inderbitzin M, Wierenga S, Väljamäe A, Bernardet U, Verschure PF (2009) Social cooperation and competition in the mixed reality space eXperience induction machine XIM. In: virtual reality, pp 153–158Google Scholar
  15. McCall C, Singer T (2015) Facing off with unfair others: introducing proxemic imaging as an implicit measure of approach and avoidance during social interaction. PLoS ONE. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117532 Google Scholar
  16. Mueller F, Stellmach S, Greenberg S, et al (2014) Proxemics play: understanding proxemics for designing digital play experiences. In: Proceedings of the 2014 conference on designing interactive systems - DIS 2014, pp 533–542. doi: 10.1145/2598510.2598532
  17. Nitsche M (2008) Video game spaces: image, play, and structure in 3D worlds. MIT Press, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Norman DA (2013) The design of everyday things: revised and expanded edition. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Pearce C (2008) Spatial literacy: reading (and writing) game space. In: Proceedings future and reality of gaming (FROG), 17–19 OctoberGoogle Scholar
  20. Rehm M, André E, Nischt M (2005) Let’s come together—social navigation behaviors of virtual and real humans. In: Maybury M, Stock O, Wahlster W (eds) International conference on intelligent technologies for interactive entertainment, pp 124–133. Springer, Heidelberg. doi: 10.1007/11590323_13
  21. UNESCO (2011) Creating and sustaining literate environments. UNESCO Bangkok Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education, Bangkok, Thailand. ISBN 978-92-9223-379-2Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Liliana Vale Costa
    • 1
  • Ana Isabel Veloso
    • 1
  • Óscar Mealha
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Communication and Art, CIC Digital/DigiMediaUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal

Personalised recommendations