Advertisement

Designing from Embodied Knowing: Practice-Based Research at the Intersection Between Embodied Interaction and Somatics

  • Yves CandauEmail author
  • Thecla Schiphorst
  • Jules Françoise
Chapter
Part of the Human–Computer Interaction Series book series (HCIS)

Abstract

While third wave HCI foregrounds experience and embodiment, the design paradigm was initially terse on methodologies to guide embodied inquiries through actual movement techniques and practices. We consider here a number of related design approaches developed to amend this gap. They incorporate somatic practices into their design processes, and draw on conceptual frameworks interweaving phenomenology, pragmatism, and embodied cognition. Somatic practices are first-person methodologies to investigate and cultivate the embodied self. They involve sustained learning strategies integrating movement, attention, and a range of sensory modalities. While embodied processes are complex and elusive, somatic practices provide instrumental methodologies to circulate between the fullness of felt experience, and a variety of views to articulate and elaborate these experiences. In synergy with embodied interaction, the field of somatics has much to offer to flesh out design practices.

References

  1. Alexander FM (2001) The use of the self. Orion, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Barlow M, Davies TA (2002) An examined life: Marjory Barlow and the Alexander Technique. Mornum Time Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergström I, Jonsson M (2016) Sarka: sonification and somaesthetic appreciation design. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international symposium on movement and computing. ACM, Thessaloniki, Greece, pp 1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2948910.2948922
  4. Berthoz A (2012) Simplexity: simplifying principles for a complex world. Yale University Press, New HavenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernstein NA (1967) The co-ordination and regulation of movements. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Cage J (1961) Silence: lectures and writings. Wesleyan, MiddletownGoogle Scholar
  7. Candau Y, Françoise J, Alaoui SF, Schiphorst T (2017) Cultivating kinaesthetic awareness through interaction: perspectives from somatic practices and embodied cognition. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on movement computing. ACM, London, UK, pp 21:1– 21:8.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3077981.3078042
  8. Cohen BB (1994) Sensing, feeling, and action: the experiential anatomy of body-mind centering. Contact Collaborations, NorthamptonGoogle Scholar
  9. Depraz N, Varela FJ, Vermersch P (2003) On becoming aware: a pragmatics of experiencing. John Benjamins, AmsterdamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dewey JM (1939) Biography of John Dewey. In: Schilpp PA (ed) The philosophy of John Dewey. Tudor Publishing, New York, pp 3–45Google Scholar
  11. Dewey J (2008a) Knowing and the known. In: Boydston JA (ed) The later works: 1925–1953, vol 16:1949–1952. Southern Illinois University Press, CarbondaleGoogle Scholar
  12. Dewey J (2008b) Art as experience. In: Boydston JA (ed) The later works: 1925–1953, vol 10:1934. Southern Illinois University Press, CarbondaleGoogle Scholar
  13. Dewey J (2008c) Body and mind. In: Boydston JA (ed) The later works: 1925–1953, vol 3:1927–1928. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, pp 25–40Google Scholar
  14. Dewey J (2008d) Experience and nature. In: Boydston JA (ed) The later works: 1925–1953, vol 1:1925. Southern Illinois University Press, CarbondaleGoogle Scholar
  15. Dimon T (2008) Anatomy of the moving body: a basic course in bones, muscles, and joints. North Atlantic Books, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  16. Dimon T (2011) The body in motion: its evolution and design. North Atlantic Books, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  17. Dourish P (2001) Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Dourish P (2013) Epilogue: where the action was, wasn’t, should have been, and might yet be. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact 20:2:1–2:4.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2442106.2442108 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Feltham F, Loke L, van den Hoven E, Hannam J, Bongers B (2014) The slow floor: increasing creative agency while walking on an interactive surface. In: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on tangible, embedded and embodied interaction. ACM, Munich, pp 105–112.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2540930.2540974
  20. Françoise J, Candau Y, Fdili Alaoui S, Schiphorst T (2017) Designing for kinesthetic awareness: revealing user experiences through secondperson inquiry. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, Denver, pp 5171–5183.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025714
  21. Ginot I (2010) From Shusterman’s somaesthetics to a radical epistemology of somatics. Dance Res J 42:12–29.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0149767700000802 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Godard H (1995) Le geste et sa perception. In: Michel M, Ginot I (eds) La danse au XXème siècle. Bordas, Paris, pp 224–229Google Scholar
  23. Hanna T (1986) What is somatics? Somat J Bodily Arts Sci 5:3–8Google Scholar
  24. Harrison S, Tatar D, Sengers P (2007) The three paradigms of HCI. In: Alt. Chi. Session at the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, San Jose, CA, USA, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  25. Höök K, Jonsson M, Ståhl A, Mercurio J (2016) Somaesthetic appreciation design. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, San Jose.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858583
  26. Hurley S (2002) Consciousness in action. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  27. Hurley S (2008) The shared circuits model (SCM): how control, mirroring, and simulation can enable imitation, deliberation, and mindreading. Behav Brain Sci 31:1–58.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X07003123 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Johnson M (2007) The meaning of the body: aesthetics of human understanding. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Johnson M (2010) Embodied knowing through art. In: Biggs M, Karlsson H (eds) The Routledge companion to research in the arts. Routledge, New York, pp 141–151Google Scholar
  30. Johnson M (2015) The aesthetics of embodied life. In: Aesthetics and the embodied mind: beyond art theory and the cartesian mind-body dichotomy. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 23–38Google Scholar
  31. Jonsson M, Ståhl A, Mercurio J, Karlsson A, Ramani N, Höök K (2016) The aesthetics of heat: guiding awareness with thermal stimuli. In: Proceedings of the TEI ‘16: tenth international conference on tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction. ACM, Eindhoven, pp 109–117.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2839462.2839487
  32. Kiverstein J, Clark A (2009) Introduction: mind embodied, embedded, enacted: one church or many? Topoi 28:1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-008-9041-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lakoff G, Johnson M (1980) Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  34. Loke L, Robertson T (2013) Moving and making strange: an embodied approach to movement-based interaction design. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact 20:7:1–7:25.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2442106.2442113 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moravec H (1988) Mind children: the future of robot and human intelligence. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  36. Paxton S (1997a) Transcription: the small dance, the stand. In: Nelson L, Stark Smith N (eds) Contact quarterly’s contact improvisation sourcebook. Contact Editions, Northampton, pp 107–109Google Scholar
  37. Paxton S (1997b) Drafting interior techniques. In: Nelson L, Stark Smith N (eds) Contact quarterly’s contact improvisation sourcebook. Contact Editions, Northampton, pp 255–260Google Scholar
  38. Paxton S (2008) Material for the spine: a movement study. Contredanse, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  39. Paxton S (2015) Why standing? Steve Paxton talks about how the stand relates to stage fright and entrainment in contact improvisation. Contact Q J Winter/Spring 2015:37–40Google Scholar
  40. Rudrauf D, Lutz A, Cosmelli D, Lachaux J-P, Le Van Quyen M (2003) From autopoiesis to neurophenomenology: Francisco Varela’s exploration of the biophysics of being. Biol Res 36:27–65.  https://doi.org/10.4067/S0716-97602003000100005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schiphorst T (2005) Exhale: (breath between bodies). In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 electronic art and animation catalog. ACM, Los Angeles, pp 62–63.  https://doi.org/10.1145/1086057.1086087
  42. Schiphorst T (2009a) The varieties of user experience: bridging embodied methodologies from somatics and performance to human computer interaction. University of PlymouthGoogle Scholar
  43. Schiphorst T (2009) Soft(n): toward a somaesthetics of touch. In: CHI ’09 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. ACM, Boston, pp 2427–2438.  https://doi.org/10.1145/1520340.1520345
  44. Sheets-Johnstone M (2017) In praise of phenomenology. Phenomenol Pract 11:5–17Google Scholar
  45. Shusterman R (2008) Body consciousness: a philosophy of mindfulness and somaesthetics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shusterman R (2012) Thinking through the body: essays in somaesthetics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ståhl A, Jonsson M, Mercurio J, Karlsson A, Höök K, Banka Johnson E-C (2016) The soma mat and breathing light. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. ACM, San Jose, pp 305–308.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2851581.2889464
  48. Varela FJ (1999) The specious present: a neurophenomenology of time consciousness. In: Petitot J, Pachoud B, Roy J-M (eds) Naturalizing phenomenology. Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp 266–314Google Scholar
  49. Varela FJ, Shear J (eds) (1999) The view from within: first person approaches to the study of consciousness. Imprint Academic, ThorvertonGoogle Scholar
  50. Varela FJ, Thompson E, Rosch E (1991) The embodied mind: cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  51. Wilson M (2002) Six views of embodied cognition. Psychon Bull Rev 9:625–636.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196322 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Woodhull A (1997) The small dance, physiology and improvisation. In: Nelson L, Stark Smith N (eds) Contact quarterly’s contact improvisation sourcebook. Contact Editions, Northampton, pp 24–26Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yves Candau
    • 1
    Email author
  • Thecla Schiphorst
    • 1
  • Jules Françoise
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Interactive Arts and TechnologySimon Fraser UniversitySurreyCanada
  2. 2.LIMSICNRS, Université Paris-Sud Université Paris-SaclayOrsayFrance

Personalised recommendations