Beatfield: An Open-Meaning Audiovisual Exploration

Conference paper


This paper presents Beatfield, a musical installation that allows players to explore an audiovisual landscape by positioning tangible objects on an augmented game board. The underlying idea of the installation was the proposition of an artefact that could encourage heterogeneous interpretations. Beatfield had to offer a multitude of interpretations and ways of appropriating the system; there would be not a right or wrong way to play with it. To this end, the design of the installation integrated related work on open-ended interaction, ambiguity, and appropriation with enigmatic aesthetics, ambiguous interaction strategies, and unpredictable mapping between user input and audiovisual output. The results collected from a user study confirmed the potential of the installation to stimulate a variety of different experiences and interaction strategies.


Interaction Strategy Rhythmic Pattern Tangible Interface Rhythmical Pattern Tangible Object 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Bødker S (2015) Third-wave HCI, 10 years later – participation and sharing. Interactions 22(5):24–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dix A (2007) Designing for appropriation. In: Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: HCI… but not as we know it-Vol 2, pp 27–30Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dourish P (2003) The appropriation of interactive technologies: some lessons from placeless documents. Comput Supported Coop Work 12(4):465–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gaver WW, Beaver J, Benford S (2003). Ambiguity as a resource for design. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 233–240Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Menestrina Z, Bianchi M, Siesser A, Masu R, Conci A (2014) OHR. In: Proceedings of the first ACM SIGCHI annual symposium on computer-human Interaction in Play, pp 355–358Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Morreale F, De Angeli A, O’Modhrain S (2014) Musical interface design: an experience-oriented framework. In: Proceedings of NIMEGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sengers P, Gaver B (2006) Staying open to interpretation: engaging multiple meanings in design and evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 6th conference on designing interactive systems, pp 99–108Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zappi V, McPherson A (2014) Dimensionality and appropriation in digital musical instrument design. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, pp 455–460Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.InterAction Laboratory, Department of Information Engineering and Computer ScienceUniversity of TrentoTrentoItaly
  2. 2.Centre for Digital Music, School of EECSQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations