Advertisement

Physical Computing | When Digital Systems Meet the Real World

  • Alan DixEmail author
  • Steve Gill
Chapter
Part of the Human–Computer Interaction Series book series (HCIS)

Abstract

Maker culture, from soldering sensors on an Arduino to 3D printing a prosthetic limb, has established that hobbyist computing is intimately rooted in the physical world. In education, ‘physical computing’ courses have captured this interest, introducing code through its physical interactions. Interpreted more broadly, physical computing sits at the nexus of a number of strands within HCI including tangible interaction, ubiquitous computing, and spatial/mobile systems. Ideas of embodiment and an experiential approach to design are natural frameworks within which to view physical computing and so it is almost tautologically third wave. However, the hidden action of computation in certain kinds of sensor-rich ubicomp and the AI turn in computing calls any simple identification into question. Product design appears to encounter the ‘waves’ in a different order; as its artefacts become more digital, it is having to consider the agency of computing and adopt more analytic approaches in research and design. Physical computing forces us to regard the ‘waves’ less as a teleological progression, and more as complementary approaches addressing different facets of human experience with physically embodied digital technology. Furthermore, it suggests there are new challenges ahead as we seek to find research and design paradigms that use physical objects as part of rich collaborations with active computation.

References

  1. Avrahami D, Hudson S (2002) Forming interactivity: a tool for rapid prototyping of physical interactive products. In: Ballagas et al (eds) Proceedings of DIS’02. ACM, New York, pp 141–146Google Scholar
  2. Baldé CP, Forti V, Gray, V et al (2017) The global e-waste monitor. http://collections.unu.edu/view/UNU:6341. Accessed 2 Jan 2018
  3. BBC (2016) BBC micro: bit launches to a generation of UK students. http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2016/bbc-micro-bit-schools-launch. Accessed 13 Dec 2017
  4. Bell G, Brooke T, Churchill E et al (2003) Intimate ubiquitous computing. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp’03). ACM, New York, pp 3–6Google Scholar
  5. Bødker S (2015) Third-wave HCI, 10 years later—participation and sharing. Interactions 22(5):24–31.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2804405 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bridge M (2017) Bitcoin network ‘is using more energy than world can sustain’. The Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bitcoin-network-is-using-more-energy-than-world-can-sustain-sqks6rpk0. Accessed 6 Dec 2017
  7. Clark A (1989) Microcognition: philosophy, cognitive science and parallel processing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark A (1998) Being there: putting brain, body and the world together again. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  9. Culverhouse I, Gill S (2009) Bringing concepts to life: introducing a rapid interactive sketch modelling toolkit for industrial designers. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on tangible and embedded interaction, pp 359–362Google Scholar
  10. Digiconomist (2017) Bitcoin energy consumption index. https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption. Accessed 14 Dec 2017
  11. Dix A (1992) Human issues in the use of pattern recognition techniques. In: Beale R, Finlay J (eds) Neural networks and pattern recognition in human computer interaction. Ellis Horwood, Amsterdam, pp 429–451Google Scholar
  12. Dix A (1994) Computer-supported cooperative work – a framework. In: Rosenburg D, Hutchison C (eds) Design issues in CSCW. Springer, Berlin, pp 23–37Google Scholar
  13. Dix A (1995) Cooperation without (reliable) communication: interfaces for mobile applications. Distrib Syst Eng 2(3):171–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 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 – volume 2. BCS Learning & Development Ltd, Swindon, pp 27–30Google Scholar
  15. Dix A (2010) Struggling with Heidegger. http://alandix.com/blog/2010/08/12/struggling-with-heidegger/. Accessed 13 Dec 2017
  16. Dix A (2017) I in an other’s eye. AI & Society (in press).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-017-0694-7
  17. Dix A, Ghazali M, Gill S et al (2009) Physigrams: modelling devices for natural interaction. In: Formal aspects of computing. Springer, 21(6): 613–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dix A, Gill S, Ramduny-Ellis D et al (2010) Design and physicality – towards an understanding of physicality in design and use. In: Designing for the 21st century: interdisciplinary methods and findings. Gower, London, pp 172–189Google Scholar
  19. Dix A, Gill S, Ramduny-Ellis D et al (2018) TouchIT. Oxford University Press, Oxford. http://physicality.org/TouchIT/ Google Scholar
  20. Fitzmaurice GW, Ishii H, Buxton WAS (1995) Bricks: laying the foundations for graspable user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘95). ACM, New York, pp 442–449.  https://doi.org/10.1145/223904.223964 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Garcia C (2012) The BBC micro. http://www.computerhistory.org/atchm/the-bbc-micro/. Accessed 13 Dec 2017
  22. Gibson J (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin Company, BostonGoogle Scholar
  23. Gill S, Walker D, Loudon G et al (2008) Rapid development of tangible interactive appliances: achieving the fidelity/time balance. In: Hornecker E et al (eds) Special issue on tangible and embedded interaction. Int J Arts Technol 1(3/4): 309–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gray W, Fu W (2001) Ignoring perfect knowledge in-the-world for imperfect knowledge in-the-head. In: Proceedings of CHI ‘01. ACM, Seattle, pp 112–119Google Scholar
  25. Hare J, Gill S, Loudon G et al (2014) Active and passive physicality: making the most of low-fidelity physical interactive prototypes. Int J Des Res. Inderscience Publishing LtdGoogle Scholar
  26. 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, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  27. Hartmann B, Klemmer SR, Bernstein M et al (2006) Reflective physical prototyping through integrated design, test, and analysis. In: Proceedings of UIST. ACM, New York, pp 299–308Google Scholar
  28. Heidegger M (1927) Sein und Zeit. (English translation: Being and Time. Harper, 2008)Google Scholar
  29. Hutchins E (1994) Cognition in the wild. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  30. Hutchinson H, Mackay W, Westerlund B et al (2003) Technology probes: inspiring design for and with families. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘03). ACM, New York, pp 17–24.  https://doi.org/10.1145/642611.642616 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Igoe T (2004) What is physical computing?. http://www.tigoe.net/blog/what-is-physical-computing/. Accessed 7 Dec 2017
  32. Ishii H, Ullmer B (1997) Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, Atlanta, pp 234–241.  https://doi.org/10.1145/258549.258715 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kushner D (2011) The making of Arduino. In: IEEE Spectrum. https://spectrum.ieee.org/geek-life/hands-on/the-making-of-arduino. Accessed 7 Dec 2017
  34. Leahy S (2017) Each U.S. family trashes 400 iPhones’ worth of e-waste a year. National Geographic. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/12/e-waste-monitor-report-glut/. Accessed 13 Dec 2017
  35. Long J, Dowell J (1989) Conceptions of the discipline of HCI: craft, applied science, and engineering. In: Sutcliffe V, Macaulay L (eds) Proceedings of the fifth conference of the british computer society, human–computer interaction specialist group on people and computers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,UK, pp 9–32Google Scholar
  36. Merleau-Ponty M (1945) Phénomènologie de la Perception (English translation: Phenomenology of Perception, Routledge, 1958)Google Scholar
  37. Morgan A et al (2014) Blue sky thinking meets green field usability: can mobile internet software engineering bridge the rural divide? Local Econ 29(6–7):750–761.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0269094214548399 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mueller S, Dix A, Phillips M et al (2012) Interactive construction: interactive fabrication of functional mechanical devices. In: Proceedings of UIST ‘12. ACM, New York, pp 599–606.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2380116.2380191 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Norman D, Draper S (1986) User centered system design: new perspectives on human-computer interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  40. O’Sullivan D, Igoe T (2004) Physical computing: sensing and controlling the physical world with computers, 1st edn. Thomson, Boston. ISBN:159200346XGoogle Scholar
  41. Pfaff G, ten Hagen PJW (1985) Seeheim workshop on user Interface management systems. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  42. Policy Lab (2014) About us. https://openpolicy.blog.gov.uk/about/. Accessed 7 Dec 2017
  43. Raspberry Pi Foundation (n.d.) About us. https://www.raspberrypi.org/about/. Accessed 7 Dec 2017
  44. Rauterberg M, Fjeld M, Krueger H et al (1998) BUILD-IT: a planning tool for construction and design. In: CHI 98 conference summary on human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘98). ACM, New York, pp 177–178.  https://doi.org/10.1145/286498.286657 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. RSE (2013) Spreading the benefits of digital participation: an interim report for consultation. Edinburgh, Royal Society of Edinburgh, pp 22–24Google Scholar
  46. Schön D (1984) The reflective practitioner. Basic Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  47. Schroeder S (2017) Bitcoin consumes a ton of energy, but it’s not as bad as you’ve heard. Mashable UK. http://mashable.com/2017/12/01/bitcoin-energy/. Accessed 14 Dec 2017
  48. Shneiderman B (1983) Direct manipulation: a step beyond programming languages. IEEE Comput 16(8):57–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. SIA, SRC (2015) Rebooting the IT revolution: a call to action. Semiconductor Industry Association and Semiconductor Research Corporation. http://www.semiconductors.org/clientuploads/Resources/RITR%20WEB%20version%20FINAL.pdf. Accessed 7 Dec 2017
  50. Smith DC, Irby C, Kimball R et al (1982) Designing the star user interface. BYTE 7(4):242–282Google Scholar
  51. Star SL, Griesemer JR (1989) Institutional ecology, translations and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–1939. Soc Stud Sci 19(3):387–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Suchman L (1987) Plans and situated actions: the problem of human–machine interaction. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  53. Sutherland I (1963) SketchPad: a man-machine graphical communication system. In: AFIPS conference proceedings, 1963, p 323–328Google Scholar
  54. Turchi T, Malizia A, Dix A (2015) Fostering the adoption of pervasive displays in public spaces using tangible end-user programming. In: IEEE symposium on visual languages and human-centric computing, Atlanta, Georgia, US, p 18–22Google Scholar
  55. Villar N, Gellerson H (2007) A malleable control structure for softwired user interfaces. In: Proceedings of tangible and embedded interaction conference (TEI ‘07). ACM, New York, pp 49–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wang D, Zhang Y, Gu T et al (2012) E-Block: a tangible programming tool for children. In: Adjunct proceedings of the 25th annual ACM symposium on user interface software and technology, 2012Google Scholar
  57. Weichel C, Lau M, Kim D et al (2014) MixFab: a mixed-reality environment for personal fabrication. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘14). ACM, New York, pp 3855–3864.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557090 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Weiser M (1991) The computer for the 21st century. Sci Am 265(3):94–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Winograd T, Flores F (1986) Understanding computers and cognition: a new foundation for design. Addison-Wesley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  60. Zampelis D, Loudon G, Gill S et al (2012) IRIS: augmented reality in rapid prototyping. In: Proceedings of the 13th rapid design, prototyping & manufacturing conference. Lancaster University, LancasterGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.HCI Centre, University of BirminghamBirminghamUK
  2. 2.Cardiff Metropolitan UniversityCardiffWales

Personalised recommendations