Advertisement

Experience Tradeoff with Technological Advancement

  • Bharat SarkarEmail author
  • Shatarupa Thakurta Roy
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 34)

Abstract

In the course of making life convenient, human activities tend to be losing the richness in interaction, i.e. much lesser engagement and involvement of senses to address all the different human skills like perceptual motor, emotional and cognitive, but rather address mostly cognitive skills. Hence, it not only becomes cognitive load but people don’t get to practice the skills. Instead of decrying over technology, the author tries to understand the different reasons that contribute to the above. The author proposes that technology if used properly can bring back the lost experiences and also enrich the interaction. An effort has been made to help designers realize the importance of emotion, experience and rich interaction, then exemplify it with a case study of coffeemaker, and design of a tea maker and communicating the message to users while outlining the different guidelines that can help designers fulfill their role.

Keywords

Experience design Emotional design Rich interaction Tangible interaction Technology Human skills Cognitive load Senses Electronics 

References

  1. 1.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. xv, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 151, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 150, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Michel, R., Design Research Now, Birkhäuser Verlag AG, Germany, pp. 139 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Heskett, J.: Tooth picks and Logos, Oxford University Press, UK, 21 Mar 2002Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. xi, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 27, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Perception, Wikipedia.org, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception
  9. 9.
    Bourguet, M.L.: Designing and Prototyping Multimodal Commands. In: Proceedings of Human-Computer Interaction (INTERACT’03), pp. 717–720 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ferri, F., Paolozzi, S.: Analyzing multimodal interaction. In: P. Grifoni (Ed.), Multimodal Human Computer Interaction and Pervasive Services. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. pp. 19–33 (2009) doi: 10.4018/978-1-60566-386-9.ch002
  11. 11.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 125, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 70, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 111, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 210, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 180, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 184, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 191, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 197, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Norman, D.A.: Design of Everyday things, p. 192, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Norman, D.A.; Design of Everyday things, pp. 194, Basic Books, New York (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Design Programme, Indian Institute of TechnologyKanpurIndia

Personalised recommendations