TOP
Search the Dagstuhl Website
Looking for information on the websites of the individual seminars? - Then please:
Not found what you are looking for? - Some of our services have separate websites, each with its own search option. Please check the following list:
Schloss Dagstuhl - LZI - Logo
Schloss Dagstuhl Services
Seminars
Within this website:
External resources:
  • DOOR (for registering your stay at Dagstuhl)
  • DOSA (for proposing future Dagstuhl Seminars or Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshops)
Publishing
Within this website:
External resources:
dblp
Within this website:
External resources:
  • the dblp Computer Science Bibliography


Dagstuhl Seminar 13452

Proxemics in Human-Computer Interaction

( Nov 03 – Nov 08, 2013 )

(Click in the middle of the image to enlarge)

Permalink
Please use the following short url to reference this page: https://www.dagstuhl.de/13452

Organizers

Coordinator

Contact

Dagstuhl Seminar Wiki

Shared Documents


Impacts

Motivation

Over time, people encounter different dimensions of proxemics in everyday life, e.g., in face-to-face communication while discussing ongoing work with colleagues, while in an elevator with strangers when private space is suspended, or while at home with their families. In disciplines like architecture and interior design, knowledge about proxemics has been used for decades to model use of space for face-to-face interactions, urban planning, and environmental design. In human-computer interaction (HCI) and human-robot interaction (HRI), however, the use of proxemics is fairly new, and both disciplines just started to employ proxemics and related theories and models (e.g., Hall’s theory of proxemics in his book “The Hidden Dimension”) to design new interaction concepts that act on proxemics features. Several recent designs explore the use of human body position, orientation, and movement for implicit interaction with large displays, for supporting collaboration, and to control and communicate with robots. This research is facilitated by the operationalization of proxemics for ubiquitous computing, toolkits for using tracking data, and new paradigms such as reality-based interaction (RBI) that take a fresh look at the role of the user’s body and the environment in HCI. However, work on understanding how proxemics can be used for HCI (and HRI) has only just begun (e.g., Proxemic Interactions).

In the seminar, we will use Greenberg et al.’s dimensions on Proxemic Interactions and Pedersen et al.’s Egocentric Interaction Paradigm as starting points. Although these theories are based on findings on how humans perceive proxemics, they might be incomplete, particularly since human perception is much more subtle, gradual, and less discrete than illustrated in Hall’s reaction bubbles (proxemic zones), for instance. In addition these discrete zones cope with only the physical features (perception of interpersonal distance); other features such as psychological and psychophysical features have not yet been considered in HCI. However, these features are perceptible by human sensors, e.g., olfaction, equilibrioception, thermoception. Current theories neither give guidelines nor provide sufficient methodologies for “good” or “bad” designs for systems employing proxemics.

We think the time is right for bringing researchers with different backgrounds and experiences together to map out the important questions that remain unanswered and to generate ideas for developing an agenda for future research on proxemics in HCI. The structure of the seminar is based on the three pillars technology, vision, and theory that will be equally exposed in seminar activities. We will create a diversified program that allows participants to introduce themselves and their work in brief Pecha Kucha presentations, offers one impulse talk for each of the three pillars, and guarantees sufficient time for discussions and breakout sessions for creative work, and of course informal discussions during spare-time activities. The following perspectives assigned to each pillar serve as basis for our discussions and breakout sessions.

Reflect on technology for interactive spaces and proxemic ecologies that:

  • takes place across device boundaries on multiple public, private, mobile, and tangible displays
  • involves collaboration of co-located users, e.g., around interactive tabletops or in front of large vertical screens
  • is based on non-traditional post-WIMP interaction styles, e.g., pen-based, multi-touch, and tangible user interfaces
  • seeks new forms for providing functionality beyond the traditional WIMP model of “applications,” e.g., tracking users’ spatial location and movements in physical space to navigation within large, digital information spaces.

Discuss future directions and create a coherent vision to:

  • critically reflect in light of cognitive theories of interaction
  • fuse the perspectives of user researchers, designers, and technologists, primarily to achieve a more realistic vision
  • transfer knowledge between the different communities
  • publish it to the HCI community in a shareable format (e.g., web page, YouTube video)

Exploit current theory on proxemics in general to achieve a productive and critical reflection and prospect to:

  • better understand HCI of proxemics
  • develop methodologies for designing systems that employ proxemics
  • understand how physical, psychological, and psychophysical features collate and can be transferred into a coherent theory of proxemics in HCI
  • discuss the open question regarding the extent to which proxemics can leverage or constrain human-computer interaction.

As an outcome of the seminar, we expect to identify, develop, and discuss central issues, challenges, and prospects regarding the directions for future research of proxemics in HCI, which can be published as a Special Issue for the Journal of Personal and Ubiquitous Computing or a book in Human-Computer Interaction Series by Springer Publishers. Of course, an immediate outcome of the seminar is the development of a community of researchers interested in proxemics for human-computer interaction.


Summary

Introduction

Over time, people encounter different dimensions of proxemics in everyday life, such as in face-to-face communication while discussing ongoing work with colleagues, in an elevator with strangers as private space is suspended, or at home with their families. In disciplines like architecture and interior design, knowledge about proxemics has been used for decades to model use of space for face-to-face interactions, urban planning, and environmental design. In human-computer interaction (HCI) and human-robot interaction (HRI), the use of proxemics is fairly new, and both disciplines recently began employing proxemics and related theories and models (e.g., Hall's theory of proxemics in his book, "The Hidden Dimension" [2]) to design new interaction concepts that act on proxemics features. Several recent designs explore the use of human body position, orientation, and movement for implicit interaction with large displays, supporting collaboration, and to control and communicate with robots. This research is facilitated by the operationalization of proxemics for ubiquitous computing [16], toolkits to track proxemics [7,8,9] and new paradigms such as reality-based interaction (RBI) [4] or Blended Interaction [6] that take a fresh look at the role of the user's body and the environment in HCI. However, work on understanding how proxemics can be used for HCI (and HRI) has only just begun (e.g., Proxemic Interactions [1]).

Goals and Structure

In the seminar, we used Greenberg et al.'s dimensions on Proxemic Interactions [1] and Pedersen et al.'s Egocentric Interaction Paradigm [11] as starting points. These theories are based on findings regarding how humans perceive proxemics; therefore, they might be incomplete, particularly since human perception is much more subtle, gradual, and less discrete than illustrated in Hall's reaction bubbles (proxemic zones [2]). In addition, these discrete zones cope with only the physical features (perception of interpersonal distance). Other features, such as psychological and psychophysical features, have not yet been considered in HCI. However, these features are perceptible by human sensors (olfaction, equilibrioception, and thermoception). Current theories neither give guidelines nor provide sufficient methods for "good" or "bad" designs for systems employing proxemics.

We thought the time was right for bringing researchers with different backgrounds and experiences together to map out the important questions that remain unanswered and to generate ideas for developing an agenda for future research on proxemics in HCI.

The structure of the seminar was based on the four pillars technology, application, vision, and theory that were equally exposed in seminar activities. The forum held 29 attendees with multidisciplinary backgrounds from research institutes in Canada, Denmark, England, Switzerland, Australia, France, Belgium, and Germany. We achieved productive and critical reflections and prospects on proxemics in HCI by letting experts from their respective fields work on a shared vision and theory. We selected the attendees to ensure an equal distribution of expertise across the four pillars.

The diversified program allowed attendees to introduce themselves and their work in brief presentations and offered one impulse keynote given by Saul Greenberg and Nicolai Marquardt. Greenberg and Marquardt coined the term Proxemic Interactions and decisively influenced the application of proxemics in HCI. We also provided ample time for discussions, breakout sessions, and creative work addressing concepts such as:

  • Intelligibility of Proxemic Interactions
  • Users' options to opt-in or opt-out
  • The "dark side" of Proxemic Interactions
  • The meaning of physical space
  • How image schemas [3] can be used to brainstorm innovative proxemic systems
  • Ad-Hoc proxemics
  • Including everyday entities in proxemic systems

Throughout the entire seminar, attendees were encouraged to write down their questions, ideas, and comments. These materials were collected and posted to one of the four pillars on a pin board for the purpose of inspiring breakout groups and ad lib collaboration. The breakout session proposed by the group centered around open problems and challenges within proxemic interactions, which was then discussed in each session.

Technology

In recent years, emerging technology has changed the interaction between human and computer. For instance, smartphones and tablets have entered our daily life. More of such novel post-WIMP technologies will be available in the foreseeable future and ultimately define how we interact in physical spaces. Interaction might take place across device boundaries on (multiple) public [15], large and private, mobile, and tangible displays [13]. It might involve collaboration of co-located users around interactive tabletops [7], in front of large vertical screens [5], or on rollout displays [14]. It might be based on non-traditional, post-WIMP interaction styles, such as pen-based [10], multi-touch, and tangible user interfaces. Or, it might provide new forms of functionality beyond the traditional WIMP model of applications by tracking users' spatial location and movements for navigation within large, digital information spaces [12]. Attendees discussed existing technologies that allow people-to-people, people-to-object, and object-to-object proxemics relations tracking, as well as improvements on tracking reliability using sensor fusion.

Application

Seminar attendees discussed the "light" and "dark" side of Proxemic Interactions. Until now, research has focused on the benefits of these interactions; however, they bear risks. We all can imagine how advertisement would change if it becomes possible to show customized ads according to our online shopping profiles while we are walking on public streets or in shopping malls. During the seminar, participants discussed what types of applications would best showcase the benefit of proxemics and avoid the risks that arise when systems are able to track and identify people. Part of this discussion included brainstorming opt-in or opt-out functions for proxemics-aware systems so that users can remain in control of these systems.

Vision

In its past, HCI has benefited from ambitious visions of future interaction such as Apple's Knowledge Navigator or Mark Weiser's "A day in the life of Sal" [16]. Although visions are not always helpful and can lead in wrong directions, we believe that a new overarching vision of future Proxemic Interactions can help inspire ongoing research and thrive in coming generations. This vision is intended to inform researchers, designers, and laymen alike. For researchers, a vision can serve to illustrate research goals, trigger new research directions, and create awareness for as yet un-reflected assumptions in our field. For designers, visions help to present concepts and technologies as a part of a believable scenario -- and not only in the isolation of conference papers. Furthermore, visions serve to fascinate and inspire laymen, who prefer to learn about future technologies from narrations instead of purely technical publications. The seminar aimed at creating a unified vision of Proxemic Interactions based on the individual contributions and experiences of the seminar attendees. Current and past visions have been discussed in plenum and breakout groups.

Theory

In the light of the countless variants and dynamics of post-WIMP interaction, traditional collections of design guidelines or "golden rules" cannot provide enough guidance about "good" or "bad" designs. Instead, we need better theories and models of human cognition to be able to understand and classify designs of Proxemic Interactions and to predict their appropriateness. We wanted to understand how physical, psychological and psychophysical features collate and can be transferred into a coherent theory of proxemics in HCI and how to give guidelines or provide sufficient methods for "good" or "bad" designs. Therefore, we had to:

  1. Better understand proxemics in HCI to develop such methods
  2. Discuss the open question: to what extent can proxemics leverage or constrain human-computer interaction?

Conclusion

The Dagstuhl Seminar 13452 offered a fantastic forum for established researchers and practitioners at a comfortable place. We framed and discussed research questions and worked together on a unifying theory for Proxemics in Human-Computer Interaction. Applications for Proxemic Interactions were sketched out and critically reflected in the light of the "dark side" of proxemics. We also discussed how we can learn from related fields and how they can profit from proxemics in HCI.

The seminar can be seen as a good starting point to identify the role of Proxemics in Human-Computer Interaction. However, it still remains an open research area and its place in HCI needs to be better understood.

References

  1. Greenberg, S., Marquardt, N., Ballendat, T., Diaz-Marino, R. and Wang, M. 2011. Proxemic Interactions: The New Ubicomp? interactions. 18, January (2011), 42-50.
  2. Hall, Edward, T. 1966. The Hidden Dimension. Doubleday.
  3. Hurtienne, J., Israel, J.H. and Weber, K. 2008. Cooking up real world business applications combining physicality, digitality, and image schemas. In Proc. of TEI'08, New York, New York, USA, Feb. 2008, 239.
  4. Jacob, R.J.K., Girouard, A., Hirshfield, L.M., Horn, M.S., Shaer, O., Solovey, E.T. and Zigelbaum, J. 2008. Reality-based interaction: a framework for post-WIMP interfaces. In Proc. of CHI'08, New York, NY, USA, 2008, 201-210.
  5. Jakobsen, M. and Hornbaek, K. 2012. Proximity and physical navigation in collaborative work with a multi-touch wall-display. In Proc. of CHI EA'12, New York, NY, USA, 2012, 2519-2524.
  6. Jetter, H.-C., Reiterer, H. and Geyer, F. 2013. Blended Interaction: understanding natural human--computer interaction in post-WIMP interactive spaces. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing. (Oct. 2013).
  7. Klinkhammer, D., Nitsche, M., Specht, M. and Reiterer, H. 2011. Adaptive personal territories for co-located tabletop interaction in a museum setting. In Proc. of ITS'11 , New York, NY, USA, Nov. 2011, 107.
  8. Marquardt, N., Diaz-Marino, R., Boring, S. and Greenberg, S. 2011. The proximity toolkit: prototyping proxemic interactions in ubiquitous computing ecologies. In Proc. of UIST '11, New York, NY, USA, 2011, 315-326.
  9. Marquardt, N., Hinckley, K. and Greenberg, S. 2012. Cross-device interaction via micro-mobility and f-formations. In Proc. of UIST'12, New York, NY, USA, Oct. 2012, 13.
  10. Matulic, F. and Norrie, M.C. 2013. Pen and touch gestural environment for document editing on interactive tabletops. In Proc. of ITS'1, New York, NY, USA, Oct. 2013, 41-50.
  11. Pederson, T. 2012. Proximity as Key Property in the Egocentric Interaction Paradigm. http://hci.uni-konstanz.de/proxemics/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/proxemics2012_Pedersen_et_al.pdf.
  12. Rädle, R., Jetter, H.-C., Butscher, S. and Reiterer, H. 2013. The effect of egocentric body movements on users' navigation performance and spatial memory in zoomable user interfaces. In Proc. of ITS'13, New York, NY, USA, 2013, 23-32.
  13. Spindler, M., Stellmach, S. and Dachselt, R. 2009. PaperLens: Advanced Magic Lens Interaction Above the Tabletop. In Proc. of ITS'09, New York, NY, USA, Nov. 2009, 69-76.
  14. Steimle, J. and Olberding, S. 2012. When mobile phones expand into handheld tabletops. In Proc. of CHI EA'12, New York, NY, USA, May 2012, 271-280.
  15. Vogel, D. and Balakrishnan, R. 2004. Interactive public ambient displays: transitioning from implicit to explicit, public to personal, interaction with multiple users. In Proc. of UIST'04, New York, NY, USA, 2004, 137-146.
  16. Weiser, M. 1999. The computer for the 21st century. ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review. 3, 3 (1999), 3-11.
Copyright Saul Greenberg and Kasper Hornbæk and Aaron Quigley and Harald Reiterer and Roman Rädle

Participants
  • Elisabeth André (Universität Augsburg, DE) [dblp]
  • Jakob E. Bardram (IT University of Copenhagen, DK) [dblp]
  • Susanne Boll (Universität Oldenburg, DE) [dblp]
  • Sebastian Boring (University of Copenhagen, DK) [dblp]
  • Andreas Butz (LMU München, DE) [dblp]
  • Raimund Dachselt (TU Dresden, DE) [dblp]
  • Andreas Dippon (TU München, DE) [dblp]
  • Jakub Dostal (University of St. Andrews, GB) [dblp]
  • Saul Greenberg (University of Calgary, CA) [dblp]
  • Kasper Hornbaek (University of Copenhagen, DK) [dblp]
  • Jörn Hurtienne (Universität Würzburg, DE) [dblp]
  • Petra Isenberg (University of Paris South XI, FR) [dblp]
  • Mikkel R. Jakobsen (University of Copenhagen, DK) [dblp]
  • Hans-Christian Jetter (University College London, GB) [dblp]
  • Nicolai Marquardt (University of Calgary, CA) [dblp]
  • Fabrice Matulic (ETH Zürich, CH) [dblp]
  • Florian 'Floyd' Mueller (RMIT University - Melbourne, AU) [dblp]
  • Max Nicosia (University of St. Andrews, GB) [dblp]
  • Kenton O'Hara (Microsoft Research UK - Cambridge, GB) [dblp]
  • Thomas Pederson (IT University of Copenhagen, DK) [dblp]
  • Aaron Quigley (University of St. Andrews, GB) [dblp]
  • Roman Rädle (Universität Konstanz, DE) [dblp]
  • Harald Reiterer (Universität Konstanz, DE) [dblp]
  • Stacey D. Scott (University of Waterloo, CA) [dblp]
  • Henrik Sorensen (Aalborg University, DK) [dblp]
  • Jürgen Steimle (MPI für Informatik - Saarbrücken, DE) [dblp]
  • Sophie Stellmach (TU Dresden, DE) [dblp]
  • Jo Vermeulen (Hasselt University - Diepenbeek, BE) [dblp]
  • Daniel Vogel (University of Waterloo, CA) [dblp]

Classification
  • mobile computing
  • multimedia
  • society / human-computer interaction

Keywords
  • interaction techniques
  • proxemics
  • interactive surfaces
  • smart spaces
  • ubiquitous computing
  • embodied interaction
  • tangible and social computing
  • mobile computing