 |
 |
Devices that Alter Perception (DAP 2010) 3rd CFP : http://devices-alter.me/10 Final submission date September 1, 2010 KEYNOTE This year's dap workshop will feature a keynote by James Auger, who is a tutor in the Royal College of Art's Design Interactions department and partner in the Speculative Design practice Auger-Loizeau (www.auger-loizeau.com). He will speak on the topic of “Designing Devices that Alter Perception.” Keynote Abstract Designing Devices that Alter Perception By suggesting that one role for design is the act of applying technology we can start to investigate two things: 1. Technology applied to what, where, when? 2. What is being applied—what does that technology do? A common approach in techno-centric domains is to focus predominantly on the latter question thus ignoring the contextual factors. This can lead to sublime technologies devoid of logical applications. If we remove the connection to everyday life, the experiences or the affects facilitated by the device risk being purely a showcase; a kind of fairground ride where the aesthetic experience, however striking, is simply a temporary alteration of reality. This can create intrigue, thrill and fascination but the effect is rarely enduring, existing like a one-line gag. Alternatively, potential dark or disruptive consequences of application pass unnoticed or unchallenged due to the removal of real-life sensibilities. Taking inspiration from James J. Gibson and his statement: ‘It is not true that “the laboratory can never be life like” [12]. The laboratory must be life like!’ The question Auger would like to address here is where, why, how and when perception altering devices are applied; the contextual issues that can turn a technology into a product and in turn modify the real-life human experience: Where can the alteration of perception lead to more immersive or rewarding mediated experiences; where should the limits lie in technological mediations, when does technology become too invasive? Using several case studies Auger will explore firstly how contextual factors can inform the design process leading to more profound, provocative or meaningful technological concepts. Secondly, how through the creation of tangible and compelling prototypes it is possible to project the existence of these concepts into near reality thus facilitating a more cogent interaction with them. DAP2010 The call for papers, information for attendees, and accepted submissions are hosted at: http://devices-alter.me/10 ABSTRACT Sensors, actuators, implants, wearable computers, and neural interfaces can do more than simply observe our bodies: these devices can also alter and manipulate our perceptions. This workshop will promote the design and critique of systems whose explicit purpose is to alter human percepts. Participants will be asked to present abstracts, images, videos and demonstrations that focus on devices that shape perceptual phenomena. The goals of the workshop are to: (1) document an emerging field of device design; (2) facilitate the development of these devices by sharing designs; (3) better understand the process of perception and how it informs the design of devices; and (4) debate the aesthetics, perceptual change, social and ethical issues as well as functional transformation the presented works envision for the future. Keywords: perception, sensors, media art, interaction, augmented reality, phenomenology, transhumanism, prosthetics. Systems that perform sensory substitution [1] as well as techniques like galvanic vestibular stimulation [2] (which interact with human balance and gait) demonstrate actual devices that act upon human percepts. Projects such as Body Mnemonics [3], which makes use of proprioception, the FeelSpace belt [4] which offers a variety of magnetic perception, Haptic Radar [5] which augments perception of space, and Low-fi Skin Vision [6] which illustrates sensory substitution all provide stronger evidence of a growing genre of on-human perceptual devices. Philosophically, we are keenly interested in accounts of perception and its relationship to tools and devices. Noë's account detailed in Action in Perception [7], we find deeply influential. His development of J.J. Gibson's view of perceptual systems [8] allows us to think theoretically about how the percepts make use of devices ready-at-hand. Clark anticipates this view in Natural Born Cyborgs and with theories concerning human-machine symbiosis [9]. We are further inspired by Stelarc's performances illustrating the relentless hybridization of human and technology.[10]. The augmented reality research community is keenly aware of the importance of perceptual biases such as those discussed by Drascic and Milgram [11]. Instead of viewing these as a human factors problem, we will advocate using such biases and perceptual illusions to create new devices that more tightly integrate with our perceptual processes. Motivation We wish to develop and bring together work related to human perception such as sensor systems, physical computing, and interaction design projects. The areas of augmented cognition, augmented reality, subliminal user interfaces, brain-computer interfaces, prosthetic design, affective computing and haptics are all overtly relevant. Examples of suitable position paper topics include: • Devices which initiate reflexive responses in users • Phenomena such as perceptual illusions which can be exploited by systems and devices • Media art that makes unconventional use of the viewer's precepts • Systems which seek to alter user behaviour subtly (such as alerting the user without diverting attention) • Prosthetics that transform perception by making use of techniques such as sensory-substitution • Sensor systems that regulate or reshape emotions • Psychological and physiological studies that relate to the process of perception • Device designs capitalizing on neuroscience established tools such as EEG, but also emerging techniques such as diffuse optical tomography and transcranial magnetic stimulation • Displays that allow atypical perceptual experiences (such as temporal distortions, out-of-body experiences, etc.) • Worn devices that simulate synesthesia combining haptic visual and optical sensations • Devices that map imperceptible phenomena onto the percepts • Interfaces which target awareness by inducing drowsiness or alertness • Haptic devices that allow re-experience of another persons' percepts These examples lead to important questions for designers: Can users control devices that manipulate the precepts? What would be necessary for users to trust these devices? Such ethical design questions deserve consideration and debate since delusory experiences and unreliable perceptions may be unplanned byproducts of these devices. OBJECTIVES There is a growing need to document designs that seek to manipulate or alter the process of perception. And so the objectives for this year's workshop are: • Compilation and publication of a device catalog which will illustrate the current state of the field. • Joint discussion by sensor engineers and interaction designers on models of perceptual phenomena • Critique and recognition for designers of devices that focus on the percepts • Debate of social problems and ethical issues that surround technologies operating on or below the level of user awareness The workshop's results should be widely applicable since the human precepts (as embodied by our sensory nervous system and evidenced by our conscious experience) are an element of every interaction with mixed and augmented reality systems. FORMAT Both device demonstrations and design concepts are welcome for 10-minute oral presentations or demonstrations followed by 5-minute question and answers sessions. The workshop will encourage lively debate on the aesthetic, social, and ethical implications of the works presented. Submissions will take the form of PDF-format 1000-word abstracts and images 3 pages in length. The first two pages should include text limited to 1000 words. The third page must include an image at a minimum of 2000 x 2000 pixel resolution. The document design and layout is free for participants to choose working within the constraint of A4 pages. Preceding the workshop, abstracts will be posted and available for public comment on the workshop website. Submissions describing work-in-progress on designs, prototypes and systems are welcome. During the workshop participants will vote to award a best design prize. AGENDA This year's DAP workshop will be a full-day workshop. We are currently planning for 10 presentations. The schedule will allow time for these presentations but also preliminary planning of the device catalog book: 9:00 - 10:00 Keynote: James Auger 10:00 - 10:30 Design Discussions 10:30 - 11:00 Coffee break 11:00 - 12:30 Demonstrations 12:30 - 13:30 Lunch 13:30 - 15:00 Design Critique and Debate 15:00 - 15:30 Afternoon Break 15:30 - 16:30 Device Catalog Book Planning 16:30 - 17:00 Awarding of Best Design Prize 17:00 - 17:30 Wrap-up Discussion 18:30 - 19:00 ISMAR Welcome Reception LOCATION Devices that Alter Perception will be held on October 13th, 2010 at COEX, Seoul, Korea. It is being organized in conjunction with the IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR 2010). COMMITTEE Carson Reynolds, Alvaro Cassinelli, Tomoko Hayashi, Danielle Wilde and Alexis Zerroug : Ishikawa Komuro Laboratory, Meta Perception Group at the University of Tokyo. Jussi Ängeslevä and Matt Karau : ART+COM and the University of the Arts (UdK) Berlin. Susanna Hertrich : independent artist and designer in Berlin. REFERENCES [1] Kaczmarek, K. A., Webster, J. G., Bach-y Rita, P. and Tompkins, W. J. 1991. Electrotactile and vibrotactile displays for sensory substitution systems. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 1-16, January 1991. [2] Maeda, T., Ando, H., Amemiya, T., Nagaya, N., Sugimoto, M., and Inami, M. 2005. Shaking the world: galvanic vestibular stimulation as a novel sensation interface. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 Emerging Technologies (Los Angeles, California, July 31 - August 04, 2005). D. Cox, Ed. SIGGRAPH '05. ACM, New York, NY. [3] Ängeslevä, J., O'Modhrain, S., Oakley, I., and Hughes, S. 2003. Body mnemonics. In: Mobile HCI Conference 2003, volume 16. [4] Nagel, S. K., Carl, C., Kringe, T., Märtin, R., and König, P. 2005. Beyond sensory substitution—learning the sixth sense. Journal of Neural Engineering, 2(4):R13+. [5] Cassinelli, A., Reynolds, C., and Ishikawa, M. 2006. Haptic radar. In SIGGRAPH '06: ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Sketches, New York, NY, USA. ACM. [6] Bird, J., Marshall, P., and Rogers, Y. 2009. Low-fi skin vision: a case study in rapid prototyping a sensory substitution system. In BCS HCI '09: Proceedings of the 2009 British Computer Society Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pages 55-64, Swinton, UK, UK. British Computer Society. [7] Noë, A. 2006. Action in Perception (Representation and Mind Series). The MIT Press. [8] Gibson, J. J. 1983. Senses Considered As Perceptual Systems. Waveland Press. [9] Clark, A. 2003. Natural-Born Cyborgs: Minds, Technologies, and the Future of Human Intelligence. Oxford University Press, USA, first edition. [10] Stelarc, 1991. "Prosthetics, robotics and remote existence: Postevolutionary strategies," Leonardo, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 591-595. [11] Drascic, D. and Milgram, P. 1996. Perceptual Issues in Augmented Reality. Proc. SPIE Vol. 2653: Stereoscopic Displays and Virtual Reality Systems III, San Jose, California, Feb. 1996. 123-134. [12] Gibson, J. J. 1986. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Psychology Press, New York.