Attention, stimulus and Augmented Reality for urban daily-life education in a social peripheral setting: the Streets that tell stories AR app

Diego Ricca, Bianca Lupo, Jairo Diniz, Leonardo Veras, Clice Mazzilli
pp.  179 – 197, download
(https://doi.org/10.55612/s-5002-052-010)

Abstract

This paper aims to identify which design strategies can be considered when exploring different levels of stimulation of cognition and attention of the user in the development of educational location-based applications used in public urban space. We proposed the Stimulus Level Framework, divided into linear, circular and spiral stimuli, based on a theoretical reflection. It is a tool to help designers to think about educational and contextual digital experiences. Afterwards, we made a practical reflection about the proposed framework in a real context. An Augmented Reality project integrated with urban furniture of a historical street in the city of Fortaleza, Brazil, was proposed. Thinking about the design decisions based on the levels of the framework, helped in the process of data collection. It also helped in the proposition of elements that could stimulate the user’s attention in different levels, having the technology as an element that unifies the whole experience.

Keywords: Activity Theory; Design for attention; location-based Augmented Reality; urban technology; Augmented Reality; educative technology, interaction design. 

References

1. Greenfield A.: Everyware: The dawning age of ubiquitous computing, New Riders, (2010)
2. Weiser M., Brown J.S.: Designing calm technology PowerGrid J., 1, pp. 75–85 (1996) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0685-9_6
3. Bakker S.: Design for peripheral interaction Eindhoven Univ. Technol., 184, (2013)
4. Bakker S., Hausen D., Selker T.: Peripheral Interaction: Challenges and Opportunities for HCI in the Periphery of Attention, Springer, (2016)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29523-7
5. Case A.: Calm technology: principles and patterns for non-intrusive design, “ O’Reilly Media, Inc.,” (2015)
6. Azuma R.T.: A survey of augmented reality Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ., 6, pp. 355–385 (1997) https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355
7. El Sayed N.A.M., Zayed H.H., Sharawy M.I.: ARSC: Augmented reality student card 2010 International Computer Engineering Conference (ICENCO). pp. 113–120. IEEE (2010) https://doi.org/10.1109/ICENCO.2010.5720437
8. Chen C.-M., Tsai Y.-N.: Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools Comput. Educ., 59, pp. 638–652 (2012)

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.001
9. Cuendet S., Bonnard Q., Do-Lenh S., Dillenbourg P.: Designing augmented reality for the classroom Comput. Educ., 68, pp. 557–569

(2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.015
10. Sommerauer P., Müller O.: Augmented reality in informal learning environments: A field experiment in a mathematics exhibition Comput. Educ., 79, pp. 59–68 (2014)

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.07.013
11. Sommerauer P.: Augmented Reality in Informal Learning Environments Design and Evaluation of Mobile Applications., (2019)
12. Azuma R.T.: The most important challenge facing augmented reality, https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doix/abs/10.1162/PRES_a_00264, (2016)

https://doi.org/10.1162/PRES_a_00264
13. Csikszentmihalyi M., Hemanson K.: Intrinsic Motivation in Museums: Why Does One Want to Learn? in Falk, J.H. and Dierking, L.D. (eds.) Public institutions for personal learning. pp. 67–77. American Association of Museums, Washington, DC (1995)
14. Huizinga J.: Homo ludens: A study of the play-element in culture, (1950)
15. Vygotsky L.S., Cole M.: Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes, Harvard university press, (1978)
16. Leont’ev A.N.: The problem of activity in psychology Sov. Psychol., 13, pp. 4–33 (1974)

https://doi.org/10.2753/RPO1061-040513024
17. Lurii︠a︡ A.R.: Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations, Harvard university press, (1976)
18. Engeström Y.: Learning by expanding, Cambridge University Press, (1987)
19. Murray T.: Coordinating the complexity of tools, tasks, and users: On theory-based approaches to authoring tool usability Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ., 26, pp. 37–71 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0076-6
20. Gay G., Hembrooke H.: Activity-centered design, MIT Press, (2004) https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1085.001.0001
21. Kaptelinin V., Nardi B.A.: Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design, MIT press, (2006) https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v12i4.1772
22. Kuutti K.: Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research Context Conscious. Act. theory human-computer Interact., 17, (1996)
23. Leont’ev A.N.: Activity and consciousness (1972)
24. Norman D.A., Shallice T.: Attention to action Consciousness and self-regulation. pp. 1–18. Springer (1986) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-0629-1_1
25. Norman D.: The design of everyday things (originally published: The psychology of everyday things), Basic Books, (1988)
26. Hassenzahl M.: Experience design: Technology for all the right reasons Synth. Lect. human-centered informatics, 3, pp. 1–95 (2010)

https://doi.org/10.2200/S00261ED1V01Y201003HCI008
27. Roda C.E.: Human attention and its implications for human-computer interaction., Cambridge University Press, (2011)
28. Carver C.S., Scheier M.F.: On the self-regulation of behavior, Cambridge University Press, (1989)
29. Norman D.A.: Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things, Basic Civitas Books, (2004)
30. Brown J.N.A.: “Unseen, Yet Crescive”: The Unrecognized History of Peripheral Interaction Peripheral Interaction. pp. 13–38. Springer (2016) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29523-7_2
31. Norman D.: The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition, Constellation, (2013)
32. Duarte R.: Entrevistas em pesquisas qualitativas Educ. em Rev., pp. 213–225 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-4060.357
33. Hanington B., Martin B.: Universal methods of design expanded and revised: 125 Ways to research complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective solutions, Rockport publishers, (2019)
34. IPEA: JC – ON LINE: Ipea constata que 70% da população brasileira nunca foram a um museu ou a um centro cultural, https://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/index.php?option=com_alphacontent&ordering=3&limitstart=4510&limit=10

back to Table of Contents