Читайте также:
|
19Visual Aesthetics
19.1 Introduction
19.1.1 The importance of visual aesthetics in HCI
19.1.2 The Design Perspective
19.1.2.1 The Vitruvian design principles
19.1.2.2 Aesthetics and other design principles overlap
19.1.3 The Psychological Perspective
19.1.3.1 Aesthetics satisfies basic human needs and is a source of pleasure
19.1.3.2 Aesthetics as an extension of the Self
19.1.3.3 Aesthetic impressions are fast, enduring and consequential
19.1.4 The Practical Perspective
19.1.4.1 Aesthetics as a differentiating factor
19.1.4.2 Aesthetics is pervasive
19.1.4.3 A note on the moral aspect of practical considerations
19.2 Research on visual aesthetics in HCI
19.2.1 Antecedents of visual aesthetics
19.2.2 Perceiving and evaluating visual aesthetics
19.2.3 Outcome Variables
19.2.4 Moderating Variables
19.3 Future Directions
19.3.1 Methodological Issues
19.3.2 Future Research
19.4 Conclusion
19.5 Commentary by Jeffrey Bardzell
19.5.1 An anti-theory theory and its consequences
19.5.2 Tractinsky's extra-ordinary language definition of aesthetics
19.5.3 The aesthetic processing theory and its discontents
19.5.4 What do we want from visual aesthetics in HCI?
19.5.5 Critically assessing the aesthetic processing theory in HCI
19.5.5.1 Strengths of the aesthetic processing theory for HCI
19.5.5.2 Weaknesses of the aesthetic processing theory for HCI
19.5.5.3 Critical evaluation summary
19.5.6 Aesthetics, according to the rest of the world
19.5.6.1 The aesthetic disciplines
19.5.6.2 Cultural aesthetics and the human quality of life agenda
19.5.6.3 Cultural aesthetics in HCI
19.5.7 A constructive conclusion
19.5.8 Acknowledgements
19.5.9 References
19.6 Commentary by Gitte Lindgaard
19.6.1 Context, processes, and measurements of visual aesthetics in HCI: A commentary to Tractinsky's chapter on visual aesthetics
19.6.2 The importance of context, expectations, and appropriateness of visual aesthetics
19.6.3 Cognitive and affective processes
19.6.4 Measurements of visual aesthetics
19.6.5 Conclusion
19.6.6 References
19.7 Commentary by Marc Hassenzahl
19.7.1 Everything can be beautiful
19.7.2 References
19.8 Commentary by Antonella De Angeli
19.9 Commentary by Dianne Cyr
19.9.1 Developing Theoretical Models for Design Aesthetics
19.9.2 Methodologies through which to Interpret Visual Design
19.9.3 New Directions for Research
19.9.4 References
19.10 Commentary by Alistair G. Sutcliffe
19.10.1 References
19.11 Commentary by Jinwoo Kim
19.11.1 References
19.12 Commentary by Masaaki Kurosu
19.12.1 Aesthetics and Beauty
19.12.2 Beauty and Art
19.12.3 Beauty and Design
19.12.4 Beauty, Quality Characteristics and Meaning in Design
19.12.5 References
19.13 User-contributed notes
19.14 References
Introduction
To scholars and practitioners in the field of HCI at the early 1990’s, the idea that aesthetics matter in information technology sounded heretic. Two decades later, in the early 2010s, this thought has conquered a solid place in both academia and industry. While experimentation with computers’ ability to generate visual art dates back to the 1960’s (Nake, 2005), systematic research on visual aesthetics of interactive systems can only be traced to the mid-1990’s (Kurosu & Kashimura, 1995; Tractinsky, 1997). Since then, a steady stream of studies has explored various aspects of this area. The timeline of this research has roughly corresponded to even more dramatic developments in the information technology industry. Since the later 1990’s, a strong shift towards visual aesthetics has swarmed the industry. The increased interest in aesthetics among the industrial and academic communities reflects the maturation of the HCI field and the overcoming of many of its growing pains as a discipline that struggles with unreliable technology on the one hand and with the need to satisfy users’ basic requirements on the other hand. Additionally, broader societal processes emphasizing design and style emerged at about the same time (Gibney and Luscombe, 2000; Postrel, 2002), further reinforcing shifts towards aesthetics of products in general (Bloch, 2011) and specifically of interactive systems. A more detailed account of this process is provided in Tractinsky (2004)and Tractinsky (2006).
Udsen & J�rgensen (2005) identified several approaches to the study of aesthetics in HCI.� “Visual aesthetics”, as described in this chapter, correspond roughly to the approach which Udsen and J�rgensen identified as “Functionalist”. To be specific, and to distinguish the subject of this chapter from other similar terms, I use the term “aesthetics” in its fairly ordinary and common sense as reflected in dictionary definitions such as “an artistically beautiful or pleasing appearance” (The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language), or as “a pleasing appearance or effect: Beauty” (Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary). The term “visual” indicates concentration on the visual sense, which is the central human sense, occupying “almost half the brain” (Ware, 2008, ix). Thus, this chapter is not about various other phenomena studied under the “aesthetics” heading, such as literary aesthetics, abstract forms of aesthetic experiences or criteria (e.g., the elegance of mathematical proofs), or reactions to object qualities that do not immediately and primarily stem from its visual attributes.
In addition, a few other characteristics that describe research in the field can be listed. These characteristics describe how researchers in the field approach their subject matter. First, the approach of researchers in visual aesthetics reveals a bias towards positive effects of visual design, an issue to which I will return later in this chapter. Hence, research in this area commonly studies the beautiful and pleasing appearance of artifacts, or designed objects that are based on computing technology, rather than the effects of their ugly and displeasing counterparts. Second, at a Dagstuhl workshop on visual aesthetics in HCI, held in 2008, a majority of the participants adopted an interactionist approach to the study of visual aesthetics, noting that the aesthetic experience consists of people’s reactions to objects as opposed to aesthetics that are inherent in the object per se (Hassenzahl et al., 2008). These reactions include both individual idiosyncrasies and tastes, but also considerable agreement between individuals and experts, to a point where they may be considered “quasi-objective” (Hoyer & Stokburger-Sauer, 2011). Third, while the Dagstuhl workshop mentioned above failed to reach a consensus over the time frame that appears relevant to visual aesthetic reactions, my own position is that it can encompass the entire range from very quick, visceral reactions to very long, contemplative evaluations. Fourth, the processes involved in designing and evaluating visual aesthetics are both affective and cognitive. �Finally, research in the field of visual aesthetics is primarily empirical and is characteristically descriptive (i.e., “what is considered beautiful”) rather than normative (i.e., what should be considered “beautiful”) (Hassenzahl, 2004b). This important distinction stresses its roots in applied research and differentiates the field from artistic or philosophical writing on the subject.
The objective of this chapter is to survey the field of visual aesthetics in HCI. We start by delineating the importance of visual aesthetics to HCI from three perspectives. We then present a research framework that serves us in reviewing key findings in the field. These aspects include issues such as what makes systems look aesthetic, what are the effects of visually aesthetic systems, and what mechanisms are involved in people’s judgment of aesthetics in the context of interactive systems. �We also discuss methodological aspects and challenges for further research. ��
Дата добавления: 2015-11-16; просмотров: 62 | Нарушение авторских прав
| <== предыдущая страница | | | следующая страница ==> |
| Unified theories of visual representation | | | The Vitruvian design principles |