More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Toy user interface design—Tools for Child–Computer Interaction

Authors:

Anna Priscilla de Albuquerque Wheler,

Patrick C.K. Hung,

Bruno de Souza Jeronimo,

Railton da Silva Rocha, Junior,

Aluizio Fausto Ribeiro AraújoAuthors Info & Claims

Volume 30, Issue C

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100307

Published: 01 December 2021 Publication History

Abstract

A Toy User Interface (ToyUI) is a setup combination of one or more toy components with other hardware or software components. As part of new technologies that permeate the Child–Computer Interaction (CCI) domain, a ToyUI can combine physical toy components with social robots, smartphones, tablets, game consoles, among other computing artifacts. This paper compiles a collection of design tools that we develop to support interdisciplinary creators in prototyping innovative ToyUI setups. The design tools aim to help the CCI community understand the benefits of hardware and software integration while delivering solutions that can meet privacy by design principles. We apply the Design Science framework to assess the problem context and propose and evaluate the design tools following a Human-Centered Design (HCD) perspective. The tools cover steps from inspiration to ideation and implementation, including user research, brainstorming, data collection planning, and low to high-fidelity prototyping tools. We detail the current version of the design tools and six years of results through qualitative evaluation in an educational setting (with 255 creators in seven different institutions). We also propose novel versions of the tools to support remote teamwork and education, and we highlight training challenges during the social distancing context.

Graphical abstract

Display Omitted

Highlights

•

Design tools to prototype toy user interfaces following privacy by design principles.

•

Design tools cover human-centered design stages, including data collection planning.

•

Qualitative project-based learning evaluation with interdisciplinary stakeholders.

•

255 stakeholders implemented 67 paper-based, functional, and digital prototypes.

•

Adapted tools for remote teamwork and education during the social distancing context.

References

[1]

de Albuquerque A.P., Breyer F.B., Kelner J., Modelling playful user interfaces for hybrid games, in: International conference on distributed, ambient, and pervasive interactions, Springer, 2017, pp. 640–659.

[2]

de Albuquerque, A. P., & Kelner, J. (2019a). Non-personal data collection for toy user interfaces In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii international conference on system sciences..

[3]

de Albuquerque A.P., Kelner J., Toy user interfaces: Systematic and industrial mapping, Journal of Systems Architecture 97 (TBD) (2019) 77–106,.

Digital Library

[4]

de Albuquerque A.P., Kelner J., Hung P.C., Human-centered design tools for smart toys, in: International conference on internet of vehicles, Springer, 2019, pp. 327–343.

[5]

de Albuquerque Wheler A.P., Kelner J., Junior R.S.R., Nogueira T.D., IoT4fun rapid prototyping tools for toy user interfaces, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications (2020).

[6]

Angelini, L., Mugellini, E., Couture, N., & Abou Khaled, O. (2018). Designing the interaction with the internet of tangible things: a card set. In proceedings of the twelfth international conference on tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction. (pp. 299–306).

[7]

Appert C., Pietriga E., Bartenlian E., González R.M., Custom-made tangible interfaces with touchtokens, in: Proceedings of the 2018 International conference on advanced visual interfaces, ACM, 2018, p. 15.

[8]

Bartneck C., Belpaeme T., Eyssel F., Kanda T., Keijsers M., Šabanović S., Human-robot interaction: An introduction, Cambridge University Press, 2020.

[9]

Bartneck C., Forlizzi J., A design-centred framework for social human-robot interaction, in: RO-MAN 2004. 13th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication (IEEE Catalog No. 04TH8759), IEEE, 2004, pp. 591–594.

[10]

Bech C., Bork A.H., Memborg J.B., Rosenlund L.S., Kraus M., The effect of interacting with two devices when creating the illusion of internal state in passive tangible widgets, in: Interactivity, game creation, design, learning, and innovation, Springer, 2016, pp. 197–204.

[11]

Bonillo C., Baldassarri S., Marco J., Cerezo E., Tackling developmental delays with therapeutic activities based on tangible tabletops, Universal Access in the Information Society 18 (1) (2019) 31–47.

[12]

van Breemen, A., Yan, X., & Meerbeek, B. (2005). iCat: an animated user-interface robot with personality. In Proceedings of the fourth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems. (pp. 143–144).

[13]

de Carvalho, L. G., & Eler, M. M. (2017). Security Requirements for Smart Toys In ICEIS Vol. 2 (pp. 144–154).

[14]

Cavoukian A., Popa C., Embedding privacy into what’s next: Privacy by design for the internet of things, Ryerson University Privacy & Big Data Institute (2016) 1–10.

[15]

Denton D.K., Denton R.A., The toolbox for the mind: Finding and implementing creative solutions in the workplace, McGraw-Hill, 1999.

[16]

Dhar T., Wu T., Mobile computing toys: Marketing challenges and implications, in: Mobile services for toy computing, Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 39–49.

[17]

Di Fuccio R., Siano G., De Marco A., Tripod: A prototypal system for the recognition of capacitive widget on touchscreen addressed for Montessori-like educational applications, in: Recent advances in information systems and technologies, Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 664–676.

[18]

Dow, S., Lee, J., Oezbek, C., MacIntyre, B., Bolter, J. D., & Gandy, M. (2005). Wizard of Oz interfaces for mixed reality applications. In CHI’05 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. (pp. 1339–1342).

[19]

Duffy B.R., Anthropomorphism and the social robot, Robotics and autonomous systems 42 (3–4) (2003) 177–190.

[20]

EU B.R., GDPR – General Data Protection Regulation, European Parliament and Council of the European Union, 2016, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32016R0679&from=EN.

[21]

Festerling J., Siraj I., Alexa, what are you? Exploring primary school children’s ontological perceptions of digital voice assistants in open interactions, Human Development 64 (1) (2020) 26–43.

[22]

Gohlke K., Hlatky M., de Jong B., Physical construction toys for rapid sketching of tangible user interfaces, in: Proceedings of the Ninth International conference on tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction, ACM, 2015, pp. 643–648,.

Digital Library

[23]

Gonzalez T., de la Rubia M.A., Hincz K.P., Comas-Lopez M., Subirats L., Fort S., et al., Influence of COVID-19 confinement on students’ performance in higher education, PloS one 15 (10) (2020).

[24]

Goodrich M.A., Schultz A.C., Human-robot interaction: a survey, Now Publishers Inc, 2008.

[25]

Grizard, A., & Lisetti, C. (2006). Generation of facial emotional expressions based on psychological theory In Workshop on emotion and computing, KI’20061. (pp. 4–19).

[26]

Group B., et al., Ergonomics of human-system interaction: Human-centred design for interactive systems: ISO 9241-210, 4, BSI Standards Publication, 2010, p. 32.

[27]

Hancock P.A., Billings D.R., Schaefer K.E., Chen J.Y., De Visser E.J., Parasuraman R., A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction, Human factors 53 (5) (2011) 517–527.

[28]

Hornecker, E. (2010). Creative idea exploration within the structure of a guiding framework: the card brainstorming game In Proceedings of the Fourth international conference on tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction. (pp. 101–108).

[29]

Hsieh H.-F., Shannon S.E., Three approaches to qualitative content analysis, Qualitative Health Research 15 (9) (2005) 1277–1288.

[30]

Kahn L.B., Lange F., Wiczer D.G., Labor demand in the time of COVID-19: Evidence from vacancy postings and UI claims, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2020.

[31]

Kazemitabaar M., McPeak J., Jiao A., He L., Outing T., Froehlich J.E., Makerwear: A tangible approach to interactive wearable creation for children, in: Proceedings of the 2017 Chi conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, 2017, pp. 133–145.

[32]

Koizumi N., Yasu K., Liu A., Sugimoto M., Inami M., Animated paper: A toolkit for building moving toys, Computers in Entertainment (CIE) 8 (2) (2010) 1–16.

[33]

Korn, O., Stamm, L., & Moeckl, G. (2017). Designing Authentic Emotions for Non-Human Characters: A Study Evaluating Virtual Affective Behavior. In Proceedings of the 2017 conference on designing interactive systems. (pp. 477–487).

[34]

Lauricella A.R., Wartella E., Rideout V.J., Young Children’s screen time: The complex role of parent and child factors, Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 36 (2015) 11–17.

[35]

Lauwaert M., The place of play: Toys and digital cultures, Amsterdam University Press, 2009.

Digital Library

[36]

Marco J., Cerezo E., Baldassarri S., Tangible interaction and tabletops: new horizons for children’s games, International Journal of Arts and Technology 5 (2–4) (2012) 151–176.

[37]

Márquez Segura E., Waern A., Moen J., Johansson C., The design space of body games: Technological, physical, and social design, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, 2013, pp. 3365–3374,.

Digital Library

[38]

Mascheroni G., Holloway D., The internet of toys: A report on media and social discourses around young children and IoToys, 2017.

[39]

Meerbeek, B., Saerbeck, M., & Bartneck, C. (2009). Iterative design process for robots with personality. In AISB2009 symposium on new frontiers in human-robot interaction. (pp. 94–101).

[40]

Melo, R., Monteiro, R. d. P., Oliveira, J. P. G., Jeronimo, B. d. S., Bastos-Filho, C. J. A., & de Albuquerque Wheler, A. P., et al. (2020). Guitar Tuner and Song Performance Evaluation Using a NAO robot. In WRE 2020 11th workshop of robotics in education. In press.

[41]

Merrill D., Sun E., Kalanithi J., Sifteo cubes, in: CHI’12 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, ACM, 2012, pp. 1015–1018.

[42]

Merritt T., Nielsen C.L., Jakobsen F.L., Grønbæk J.E., Glowphones: designing for proxemics play with low-resolution displays in location-based games, in: Proceedings of the annual symposium on computer-human interaction in play, ACM, 2017, pp. 69–81.

[43]

Moursund D.G., Project-based learning using information technology, International society for technology in education Eugene, OR, 1999.

[44]

Nicola M., Alsafi Z., Sohrabi C., Kerwan A., Al-Jabir A., Iosifidis C., et al., The socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19): A review, International journal of surgery (London, England) 78 (2020) 185.

[45]

de Paula Albuquerque O., Fantinato M., Kelner J., de Albuquerque A.P., Privacy in smart toys: Risks and proposed solutions, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 39 (2020).

[46]

Pollmann, K., Ruff, C., Vetter, K., & Zimmermann, G. (2020). Robot vs. Voice Assistant: Is Playing with Pepper More Fun than Playing with Alexa? In Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction. (pp. 395–397).

[47]

Putnam, C., Puthenmadom, M., Cuerdo, M. A., Wang, W., & Paul, N. (2020). Adaptation of the System Usability Scale for User Testing with Children. In Extended abstracts of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. (pp. 1–7).

[48]

Rafferty L., Hung P., Fantinato M., Peres S.M., Iqbal S., et al., Towards a privacy rule conceptual model for smart toys, in: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), AIS, 2017, pp. 1–10.

[49]

Scherer K.R., Toward a dynamic theory of emotion: The component process model of affective states, Geneva studies in Emotion and Communication 1 (1987) 1–98.

[50]

Schmitz M., Steimle J., Huber J., Dezfuli N., Mühlhäuser M., Flexibles: Deformation-aware 3D-printed tangibles for capacitive touchscreens, in: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, 2017, pp. 1001–1014.

[51]

Schneider K., Prototypes as assets, not toys. Why and how to extract knowledge from prototypes.(experience report), in: Proceedings of IEEE 18th International conference on software engineering, IEEE, 1996, pp. 522–531.

[52]

Shasha S., Mahmoud M., Mannan M., Youssef A., Playing with danger: A taxonomy and evaluation of threats to smart toys, IEEE Internet of Things JournalTBD,TBD (2018),.

[53]

Shin W., Kang H., Adolescents’ privacy concerns and information disclosure online: The role of parents and the internet, Computers in Human Behavior 54 (2016) 114–123.

[54]

Sintoris C., Mavrommati I., Avouris N., Chatzigiannakis I., Out of the box: Using gamification cards to teach ideation to engineering students, in: European conference on ambient intelligence, Springer, 2018, pp. 221–226.

[55]

Soute I., Vacaretu T., Wit J.D., Markopoulos P., Design and evaluation of rapido, a platform for rapid prototyping of interactive outdoor games, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 24 (4) (2017) 28.

[56]

Tang J.K., Tewell J., Emerging human-toy interaction techniques with augmented and mixed reality, in: Mobile services for toy computing, Springer, 2015, pp. 77–105.

[57]

Tyni, H., & Kultima, A. (2016). The emergence of industry of playful hybrids: developer’s perspective. In Proceedings of the 20th international academic mindtrek conference. (pp. 413–421).

[58]

UML O., MOF I., The unified modeling language UML, ed, 2011.

[59]

Viner R.M., Russell S.J., Croker H., Packer J., Ward J., Stansfield C., et al., School closure and management practices during coronavirus outbreaks including COVID-19: a rapid systematic review, The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health (2020).

[60]

Wieringa R.J., Design science methodology for information systems and software engineering, Springer, 2014.

Digital Library

[61]

Wiethoff, A., Schneider, H., Rohs, M., Butz, A., & Greenberg, S. (2012). Sketch-a-TUI: low cost prototyping of tangible interactions using cardboard and conductive ink. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on tangible, embedded and embodied interaction. (pp. 309–312).

Cited By

Ahtinen AChowdhury ARamírez Millan VWu CMenon G(2023)Co-Learning around Social Robots with School Pupils and University Students – Focus on Data Privacy ConsiderationsProceedings of the 11th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction10.1145/3623809.3623816(115-123)Online publication date: 4-Dec-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3623809.3623816
de Souza Jeronimo Bde Albuquerque Wheler Ade Oliveira JMelo RBastos-Filho CKelner J(2022)Comparing Social Robot Embodiment for Child Musical EducationJournal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems10.1007/s10846-022-01604-5105:2Online publication date: 1-Jun-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10846-022-01604-5

Index Terms

Toy user interface design—Tools for Child–Computer Interaction
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)
  2. Interaction design
    1. Interaction design process and methods
      1. User centered design

Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

Recommendations

Human-Centered Design Tools for Smart Toys
Internet of Vehicles. Technologies and Services Toward Smart Cities
Abstract
The smart toy industry faces challenges to achieve Hardware and Software (H&S) integration since numerous products are not generating enduring value propositions to the consumers. It is possible to achieve better H&S integration by following ...
Developing information appliance design tools for designers

As more products become computer-embedded, designers need to consider both the hardware and interface. Traditional design processes and design tools focus on hardware aspects, and so new methods and techniques must be investigated and developed. The aim ...
Creative connections: user, designer, context, and tools

The design symposium ‘creative connections discusses the designers’ tools in the conceptual phase. Over the past few decades, many considerations, which hitherto occured before or after conceptualizing have become an integrated part of concept ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction

International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction Volume 30, Issue C

Dec 2021

240 pages

ISSN:2212-8689

EISSN:2212-8689

Issue’s Table of Contents

Elsevier B.V.

Publisher

Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

Netherlands

Publication History

Published: 01 December 2021

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 10 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Ahtinen AChowdhury ARamírez Millan VWu CMenon G(2023)Co-Learning around Social Robots with School Pupils and University Students – Focus on Data Privacy ConsiderationsProceedings of the 11th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction10.1145/3623809.3623816(115-123)Online publication date: 4-Dec-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3623809.3623816
de Souza Jeronimo Bde Albuquerque Wheler Ade Oliveira JMelo RBastos-Filho CKelner J(2022)Comparing Social Robot Embodiment for Child Musical EducationJournal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems10.1007/s10846-022-01604-5105:2Online publication date: 1-Jun-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10846-022-01604-5

View Options

View options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents