An investigation into the physical build and psychological aspects of an interactive information point.pdf

1
Entertainment Research Dissertation
An investigation into the physical build and
psychological aspects of an interactive information point
Supervisor: Sam Wane
Staffordshire University
Faculty of Computing Engineering and Technology
C.G.I. and Animatronics BSc (Hons)
Submission Date 28th
April 2010

2
Abstract
This dissertation will be looking at how to build an interactive information point and
looking at the different aspects of how this would be possible, looking at the how to
make something interactive both through hardware and software and what the
psychological affects to the user are. The psychological aspect of the dissertation will
be looking at the user‟s interaction with the information point and how it affects them
to see whether making an information point more interactive is better for its success,
not only in terms of people initially using but also in conveying the information.
With this project completed the results were as expected considering the hypothesis
derived from the research. Achievements include competency in new programmes
such as Labview and Roborealm. A possible business opportunity with regards to
the positive outcome to the information point. The results show a positive outcome to
objects being more human like in their appearance to increase the effectiveness of
their role. In this case humanising the information point increases the enjoyment and
retaining of information by the user.

3
Acknowledgements
Sam Wane – Senior Lecturer at Staffordshire University and dissertation supervisor,
for all the help and advice given though out this dissertation
Chris Wayman – Senior Lecturer Staffordshire University.
Roborealm – For allowing the free use of their programme for this dissertation.

4
Contents
Abstract...................................................................................................................... 2
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................... 3
Contents..................................................................................................................... 4
1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 6
1.1 Aims ..................................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Objectives ............................................................................................................ 7
1.3 Deliverables ......................................................................................................... 7
1.4 Gantt Chart........................................................................................................... 8
2.0 Information Point .................................................................................................. 9
2.1 Psychological Background ................................................................................. 10
2.1.1 Uncanny Valley............................................................................................ 14
2.2 Object Tracking .................................................................................................. 17
2.2.1 Hardware ..................................................................................................... 19
2.2.2 CMOS (Metal-Oxide Semiconductor) .......................................................... 20
2.2.3 Software ...................................................................................................... 20
2.2.4 Interaction with the user............................................................................... 21
2.2.5 Interaction with information point ................................................................. 22
2.2.6 Servo Controller........................................................................................... 22
2.2.7 Servo ........................................................................................................... 23
3.0 Production Method ............................................................................................. 26
3.1 Autotalk........................................................................................................... 27

5
3.2 G.U.I. .............................................................................................................. 27
3.3 Labview .......................................................................................................... 27
4.0 Testing and Evaluation....................................................................................... 31
4.1 Testing............................................................................................................ 31
4.2 Questionnaire ................................................................................................. 31
4.3 Questionnaire results...................................................................................... 31
5.0 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 37
6.0 Recommendations ............................................................................................. 42
7.0 Reference........................................................................................................... 44
8.0 Appendix ............................................................................................................ 46

6
1.0 Introduction
With the introduction of 3D and virtual reality into everyday life, this dissertation was
to look at the affects of keeping different inanimate objects physical but still make
them interactive. An information point was chosen as a piece of interactivity, this is
so an information point can be built and tested for people‟s reactions to it. The aims
and objectives are listed below of what needs to be completed so that this
information point can work well and efficiently. Aspects that will need to be looked at
so an animatronic information point will include, what makes an object Interactive?
This will look at how objects or actions/reactions make something seem like it is
interacting. This would include what people do intentionally and un- intentionally. For
example people don‟t notice that they move their head in the direction of where they
are showing somebody to, but they still do this. Parts of the dissertation will be
looking at why this is done and how it could be recreated. Other aspects that will be
included are how to convey the information back to the user so they can have an
enjoyable and productive time of using the information point. Different programmes
will need to be looked at to make all the different parts of the project work correctly
and efficiently.
1.1 Aims
By the end of the investigation the following aims are to be completed. This is to find
out whether having a more personified interactive information point is beneficial or
detrimental for its overall use.
To create an object tracking animatron.
To have an interactive animatron.
To create an intuitive and friendly interface both for the animatron and
information point.
Test and collate the results of test subjects using the information point to find
out their response and feelings of using an interactive information point that is
life-like.
To have a completed dissertation with research, testing and evaluation into
the physical build and psychological aspects of an interactive information
point

7
1.2 Objectives
To overcome these aims the following objectives will need to be researched and the
results used accordingly within the rest of the investigation.
How to track an object – What pieces of hardware and/or software are needed
to track an object?
Interactive information point:
o What makes something interactive? – Look into existing information
point looking at the pros and cons.
Intuitive information point – Look at and investigate existing General User
Interface (G.U.I) and investigate the best and most reliable layout using the
appropriate software.
Investigate the software needed to make these statements possible and use
the one best suited for making an interactive information point
To create a questionnaire and test on a reasonable scale the affects of using
a more life-like interactive point
To create an electrical and programme information flow diagram.
Research into human-computer interaction (HCI)
Research into current life like animatronics and robotics and their effects on
humans
1.3 Deliverables
By the end of the research and project the deliverables that will be created either
physically or electronically will be:
Physical animatronic head.
Labview and Roborealm programme
Completed questionnaires and results
Electrical Diagrams
Programme information flow diagrams
Completed Dissertation

8
1.4 Gantt Chart
Michael Grant 07001269 Dissertation Gantt Chart
09/10/09
16/10/09
23/10/09
30/10/09
06/11/09
13/11/09
20/11/09
27/11/09
04/12/09
11/12/09
18/12/09
25/12/09
01/01/10
08/01/10
15/01/10
22/01/10
29/01/10
05/02/10
12/02/10
19/02/10
26/02/10
05/03/10
12/03/10
19/03/10
26/03/10
02/04/10
09/04/10
16/04/10
23/04/10
30/04/10
Main
Project Proposal
Research
Physical
Object Tracking / Roborealm
Academic Papers
Labview
Diagrams - Electrical/ Information Flow
Physiological
Current Views (T.V. And Film)
Academic Papers
Build and Test
Physical Build
Programming
Test Build and Programming
Questionnaire Research
Participant Testing
Collaborate Results
Interim Progress Report
Ethics
Write Report
Final Hand in

9
2.0 Information Point
This section will be looking at information points already being used in the public
sector. This could include anything from an information point in a museum or a place
of public interest like a town centre or shopping centre. Appendix 11 / Appendix 12/
Appendix 13/ Appendix 14/ Appendix 15/ Appendix 16 are all examples of
information points that could be used by the general public. These information points
all have several things in common. They all use a computer screen to convey their
information and some even have speakers to convey audio information. All the
screens are placed at what seems to be a “normal” height. This is significant in the
sense that that the position of the information point would be prudent in its
effectiveness.
Some information points have touch screens to allow for easier use of the
information point. Although this would make the information point in this dissertation
more effective, time and money constraints stop this from happening. Taking this
into account, the front end of the information point will have its design carefully done
so that it could be used on a touch screen surface in the future.
Although the information points have 2 way communication in the sense that a user
can ask a question and the information point can return the answer either verbally
through speakers or through information on the screen, none of them are interactive
in the sense that they do not know when the user is there until they ask it for
information. Adding a form of interaction (such as verbal responses) so that the
information point is deemed to know about the user before they start using the
information point adds to the effect of being humanlike in its reaction. The fact that
the information point has “noticed” the user by following it or starting off the
conversation with the user would have a far better chance of being effective and a
better chance of somebody using the information point in the first place.
All the information points have no humanoid features to them whether it is a head
with a moving jaw or even just an animatronic head. This shows from a business
aspect that if people like using the information point that is going to be created in this
project then there is a gap in the market for this type of product.

10
2.1 Psychological Background
The second part of this dissertation is looking at how people react to animatronic
information points
To prove this, research will be done into pre-recorded events of people becoming
more involved and humanising with animatronics/ robotics. The second part of this
research will be to test this hypothesis with questionnaires asking people to use the
created animatronic information point and record their reactions to it.
To show the reaction of people working with a humanoid robot Brooks (2002 p96)
has stated that “Cynthia would sit them down in front of the robot Kismet and then,
“Speak to the robot.” People were left to their own devices to figure out what that
meant and how to speak to the bodiless head... Most people were soon able to strike
up a conversation with Kismet, even though Kismet only babbles nonsense syllables
and does not understand a word anyone says to it.” Brooks (2002 p96) also goes on
to say that “...it is also fascinating just to watch the tapes. Most people know when it
is their turn to speak – they really understand that they are participating in a
conversation with a robot, albeit a content free conversation.”
Looking from these extracts from Brooks (2002), it could be taken that people seem
to be more comfortable and “open” with their conversations with a robot that has
been designed and react like a humanoid.
Another piece of research that could be covered in both the psychological aspects of
the animatron and the design is going to be discussed in the following section. The
article is Breazeals‟ (2000) article on human-computer interaction where he states
“We have implemented an expressive vocalization system that supports novel
utterances. In doing so, we have addressed issues regarding the expressiveness
and richness of Kismet‟s vocal modality, and how it supports social interaction. We
have found that the vocal utterances are rich enough to facilitate interesting proto
dialogs with people.” (Breazeal, 2000, p 328).
From Breazeals‟ extract a conclusion can be taken that other people in the same
field of research have found that adding expressions and movements as well as

11
having speech that interacts with the viewer / user improves the two way interaction
rate of both the animatron and the user. Another point that can be taken from this is
that adding expressions to make the animatron act more like a human would
increase its effectiveness.
Empathy with robotics and animatronics is a major part of this research. This next
article is about research done into how empathetic people are towards different
types of robots and animatronics. When using the term “different” in this case, it
means several robots were used in the test ranging from completely automated and
robotic through to life like robotics and androids and ending up with actual humans.
Riek et al (2009 p5) state that “We found strong support for our second hypothesis,
that people are more empathetic toward human-like robots and less empathetic
toward mechanical-looking robots. This result is compatible with Simulation Theory
which states that people mentally „simulate‟ the situation of other agents in order to
understand their mental and emotive state, and that the more similar the other agent
is to the empathizer the stronger the empathy process is”.
From the article by Riek et al a conclusion can be taken which is useful to the current
project that people and therefore the users would be more willing to empathise, react
and interact with the animatronic information point if it were human in its appearance,
which in previous research in this dissertation has shown that an animatronic human
head will be used in the practical and physical side of this project.
One occurrence that will be looked at is an experiment that was done in Japan in
2004 looking at how to create and how people interacted with an animatronic fish
tank. The part that will be studied here is the user-interface and the discussions
behind it (Terada and Yamamoto, 2004).
Terada and Yamamoto (2004, p 1818) state that “This animatronics system is based
on the “system reality” model whereby spectators take pleasure in watching the
robotic fish swimming in the tank. The premise is that reality appeals to human
sensitivity. The spectators compare the known image in their brain with the robotic

12
image before them and determine the level of realism (and by extension the level of
pleasure).”
A hypothesis would be that people would be more interested in using the animatronic
information point if it is what they expect it to be. For example a person is more likely
to react in a positive manner if the information point is something predictable like a
human, rather than something that is different to what they were expecting that could
possibly be irrelevant to the situation and potentially off-putting, like a hand making
the gesture of talking when it is explaining something back to the user.
Taking the extract from Terada and Yamamoto (2004) into account, this backs up
the hypothesis that users like to use and control animatronics and informational
systems. This extract is also useful in reaffirming the decision to use an animatronic
human head. The reasoning behind this is that from the extract Terada and
Yamamoto state users enjoyed interacting with an interactive animatronic fish tank
because it had realistic animatronic fish in it that in turn returned pleasure back to the
user. An animatronic information point being built in this project will benefit the
builder and users and will be more successful if the animatron is something well
known, like a human head.

13
Another point of interest into why using an animatronic human head for an
information point is more prevalent than using a different species or using virtual
reality is Honda‟s research into the Asimo programme. Although this is not an
animatronic information point it does show how companies in today‟s world are
putting money into research and development to recreate human like robotics
through its movements and social interaction. Asimo is a name given to the project
in which several identical looking robots that each have been programmed or altered
slightly to perform tasks that humans can do, whether this is walking or decision
making. This shows that people are researching into interaction with robotics that are
human in form.

14
2.1.1 Uncanny Valley
The uncanny valley is a name given to the shape of the diagram that is widely used
to describe the relationship between the interactivity of users with either robotics or
humans.
The picture shown in Figure 1 Uncanny Valley shows the diagram as previously
discussed.
Figure 1 Uncanny Valley
The graph above shows that humans are more likely to interact with other humans
the most. Whereas something like a more inanimate object, like a toy, is less likely to
have someone holding a complete conversation with it.
At the moment the interactive information point is most likely to fit on the graph at the
first peak before it drops off to corpse. With this statement there is expected to be a
high level of “familiarity” and therefore a high level of reaction and response to the
interactive information point.
Zia-ul-Hague et al (2007, p2228) states the following about why people react
differently whilst interacting with different robots and humans
“Having a humanlike face provides the benefit of universally recognized facial
expressions, an understood focal point of interaction etc. Some researchers suggest
that an iconic/minimal face to be sufficient as it provides a sense to project one‟s

15
own emotions and expressions, and to apply their own identity to the robot whereas
the completely realistic face may increase false expectation in users.”
This passage is particularly relevant to the dissertations outcome as this reaffirms
the decision to use a human head rather than any other head as people are more
likely to interact and communicate with the robotic head.
From this a conclusion can be made that people are more “friendly and trusting” of
objects that they recognise like other human faces and expressions.
Zia-ul-Hague et al (2007, p2230) also state that “The eerie sensation generated in
human by humanlike robots is supposed to be due to a reminder of mortality from
the robots.” This passage again reinstates the fact that using a humanoid head in
appearance is the best step forward as this is the most likely to gain a response, but
this statement shows that this interactive information point will never completely
replace a human in the same role but still has some standing and will work to some
extent. It was found that “88% of subjects said that they were attracted or amused
with these robots whereas only 6% felt eerie. Remaining 6% were not clear about
their feelings during interaction.” This statement shows that people are attracted and
are more likely to use robotics that are more human like in appearance. “53% of the
visitors liked the most humanlike robot (the third one) whereas almost 30% of them
liked the singing doll. 11% visitors liked the least realistic but still much humanlike
one, whereas 6% could not decide.” This shows that from other people‟s
experiments that people like humanoid looking robotics the most and the second
biggest group of people liked the robot that acted like a human by singing. This is
relevant to this dissertation as is shows that people are likely to pick the more human
like robotics compared to something like an inanimate object.
Shimada et al (2007, p374) summarises in one sentence why using a humanoid
head is needed, “The uncanny valley ...must be avoided from the viewpoint of
communication robot design”. This statement shows that having a robot/ animatronic
object whose main purpose is to communicate, which in this dissertation and project
it is, then beating or using the uncanny valley to gain an advantage will get the best
result. Taking this into account the style of robot/ animatronic that is going to be
made will in turn have a correlation to where the robot is placed on the graph, and if

16
the placement is correct then the overall outcome can have a greater chance of
success.
In summary the main parts to consider whilst making the physical animatronic is that
it needs to resemble something that is familiar and appropriate to the user so that it
not only does not scare or frighten the user but allows the user to create an
emotional bond with it because the user empathises with it. Other aspects that need
to be considered are that the animatron needs to react in the correct fashion, so for
example the animatron needs to react when objects/ users come close to it, as a
human would do. The animatron also needs to make subliminal gestures, for
example when giving directions people often use their hands or point their head in
the direction that needs to be followed. This should be mimicked so that the
interactive animatronic information point has the best chance of not only working but
working effectively so that people can enjoy the full benefits.

17
2.2 Object Tracking
One of the main parts of the physical build is its interactivity with the audience. One
way of doing this is to have the hardware track the user as they come near to it, as to
simulate the effects of one human asking another for information.
Object tracking can be done in several different ways, using a vision system (using
real life images to track the object), ultrasonic and heat sensors (using infra red
sensors).
Below lists the pros and cons of each system for use in an interactive information
point.
Real time Vision
Uses a real life images whether it is from a webcam or any other image
acquisition device and turns the image into a set of digital information for the
software tracking programme to use to track an object within the field of view.
Pros:
Most accurate in terms of defining a human object compared to
the others
Depending on type of camera, it is not usually affected by other
non-essential data. This could include thermal data from other
sources like radiators or from inanimate objects heating up over
the day.
Cons:
A lot of processing power is needed; usually a static information
point or a mobile P.C. is needed to compute the tracking
requirements to make the system work.
Ultrasonic
Ultrasonic sensors have a two step cycle for the software to compute. The
first step is that the software will tell the ultrasonic sensor to send out a “ping”.
The second part of the process is that the ultrasonic sensor waits for the

18
“ping” to return after hitting an object. From the time is takes to be returned
the distance, or the fact that there is even an object there, can be calculated
(ehow.com 2010).
Pros:
Not affected by the light spectrum. The sensor is not affected by
the visible light spectrum and does not mistake things that are
similarly shaped to humans.
Cons:
Can not differentiate between what a human is compared with
any other object.
The sensor cannot tell the direction of the object or whether it is
human or not, unless it uses several sensors at the same time
(Low 1991).
Infrared
Thermal infrared imagers are detector and lens combinations that give a
visual representation of infrared energy emitted by objects. Thermal infrared
images let you see heat and how it is distributed. A thermal infrared camera
detects infrared energy and converts it into an electronic signal, which is then
processed to produce a thermal image and perform temperature calculations.
Thermal imaging cameras have lenses, just like visible light cameras. But in
this case the lens focuses waves from infrared energy onto an infrared sensor
array. Thousands of sensors on the array convert the infrared energy into
electrical signals, which are then converted into an image (Cool Cosmos,
2010)
Pros:
Can track movement of heat sources
Cons:

19
Easily affected by non-human sources of heat, such as radiators
and outside sources of heat. Also cannot tell the difference
between human and animal sources of heat
2.2.1 Hardware
The hardware that will later be used is a U.S.B. (Universal Serial Bus) webcam, for
two reasons.
1. The connection with other hardware, such as the laptop that the object
tracking software will be running on.
2. The digital signal that the webcam will provide is needed by the
software for it to be able to track and then output to the servo
controller.
The webcam that will be used is the Microsoft Life Cam VX-1000.
Camera Imaging Type: CMOS VGA
Camera Imaging Size: 640 x 480 pixels
Video FPS (Frame per Second): 30
(Microsoft, 2010)
There are two reasons for choosing this particular camera. The first reason is that
this camera was already available without incurring any extra cost. The second
reason for choosing this camera is that it gives enough definition for an effective
outcome without comprising the computational speed of the computer the camera is
linked to as this machine will also be controlling other aspects of the interactive
animatronic head.
When an analogue image is being converted in to a digital one a certain process
takes place to allow the image to be used by the computer. The sensor of the
camera (CMOS in this case) assigns a pixel to a certain part of the image. As the
camera in question has a resolution of 640 x 480, this gives the overall amount of
pixels to be 307,200. Each of these pixels is then given a value depending on its

20
colour or intensity. In the example of a black or white image the pixel is given a value
or either 1 or 0 depending on whether it is black or white. In the case of a colour
sensor more variations will be needed. The calculation in this case would be
dependent on the colour depth of the image acquisition; in this case it is 256 bits.
256 bits is also the equivalent of 512 individual colours because of the available 256
bits there is an on and off option available, also known as binary, per pixel. This
calculation was done using the same techniques used by Low (1991). This
calculation was adjusted to calculate colour images rather than a monotone image
as in the book.
2.2.2 CMOS (Metal-Oxide Semiconductor)
This image acquisition device converts light into electrons. The CMOS is
constructed on a 2D array of a certain resolution, in the case of this camera it is 640
x 480. The light being input onto the CMOS chip has individual pixels which then
transfer the information into electrical data. Each pixel then has several transistors
which allow the light information to be changed into digital information for the
computer to analyse (How Stuff Works, Unknown Date).
2.2.3 Software
The software that will be used in this project is called Roborealm. This software
takes the digital data from the U.S.B. and allows for different filters to be added to
the image to allow for just the required object(s) to be tracked. Some examples are
the preset “skin” filter which takes out the entire non-skin colour from the image and
only shows what is visible when skin is in the frame (Roborealm, 2009).
The software also has a preset link for using the Parallax servo controller that will be
controlling the servos for the head rotation and the jaw action to mimic speech. This
software was given with a free licence from the company that produces this
programme on the understanding that it would be used for educational purposes.

21
2.2.4 Interaction with the user
In the following section there will be screen prints of the different steps taken so that
the camera can accurately track a human object, whether it is a hand or a face.
Each step will show what was done and how this benefits or hinders the final
outcome.
What was done? Does this help towards
the final outcome?
Picture
Evidence
Camera Properties – This filter
allows the camera to be accurately
set up within the program, allowing
other filters to be added later on
Yes – This is a mandatory
filter, which without it none
of this would work
Appendix 1
Skin – This takes the incoming
pictures and with the settings that
have been put in place have
allowed for images to only show
skin colour. The mask option was
also used in this case to make the
“skin” colour stand out even further.
This also allows for the further filters
to work more efficiently and
effectively.
Yes – This filter is one of
the most important as it
allows the camera to track
just the humans in the
scene. This is the main
part of the project and
allows the outputs, to react
to the input of the images
being gathered.
Appendix 2
Parallax Control – This controls
the parallax servo controller, within
the settings certain servos can be
assigned a different variable (In this
case C.O.G X and C.O.G. Y, which
will be explained in the next filter).
Yes – This filter allows the
computer, which is
computing the images and
the variables within, to talk
to the servo controller. This
in turn makes servos react
to the variable.
Appendix 3
C.O.G. (Centre of Gravity) – This
takes the images being input
through the camera and assigns a
Yes – This gives a number
to the position of the skin
in the scene. This
Appendix 4

22
number depending on the position
of the main part of the image. In
this case it assigns the centre of
gravity to the “masked” skin colour.
combined with the Parallax
Servo controller gives the
servos a position number
depending on the position
of the centre of gravity in
the scene
2.2.5 Interaction with information point
The Roborealm software has a built-in preset for the Parallax servo controller, this
allows for the tracking data used from the above filters to be sent to the servo
controller so that it can tell where the positions of the servos need to be.
Refer to Appendix 3 for software interaction between these two components.
2.2.6 Servo Controller
The servo controller in this project is used so that data from the Roborealm software
can be translated in to real life movement using servos and it also allows for the pre-
recorded data from the stored answers from the information point to be accessed
and played out. The servo controller takes positional information in a digital format
and then uses an external power source to move the servo into its correct position.
This particular servo controller allows for multiple servos to be connected to it at the
same time allowing for more complex and simultaneous actions being done by the
servos (Parallax, 2009).
Below is the picture of the Parallax Servo controller that will be used in this project
and what all of the major components on this board.

23
Figure 2
2.2.7 Servo
Having deconstructed a servo it can be described as a highly geared motor with a
step by step precision which allows for accurate stopping each and every time. The
servo uses numeric data which allows for it to go back into the same position each
time, which is useful for the pre-recorded messages in the information point. The
other asset to using a servo is that the motor has a high torque ratio compared to a
regular r/c motor, which in these instances where a head will be moving will allow it
to interact with the user in a more human and life-like response.
Below is a deconstructed view of a servo and what the different parts do in relation to
the whole product.
(Parallax, 2009)
Power Input – This is needed as
the USB port that is used for
programming does not carry the
required voltage for the servos to
USB port – This allows for two
way communication between the
servo controller and the PC.
Servo Headers – This takes the
positive and negative charge from
the power input and the directional
information from the USB port and

24
Figure 3
This is a diagram of how the different components relate to each other. The diagram
shows how the information flows between different components, whether it is image
data or positional data from the servos.
Top Cover – Protects
the gears.
High ratio gears turns motor
into highly positional and
powerful output (torque wise).
Base Cover –
Protects the electrical
components.
DC Motor and Circuit Board – Turns electrical energy into rotational
energy which is then output through the gearing. The circuit board
also allows the servo to rotate in both directions and allows the position
to be accurately gained.

25
Figure 4
Below is an electrical diagram of how the components fit together in regards to the
electrical inputs and outputs.
Figure 5

26
3.0 Production Method
To create the animatronic head for the interactive information point certain materials
and production methods were needed for its creation.
The head was sourced from www.sillyjokes.co.uk the reason for using this particular
head is that it has been used before in previous projects and altering it to allow it to
move with servos will be particularly easy.
Other parts of the project that will hold the animatronic head will allow it to move on
the different axis.
Acrylic was chosen as this material is relatively cheap and can be used with ease to
be cut into different shapes. This material can be changed into different shapes by
heat (line bender).
In the design of the model certain shapes are going to be needed to be cut out.
These shapes would be hard to cut out by hand so the decision has been made to
use a CNC laser machine to cut out the parts of the acrylic.
The machine that the acrylic was cut out on was a Gravograph LS500XL CO2 Laser
printer.
The set up time was approximately15 minutes with the first A3 sheet taking
approximately 2 minutes to be printed out and the second piece took approximately
10 minutes to be printed out.

27
3.1 Autotalk.
Originally a piece of hardware called “Autotalk” which can be sourced from
http://www.bpesolutions.com was going to be used to make the servo connected to
the mouth move in time with the audio files.
This piece of hardware works by setting the higher and lower limits of movement of
the servo. It then takes audio information into the board and uses the electrical
information of the audio to tell the servo where to move. For example when there is
little or no sound being produced this in turn produces a low or no electrical current
through the audio jack. This Autotalk board then tells the servo to go to its close
position. This also works in exactly the opposite way when the there is audio
information being played to the board
Unfortunately due to technical difficulties, which in turn created time constraints, this
product could not be used. The technical difficulties that occurred were that the
information was being taken in to the board and the board was moving the servo
(which was connected to the mouth). The board was not sensitive enough and did
not have a quick enough reaction time to keep up with the audio. Trial runs of
reducing the speed of the speech were done, but it had to be slowed down to such
an extent that it became inaudible to the user. Due to this the product had to be
taken out and a change in the Labview programme was made so that the mouth
servo was included.
3.2 G.U.I.
The front end of the programme that the audience will be using will have all of the
relevant information for them to be able to use it. This will include instructional data
on what they need to do to be able to get the required information that they are
seeking.
3.3 Labview
Labview is a piece of software that is produced by National Instruments. This
software is going to be used for 2 different parts of the physical project. The first is to
play sounds, in this case pre-recorded WAV files, and the second is to send
information to the servo controller so that the servos can move to different positions
to create different effects. This first part of the software is to play pre-recorded audio
files at the click of a button so the answers to the questions that the users will want

28
to know can be heard aurally. This is done by using a piece of freeware called
“Panopreter” that records text into an audio format. This audio file is then played
through Labview. The specifics of the programme can be shown in the diagram
below.
Figure 6
What this programme does is to take the file path, which in this case is the file path
of the audio file and tells the programme to “read” what file type it is. The next stage
in this programme is to have the file played through “Play Waveform” object. The
result of this is that the programme plays the file when the button is pressed. This is
then repeated for the other questions, with the file path being changed depending on
which question/answer it is being used for.
As previously stated this programme will also send information to the servo
controller. Although this could be done “live”, with the user having direct control on
where the servo is positioned, the decisions not to do this was twofold. The first
because the user could damage part(s) of the programme or physical model by
trying to make the servo perform out of its limits. The second reason is that having a
pre-recorded set of movements will have a greater effect of being more interesting to
the user. These movements can then be interpreted so that the movement of the
mouth can be timed together with the audio file. This again adds to the effect that
this information point will be more humanlike in its appearance and reactions and
therefore will have a greater effect of working. As shown from previous research
having a robot that reacts like a human, will be more appealing to the users.

29
Figure 7
This diagram shows how the programme sends information to the servo controller so
that the servos can move. Starting on the left hand side of the image the “Ok” button
is linked to the rest of the programme, so when this button is pressed it then creates
a “True” statement which plays the programme within the box to the right of it. When
this button is not being pressed it creates a “False statement which in turn makes the
programme do nothing.
The next part of the programme, labelled Part 1, has 2 different elements to it. The
first element is to have the programme read and open a file with the information
about the positions of the servos, in the same way that the previous programme did
by using a file path to tell the programme where the information is. The second part
of the box labelled Part 1 is the programme telling the computer where to send the
information and how to do it. The “Com 6” in this case refers to comport on the
computer that this programme is being run on. The com-port is needed to be known
as this comport relates to which USB port the servo controller is connected to.
The part of the programme labelled Part 2 is the part of the programme that
configures the information so that it can be sent to the servo controller and the
correct servo on said servo controller. The part of the programme that is labelled
“SC” tells the computer and the running programme that the information will be sent
Part 1 Part 2

30
to a Servo Controller which in the programme has been abbreviated to “SC”, which is
a built in preset in Labview which helps with the communication between the pc and
the controller. The part of the programme can also be configured depending on what
servos are going to be used.
Although the basis of the programme in Part 2 of the previous diagram was a
programme originally made by Wane (2009), parts have been modified and created
to make it work in the current situation. In the next section, the “recording
programme” is discussed, which was also created by Wane (2009).
The recording programme is shown in Appendix 9/Appendix10. This part of the
programme is used to make a “recording” of the servo position. This is done by
using a knob on the front end of the programme, which not only represents its own
position in the real world with a servo and the Parallax USB servo controller but it
also allows the programme to take that positional information and turn it into data
that can be used and recalled at a later point. The programme has several variables
that can be changed, these include the output data path, which is where the
information is going to be stored and saved once the Labview programme has been
stopped. The other is that the recording rate can be changed so that more or less
readings can be taken per second depending on how much movement there is. For
example if there is a lot of movement within the piece that needs to be recorded then
the data collection would be increased every second to get a more accurate
representation. The drawback of this though is that it has a larger file size.
The final programme can be found in “Appendix 8”
In summary the physical build has all the elements as described in the psychological
background. The animatronic information point follows the nearest “skin coloured”
(which in this case would be a human) object around the room as a human would do,
the user can then ask the information point 1 question at a time from the 4 preset
into the computer at the moment. The information point then reacts by speaking so
that the answer can be heard but the jaw also moves to mimic the speech.
Accompanying some of the responses there is subliminal messages where the
interactive animatronic information point turns its head in the direction that it is giving
out.

31
4.0 Testing and Evaluation
4.1 Testing
Testing of this project will be done on a questionnaire bases, looking at the reactions
of people using both a standard information point and one that has an animatronic
interface to it. The questionnaire will be available both in a physical medium and a
virtual one. This will then allow for people to use the animatronic in person and
online, allowing for a far greater and wider range of results to allow the results to
have a more accurate outcome.
4.2 Questionnaire
The questionnaire will have two parts to it; the first is to collect data by using closed
questions with predefined multiple choice answers. The second part of the
questionnaire has more open ended questions allowing the user to express any
comments/ questions that they might have. The first part of the questionnaire is
being done in this way because it allows for easy data collection. Having a wide
variety of closed questions with predefined answers allows for the person filling in
the questionnaire to express the feelings about the experience but also allowing the
responses to be correlated and put into chart form. Allowing the data to be put into
chart form allows for easier and more concise conclusions to be created.
The Questionnaire can be seen in Appendix 5/Appendix 6. The questionnaire
disclaimer can also be found in Appendix 7 which allows for the data to be collected
and used in this dissertation, it also tells the users of anything important that they
might need to know about the information point before they start using it.
4.3 Questionnaire results
Appendix 17and Appendix 18 are screen shots taken from the collated results of the
questionnaire that was placed on the internet. This questionnaire was placed on the
internet containing a video with the information point in action. The screen shots
contain the details of how people voted in the questionnaire for validity.
The results were monitored closely to stop any answers being counted, if they stated
that they had not agreed to the terms and conditions of the questionnaire. As it
turned out all the people that participated in the questionnaire agreed to the terms

32
and conditions. If they had not agreed to the terms and conditions then their results
would have been taken out and discarded from the overall outcome.
Appendix 19 and Appendix 20 are copies of the answers given in the open ended
questions.
Appendix 21 through to Appendix 30 are pie chart representations of the answers,
the pie charts have been colour coded to help with identification and clarification.
Answers that “Completely Agree” or “Almost Completely Agree” are colour coded
green, answers that “Neither Agree or Disagree” are colour coded blue and the
answers that either “Almost Completely Disagree” or “Completely Disagree” are
colour coded red.
As seen below each answer from the questions of the questionnaire have been
analysed so an overall conclusion can be made.
“Compared to the information point without the animatronic head would you
be more likely to use the information with the animatronic head?” (Appendix
21)
From the answers given, a third of the people would prefer to use an information
point with an animatronic head; this bodes well for the original hypothesis of having a
more human like appearance to an information point. A further 28.57% of people
answered that they Almost agreed with the question, which in total is over 60% of
people asked would prefer to use an information point with animatronic head rather
than one without.
“Would the information point with the animatronic head make for a more
interesting use of an information point?” (Appendix 22)
The answers to this question are unsurprising considering the answers give in the
previous question. In total 90.48% people either completely agreed or almost
completely agreed with the statement that having and animatronic interactive
information point would make for a more interesting use compared to just a standard
interactive information point like the ones in Appendix 11 to Appendix 16.

33
“Would the information point with the animatronic head make for a more
enjoyable use of an information point?” (Appendix 23)
This question asks whether the participants believed it would make for a more
enjoyable experience if the information point had an animatronic head. Nearly 50%
of people agreed that using an animatronic information point would make for a more
enjoyable experience and a further 19% of people almost completely agreed that it
was a more enjoyable experience.
“Do you think that an animatronic information point makes for a more personal
experience for gaining information?” (Appendix 24)
The answers given to this question were surprising considering the answers given in
the previous questions. A third of the people answered that they did not agree or
disagree to the question. A further 35% of people either completely or almost
completely disagreed with the statement that having this animatronic information
point made for a more personal experience. This may be due to the fact that,
although the information point is a representation of a head, it is either not close
enough to a real head or they have not spent enough time with the information point
to make a personal connection with it to make it a more personal experience.
“Was the information from the information point conveyed in appropriate way?
(e.g. Was it audible)” (Appendix 25)
This question was to gauge the response of what people thought to how they
received the information, and if that the decision to use the head and its jaw moving
to represent speech was a good idea and if it added to the overall effectiveness of
the information point.
In total nearly 60% of people either completely agreed or nearly agreed with the
statement that using both audio and visual “extras” to the answers was a good idea
and that people thought it added to the overall effectiveness of the interactive
animatronic information point.

34
“Would you say that using the information point with the animatronic head
was “Scary” or “Invasive”?” (Appendix 26)
This question was making sure that even though people might have thought the
experience was enjoyable and interesting that they also thought it was not potentially
scary or invasive. The reason for finding this out, is that people from all types of
backgrounds, genders and people from all age groups could use this animatronic
information point in a real world scenario, and having one that was either scary or
invasive could impeded its effectiveness in being an information point. Nearly 60% of
people answering that they did not think that the information point was invasive or
scary, meaning this type of information point could be used in the a real world
scenario and would be effective with all different demographics of people.
“Was using the “human” head a good idea, e.g. was it what you were
expecting to see whilst using and interactive information point?” (Appendix 27)
As per the previous answers to the previous questions, it could be concluded that
people thought it was a friendly, enjoyable and interesting experience to use an
animatronic information point, this questions asks if using a head was a good idea.
This was to establish whether the general public could back up the statements in this
dissertation on whether humanising and personifying an inanimate object, in this
case an information point, was a good idea. A third of people were undecided either
way, but nearly 45% of people either nearly completely agree or completely agreed
to the statement.
“Did the reactionary part of the animatronic (e.g. the head following
movement) add to the interactivity aspect of the information point?” (Appendix
28)
This question was to find out whether or not people thought it was a good idea to
have an animatronic information point, in this case a head, follow potential users
around the room and up to the information point stand and whether this added to the
effectiveness. The fact that just over 90% of people agreed with the statement
means that, again the reasoning behind using an animatronic head and having it

35
react in a humanoid fashion was justified by the audience agreeing that they like the
interactivity of the information point. The statement that “users would be more likely
to interact with an information point that is more human in its appearance or its
reactions” has been confirmed by the majority of people answering that they agreed
with the question.
“In future would you prefer to use an animatronic information point in
preference to a normal non animatronic information point?” (Appendix 29)
This question was to determine, if people were given a choice, which information
point would they would choose. The choices being either to use an animatronic
information point or a non-animatronic information point. 36.84% of people were
undecided either way and a further 36.84% of people were agreeing with the
statement that they would rather use the animatronic information over using a non
animatronic interactive information point. This not only backs up previous
statements that people are more likely to use something that they empathise with,
which as the research shows if an object is more human in its appearance more
people empathise with it, but it also backs up and concludes that an animatronic
interactive information point is more effective in not only people using the information
point in the first place but retaining the information that they were given, because it
was given in a human style response of the mouth moving to represent speech.
“Could you as a viewer/ user of information points see a future in making
information points more lifelike with animatronics?” (Appendix 30)
This was to test whether or not people could see a future of animatronic information
points and whether as a viewer or potential users whether they could see more and
more of these information points being used in different scenarios whether it is in a
museum, a town centre or anywhere else they need an information point to be.
Nearly 62% of people agreed with this statement, that they could see a future of a
having an animatronic information point. This could mean that because of this
investigation into the physiological effects of people and their reactions to an
animatronic information point, there could be a potential for a business for this type

36
of information point. But this will be discussed further in the conclusion segment of
the dissertation.

37
5.0 Conclusion
Below are a set of pictures of the finished animatronic information point.
Figure 8
Figure8 is a frontal view of the finished
product.
Figure 9
Figure 9 is a wider angle frontal view of the
interactive information point showing how all
of the different parts are connected. The
lower platform which is connected to the
servo on the right has an upper platform on
it which also contains the head movement.
The upper platform rotates independently
from the lower to allow vision tracking to
work independently from Labview.
Figure 10
Figure 10 is a top down view of the final
product which shows a different angle of
how everything is connected. It also shoes
the wiring. It also shows how two servo
controllers were used, 1 for Labview and
the other was used for Roborealm.

38
The psychological effect was as predicted; users were both intrigued and willing to
use this interactive information point. The results show that people liked the
information point and that using a head to create something that the user could
empathise was in this case was a good idea. The human head was used because
the research from “The Uncanny Valley” through to other humanoid animatronics
stated that using human looking animatronics invoked a response from users, which
as the questionnaire results show is true. Taking all of this into account the
information point used all of the hardware and software that was used created and a
good interactive information point was made so that it could be tested and the
responses gauged.
Below is a list of aims, objectives and deliverables that were previously stated in the
Introduction section of the dissertation. Any aims, objectives and deliverables that
were not completed will have an explanation as to why they were not completed.
Task Completed
Aims
To create an object tracking animatron.
Evidence: The video that people watched to be able fill in the
questionnaire, the video will also be available on the CD/DVD that will
be handed in as well.

To have an interactive animatron.
Evidence: Same as above.

To create an intuitive and friendly interface both for the animatron and
information point.
Evidence: The user‟s reaction to the information point was positive
enough to conclude that this section was completed.

Test and collate the results of test subjects using the information
point to find out their response and feelings of using an interactive


39
information point that is life-like.
Evidence: Questionnaire and Results can be found in the Appendix
To have a completed dissertation with research, testing and
evaluation into the physical build and psychological aspects of an
interactive information point.
Evidence: The completion and handing in of this dissertation

Objectives
How to track an object – What pieces of hardware and/or software
are needed to track an object?
Evidence: Several different programmes were looked into, such as
Labview and Roborealm. Also the hardware was looked into such as
servos and servo controllers.

Interactive information point:
What makes something interactive? – Look into existing information
point looking at the pros and cons.
Evidence: This was looked at in the dissertation, looking at previous
examples of existing information points.

Intuitive information point – Look at and investigate existing General
User Interface (G.U.I) and investigate the best and most reliable
layout using the appropriate software.
Evidence: Although specific G.U.I were not looked into, the layout
using the appropriate software was, the software that was being used
was Labview and the most appropriate user friendly design was
created for ease of use.

Investigate the software needed to make these statements possible
and use the one best suited for making an interactive information
point.


40
Evidence: Labview and Roborealm were used and discussed in
previous sections.
To create a questionnaire and test on a reasonable scale the affects
of using a more life-like interactive point.
Evidence: A questionnaire as well as the results can be found in the
Appendix section, where the questionnaire was an online version
were people watched a video of the information point in action. The
online questionnaire was used for ease of collation of results and
anonymity of people taking the questionnaire.

To create an electrical and programme information flow diagram.
Evidence: As per Figure 4 and Figure 5

Research into human-computer interaction (HCI)
Evidence: Although HCI was not specifically looked into other
branches of it were. Such as previous interactive animatronics and
how people reacted to them

Research into current life like animatronics and robotics and their
effects on humans
Evidence: Same as Above

Deliverables
Physical animatronic head.
Evidence: Photographs included in the CD/DVD attached to the
dissertation.

Labview and Roborealm programme
Evidence:


41
Labview - As per Figure 6, Figure 7and Appendix 8 and Appendix 9
Roborealm – As per Appendix 1through to Appendix 4
Completed questionnaires and results
Evidence: As per - Appendix 5, Appendix 6and Appendix 7 and
Appendix 17 through to Appendix 20

Electrical Diagrams
Evidence: As per Figure 5

Programme information flow diagrams
Evidence; As per Figure 4

Completed Dissertation
Evidence: Receipt of handing this dissertation being handed in.

Appendix 31 shows a revised Gantt chart showing alterations to the when the work
was being done. In the original Gantt chart in the introduction section, that specific
Gantt chart showed at the end of the chart that the last 4 weeks were for the write
up, which in this case was used for writing up the dissertation and also for other
parts that had not been completed in their allotted time. Using this “extra” time,
previous parts of the dissertation that were unfinished up to this point could be done
with a relative amount of ease and still had enough time for it to be completed to a
good enough standard. Due to time constraints certain parts of the project got behind
schedule, for example testing and evaluating the responses of the questionnaire, but
as there was an allotted 4 weeks “spare” these were still completed.

42
6.0 Recommendations
Certain aspects of the project could have been improved. The physical build can
build could be improved in the following way. The “Autotalk” piece of hardware or
similar piece of hardware software could be investigated more so that it could work
for a more realistic experience of the mouth moving in sync with the speech.
The main improvements suggested from the users were, the video quality needed to
be improved, which is partly relevant in the sense of the it needed to be clear enough
for people to see to be able to fill out the questionnaire but on the other hand this can
be improved in the future by using a higher quality camera setting. The other
improvement was about the skull part of the animatronic itself. As it will be later
discussed about future projects about improvements to the head, the original
reasoning behind using it was because it was something that was already used in
previous modules and so it was known that it could be modified. The other reasoning
behind using the skull was cost, if there was a bigger budget then prosthetics and
more human looking heads could have been used/ investigated so that they
potentially could have been used in this project.
Another improvement that could be made on a software part of the project is
something that was done in the information points that were looked at earlier in the
dissertation, is looking into having a language selection so that people from different
countries could use the interactive information point. Different aspects that would
need to be taken into account are an entirely new set of .wav files were would need
to be made for each individual language as well as entirely new set of servo files for
the mouth servo to read so that it could open and close the jaw in time with the
speech, if the animatronic information point uses the same hardware as used in this
information point.
As previously discussed and that also can been seen in Appendix 17, questions 10
and 11 people answered that they could see a future in animatronic information
points. This reaction to an animatronic information point was originally unpredicted.
The prospect of taking this information point into the real world would need further
research and development, in the sense of the design would have to be
interchangeable so that it could be used in a wide variety of situations. Another point
to factor in is whether there would be enough of a demand from companies such as

43
town councils and museums to be able to set up a business. Although taking this into
account this prospect will be looked into further outside this dissertation.
One part that dissertation that may cause a problem in the future that was noted was
the skin filter with Roborealm. The skin filter within Roborealm when originally tested
picked up on the light brown/pink tones in the flesh to track an object. The reasoning
for mentioning this is that whenever testing was done or the video was recorded for
the vision tracking, only Caucasians were used. This is not to say that it would not
work for people from different origins with different skin colour, it is to be noted that
no testing was done with people with different skin colour.
Further projects that could be looked into (whilst taking into account the feedback
given from users) include:
Air Muscles: Investigating how air muscles with prosthetic skin could be used to
make an effective and believable replacement to traditional prosthetic limbs. This
project would aim to use air- muscles to rein act what traditional muscles do in both
their action of moving bones and other parts of the body, but also be aesthetically
pleasing as well by rein-acting what muscles do visually.
Mobile Information Point: Using the existing project, but improve it by making it
mobile. Objectives in this project would include 3D tracking, looking at potentially
using 2 cameras to make a 3D image of the world around the animatron so that it
could move to the nearest user.

44
7.0 Reference
Breazeal, C (2000). Proto-Conversations with an anthropomorphic Robot [Online]
Available From:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=892518&isnumber=19279
[Accessed 14/01/2010]
Brooks, R (2002) Robot: The Future of Flesh and Machines. Penguin. Clays Ltd, St
Ives PLC, England
Cool Cosmos (Unknown Date). Teachers guide to Infrared: What is Infrared light?
How does it compare to visible light? Available from:
http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/image_galleries/ir_zoo/lessons/background.html
[Accessed 17/01/2010]
E-How (2010), How Ultrasonic‟s work. Available from: http://www.ehow.com/how-
does_4947693_ultrasonic-sensors-work.html [Accessed 12/04/2010]
Figure 1 Shimada, M.; Minato, T.; Itakura, S.; lshiguro, H.; , "Uncanny Valley of
Androids and Its Lateral Inhibition Hypothesis," [Online] Robot and Human
interactive Communication, 2007. RO-MAN 2007. The 16th IEEE International
Symposium on, vol., no., pp.374-379, 26-29 Aug. 2007Available from:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.ezproxy.staffs.ac.uk/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4415
112 [Accessed 11/03/2010]
How Stuff Works (Unknown Date). What is the difference between CCD and CMOS
Images sensors in a digital camera? Available from:
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question362.htm [Accessed 17/10/2010]
Low, A (1991) Introductory Computer Vision and Image Processing. McGraw-Hill
Book Company (UK) Limited, England
Microsoft. (Unknown Date). Life cam VX-1000 Datasheets. Available from:
http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/documentation/default.aspx?type=LifeCam&sku
=64L-00003. [Accessed 17/01/2010]
Parallax (2009). Parallax Propeller Servo Controller (USB). Available from:
http://www.parallax.com/StoreSearchResults/tabid/768/List/0/SortField/4/ProductID/5
95/Default.aspx?txtSearch=servo+controller [Accessed 17/10/2010]

45
Riek, L.D.; Rabinowitch, T.-C.; Chakrabarti, B.; Robinson, P, (2009) Empathizing
with Robots: Fellow Feeling along the Anthropomorphic Spectrum [Online] Computer
Laboratory, Centre for Music and Science, Autism Research Centre
Shimada, M.; Minato, T.; Itakura, S.; lshiguro, H.; "Uncanny Valley of Androids and
Its Lateral Inhibition Hypothesis," [Online] Robot and Human interactive
Communication, 2007. RO-MAN 2007. The 16th IEEE International Symposium on,
vol., no., pp.374-379, 26-29 Aug. 2007 Available from:
042 [Accessed 16/03/2010]
Terada, Y.; Yamamoto, I, (2004). An animatronic system including lifelike robotic fish
[Online] vol.92, no.11, pp. 1814- 1820, 2004. Available From:
6 [Accessed 14/02/2010]
University of Cambridge, UK. Available From:
9257 [Accessed 14/02/2010]
Wane, S. (2009) Network and Embedded Control of Animatronics. Staffordshire
University. 2009 [Lecture]
Zia-ul-Haque, Q.S.M.; Zhiliang Wang; Jadoon, N.R.; , "Investigating the Uncanny
Valley and human desires for interactive robots," [Online] Robotics and
Biomimetics, 2007. ROBIO 2007. IEEE International Conference on, vol., no.,
pp.2228-2233, 15-18 Dec. 2007. Available from
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.ezproxy.staffs.ac.uk/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4522
516 [Accessed 11/03/2010]

50
QUESTIONNAIRE
After using the animatronic information point, please fill in the questionnaire below to
the best of your ability, giving 1 answer for each question.
Completely
Agree
Almost
Completely
Agree
Neither
Agree
or
Disagree
Almost
Completely
Disagree
Completely
Disagree
Compared to the information point without the animatronic
head would you be more likely to use the information with
the animatronic head?
□ □ □ □ □
Would the information point with the animatronic head,
make for a more interesting use of an information point? □ □ □ □ □
Would the information point with the animatronic head,
make for a more enjoyable use of an information point? □ □ □ □ □
Do you think that an animatronic information point makes
for a more personal experience for gaining information? □ □ □ □ □
Was the information from the information point conveyed in
appropriate way? (e.g. Was it audible) □ □ □ □ □
Would you say that using the information point with the
animatronic head was “Scary” or “Invasive”? □ □ □ □ □
Was using the “human” head a good idea, e.g. was it what
you were expecting to see whilst using and interactive
information point?
□ □ □ □ □
Did the reactionary part of the animatronic (e.g. the head
following movement), add to the interactivity aspect of the
information point?
□ □ □ □ □
In future would you prefer to use an animatronic
information point in preference to a normal non
animatronic information point?
□ □ □ □ □
Could you as a viewer/ user of information points see a
future in making information points more lifelike with
animatronics?
□ □ □ □ □
Appendix 5

51
Are there any other comments about the animatronic information point
experience that you would like to add?
Are there any other comments / improvements in general that you would like to
add?
Appendix 6

52
Entertainment Research Dissertation
An investigation into the physical build and
psychological aspects of an interactive information point
This is an investigation into the affects of making an information point more human in
its appearance. Once you have used the information point please take the time to fill
in the following questionnaire.
Before doing so please read and sign below.
All participation is completely voluntary and you have the right to withdraw at
any point during the investigation.
You may wish to abstain from answering any or all of the questions from the
questionnaire.
All answers will be completely confidential and no personal information will be
taken.
Any follow up questions or if you would like to find out the results please
contact on: michael.grant.student@googlemail.com
Sign................................... Print Name.................................... Date.........................
Appendix 7

56
Appendix 11
http://www.kiosks4business.com/page.php?id=32&cmd=view

57
Appendix 12
http://www.icetechkiosks.co.uk/?gclid=CI-X2MXEgaECFRUslAodsVI7vQ

58
Appendix 13
http://www.touchscreens.com/products-kiosk-pedestal.html

59
Appendix 14
http://www.protouch.co.uk/Item/Kiosk5000/#overview

60
Appendix 15
http://www.kiosk.com/market/retail-kiosk-experience.php

61
Appendix 16
http://www.regent.edu/general/library/about_the_library/news_publications/200
7_03.cfm

64
Appendix 19
#12 » Are there any other comments about the animatronic information point
experience that you would like to add? (Type: Written Answer)
A program displayed on a monitor with a human face would work equally as well in making
the experience more interactive and would probably be less likely to break, be vandalised etc.
I think with smoother motion of the head and jaw, and a skin covering, the experience would
have been improved.
N/A
No
None
I do find it very 'scary' particularly because it is made from human form, perhaps this could
be a strong point for a particular audience? Teenagers perhaps? or perhaps a different form
may make it less daunting
the animatronic would act only as a entertainment entity or something for the children, but for
adult this could slow down the transfer on information and this could mean that adults are
less likely to use it on the move
/
No.
.
-
The TTS (Text To Speech) engine used detracts from the interactivity, using a smoother TTS
engine would have been a better choice, though that is a minor point
No, apart from Glenn is a homo, but that isn't relevant
No thank you :)
assed baig ftw
viva staffs!
I think it should look less human but sound more human. The skull is kinda threatening and I
believe it would frighten people. Interchangable skins for the varying seasons would be great.
For instance, a bunny at easter and santa at christmas. Save the skull for halloween.
i liked how it tracked your hand/face - i have very strong opinions about eye-to-eye contact

65
when interacting with other humans and feel this is a good addition to the animatronic head
Using a skull makes the information point quite threatening.
The voice was fairly difficult to understand on the first listening.
no
no

66
Appendix 20
#13 » Are there any other comments / improvements in general that you would like
to add? (Type: Written Answer)
Until the use of animatronic information points becomes a widely accepted idea, i think a
large number of people will find them offputting and avoid using them as it is a bit weird.
Also I should imagine vandalising one would be very easy...
N/A
The voice is a bit creepy, could be a bit more "friendly" sounding
Might work OK in some museums but would get bad reactions in most places.
Screens with speakers far more effective for conveying information, and allow for more
users. E.g. animatronic head completely useless for deaf people
No
the video quality made it difficult to see the jaw movement
/
No.
.
some of the survey questions in this format are not correct, e.g. 10 does not make complete
sence with the answers provided, in this case it should be true or false
-
N/A
If it were possible to make the jaw have stages inbetween fully closed and fully open, that
would make it more human like
Could have an arm which also points people in the right direction as a visual tool. Future
improvements could be the addition of more languages
assed baig ftw
viva staffs!
Nice work Michael!
need to sort out the lip-sync and stop it from finishing a sentence by opening it's mouth. You
also, seriously, need to improve the quality of the sample video as it makes it difficult to see
what you have achieved/made

68
Appendix 21
33.33%
28.57%
14.29%
14.29%
9.52%
Completely Agree
Almost Completely Agree
Neither Agree or Disagree
Almost Completely Disagree
Completely Disagree
Compared to the information point without the animatronic head would you be more
likely to use the information with the animatronic head?

69
Appendix 22
52.38%
38.10%
4.76%
0.00%
4.76%
Completely Agree
Completely Disagree
Would the information point with the animatronic head make for a more interesting
use of an information point?

70
Appendix 23
47.62%
19.05%
19.05%
4.76%
9.52%
Completely Agree
Completely Disagree
Would the information point with the animatronic head, make for a more enjoyable
use of an information point?

71
Appendix 24
19.05%
9.52%
33.33%
23.81%
14.29%
Completely Agree
Completely Disagree
Do you think that an animatronic information point makes for a more personal
experience for gaining information?

72
Appendix 25
19.05%
38.10%
19.05%
14.29%
9.52%
Completely Agree
Completely Disagree
Was the information from the information point conveyed in appropriate way? (e.g.
was it audible)

73
Appendix 26
23.81%
9.52%
9.52%
28.57%
28.57%
Completely Agree
Completely Disagree
Would you say that using the information point with the animatronic head was “Scary”
or “Invasive”?

74
Appendix 27
23.81%
23.81%
33.33%
9.52%
9.52%
Completely Agree
Completely Disagree
Was using the “human” head a good idea, e.g. was it what you were expecting to see
whilst using and interactive information point?

75
Appendix 28
47.62%
42.86%
0.00%
0.00%
9.52%
Completely Agree
Completely Disagree
Did the reactionary part of the animatronic (e.g. the head following movement), add to
the interactivity aspect of the information point?

76
Appendix 29
31.58%
5.26%
36.84%
5.26%
21.05%
Completely Agree
Completely Disagree
In future would you prefer to use an animatronic information point in preference to a
normal non animatronic information point?

77
Appendix 30
38.10%
23.81%
19.05%
4.76%
14.29%
Completely Agree
Completely Disagree
Could you as a viewer/ user of information points see a future in making information
points more lifelike with animatronics?

78
Appendix 31
Michael Grant 07001269 Dissertation Gantt Chart
09/10/09
16/10/09
23/10/09
30/10/09
06/11/09
13/11/09
20/11/09
27/11/09
04/12/09
11/12/09
18/12/09
25/12/09
01/01/10
08/01/10
15/01/10
22/01/10
29/01/10
05/02/10
12/02/10
19/02/10
26/02/10
05/03/10
12/03/10
19/03/10
26/03/10
02/04/10
09/04/10
16/04/10
23/04/10
30/04/10
Main
Project
Proposal
Research
Physical
Object Tracking /
Roborealm
Academic
Papers
Labview
Diagrams -
Electrical/
Information Flow
Psychological
Current Views
(T.V. And Film)
Academic
Papers
Build and Test
Physical Build
Programming
Test Build and
Programming
Questionnaire
Research
Participant
Testing
Collaborate
Results
Interim
Progress
Report
Ethics
Write Report
Final Hand in

An investigation into the physical build and psychological aspects of an interactive information point.pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to An investigation into the physical build and psychological aspects of an interactive information point.pdf

Similar to An investigation into the physical build and psychological aspects of an interactive information point.pdf (20)

More from Jessica Navarro

More from Jessica Navarro (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

An investigation into the physical build and psychological aspects of an interactive information point.pdf