This presentation was given during IDC2012 doctoral consortium. ABSTRACT of the accompanying dr-consortium paper: We are working towards a socially adaptive digital playground for children. To this end, we are looking into non-verbal synchrony and other social signals as a measure of social behavior and into ways to alter game dynamics to trigger and inhibit certain social behaviors. Our first results indicate that we can indeed influence social behaviors in a digital playground by changing game dynamics. Furthermore, our first results indicate that we will be able to sense some of these social behaviors using only computer vision techniques. I propose an iterative method for working towards a socially adaptive digital playground.

1. Towards a Socially Adaptive
Digital Playground
Robby van Delden
University of Twente
HMI

2. Outline
• Example of “Digital Playgrounds”
• A quick intro to synchrony of body movement
• One of our interactive playgrounds
• Results of observational study
• Design methodology
• Future Plans

3. Digital Playgrounds
Based on Sturm et al. (2008)
1) floors 2) walls
3) props 4) installations

4. Floor: STUMP
Wyeth, Adkins and Summerville (2011)
Crop from Figure 8

5. Wall: SUTU
Yalp & KiTT

6. Props: Feetup
Rosales et al. (2011)
Crop from Figure 2

7. Installation: interactive slide
Soler-Adillon and N. Parés (2009)

8. social interaction
& synchrony measurement

9. Synchrony measure
Figure is part of Fig 1, p337
Ramseyer&Tschacher(2008)

10. Synchrony measure
Figure is part of Fig 1, p337
Ramseyer&Tschacher(2008)
window size
||||||||||||||||| Pearson correlation
|||||||||||||||||
lag

11. Design Methodology
Tetteroo et al (2009)
GOALS
e.g. physical, social
_____________________
DIMENSIONS OF PLAY
e.g. time limit, item possesion
_________________________________
INTERACTIONS
e.g. switch a colour surrounding a person
when users are close to each other

12. Design Methodology
Roozendaal et al. (2009)
Transformation (goals)
e.g. Increase social interaction
measured by conversations
______________________________
Experience (psychological needs)
e.g. need for discovery
or competition
______________________________
Interaction (motor-sensory)
e.g. Jump to see
a piece of puzzle
______________________________
System
e.g. dancing on a musical staircase
Crop from Table 1

13. Design Methodology
[L] Tetteroo et al (2009), [R] Roozendaal et al. (2009)
HIGHER END GOALS
e.g. increase social interaction
__________________________
RATIONALE
e.g. gives opportunity for
competitive behaviour
__________________________
INTERACTION
user action – system response
e.g. when users come close
change item possession
__________________________
IMPLEMENTATION
e.g. change colour of shape
surrounding the players when
they are within 2m

14. Interactive Playground
Tetteroo et al (2009)

15. Interactive Playground
Tetteroo et al (2009)

16. Observations
Moreno et al. (2012, in press)
Agreement: κ= .27 to .37
“Item agreement”: κ= .67 - .92

17. Future plans: play analyses

18. Future plans: digital playgrounds
“destructive” elements
design methodology adaptive play mechanics
Synchrony (measurement)
A socially adaptive playground

19. Two questions
1) How does one select a suitable metaphor for
a design/installation for children in a
structured, efficient and effective way?
2) Should we make use of existing fantasy
contexts (from trends and hypes) like the
Smurfs and Disney movies?