Interactive Art and Meta-Design:
Collaboration and Co-Creation
Case Studies Results
Elisa Giaccardi
11 September, 2002, L3D
“You can’t create anything
by trying to separate yourself from others” (T. Anzai)
Interactive Art and Meta-Design
Overlaps
Meta-design
Interactive art
Consumer vs. designer
Viewer vs. co-author
Meta-design
Interactive art
Goals
Problem framing/
problem solving
No final goals,
experience per se
Motivations
Reflexive engagement,
empowerment
Emotional enjoyment,
value feeling
Exploitation
Knowledge
Intersubjectivity
Mindset
Differences
What Can We Learn From Interactive Art?
• Intrinsic motivations to intersubjective creativity
(case studies)
• Improvement of meta-design systems and interfaces in
terms of intersubjective creativity (case studies)
• Further development of the conceptual framework
of meta-design (theory)
Case Studies
The case studies have been chosen on the basis of their
interactional characteristics. They are creative environment
based on a high graphical interaction between participants.
•
•
•
Poietic Generator (poietic-generator.net)
Open Studio (www.artcontext.com)
SITO Synergy (www.sito.org)
Case Studies: Limitations and Advantages
LIMITATIONS
• Artists policies
• Regulars participants
• Number of participants
• Online environment
• Summer time
ADVANTAGES
• Artists collaboration
• First-hand experience
• Many years of direct observation
Collaboration and Co-Creation
•
WHY THIS METHOD?
•
•
•
The representation of values by colours matches
spontaneity of judgement;
It allows an istantaneous and dinamic
visualization of judging patterns;
It allows to explore information at 3 levels: local,
regional, global.
Don't want to answer
No opinion
Yes, absolutely
Rather Yes
It uses an ordinal and colored scale, whose data
are represented in a board;
It consists of both the combination of a logical
and a statistical representation.
Medium
•
Rather Not
HOW DOES IT WORK?
Absolutely not
Abaque de Régnier
Mosaic of Individual Perceptions
PARTICIPANTS
1
2
18
22
34
38
40
41
30
44
47
46
39
52
56
66
69
112
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
20
20
21
21
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
2 sessions
64 participants
27 respondents
18
19
19
1
2
18
22
34
38
40
41
30
44
47
46
39
52
56
66
33
35
36
37
51
53
54
59
58
57
60
62
63
65
72
98
69
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
QUESTIONS
GP:
19
33
35
36
37
51
53
54
59
58
57
60
62
204
200
86
87
201
202
203
205
206
207
208
106
63
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
22
22
23
23
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
204
200
86
87
201
202
203
205
206
207
208
106
65
72
98
112
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
OP:
2 sessions
unknown participants
16 respondents
SITO:
2 weeks online
12
respondents
TOT 55
respondents
Questions : Overview
19
19
8
8
6
6
18
18
2
2
12
12
20
20
1
1
15
15
17
17
16
16
5
5
3
3
13
13
21
21
14
14
4
4
9
9
7
7
18
18
8
8
2
2
6
6
10
10
11
11
19
19
12
12
16
16
1
1
3
3
13
13
14
14
4
4
5
5
15
9
7
7
17
OP:
Positive trend on items 18, 8, 2, 6
Negative trend on items 9, 7, 17
Reticenza alta
17
2
2
8
8
16
16
19
19
15
15
1
23
23
18
18
22
22
5
5
6
6
3
3
4
4
12
Positive trend on items 19, 8, 6, 18
Negative trend on items 9, 7
Rifiuto alto
15
9
1
GP:
12
7
7
9
9
13
13
14
14
17
17
SITO:
Positive trend on items 2, 8, 16, 19
Negative trend on items 13, 14, 17
Nessun rifiuto
Zona di frattura ridotta con accentuata
discontinuità sui consensi positivi e negativi
Positive Consensus: Co-Creation
[8] “I created something that was different than I would
have created alone” (statistical value 1,4)
[19] “I feel satisfied” (statistical value 1,8)
[16] “I felt there was a creativity that went beyond my
interaction with the computer” (statistical value 1,9)
[6] “My interaction with other participants was guided by
the visualization of their activity” (statistical value 2,0)
[2] “I felt that I interacted creatively with others”
(statistical value 2,1)
[18] “The experience is more important than the outcome”
(statistical value 2,1)
Negative Consensus: Co-Creation (more)
[17] “The outcome is predictable” (statistical value 3,4)
[7] “My interaction with other participants was guided
by my chatting with them” (statistical value 3,4)
[9] “Previous knowledge of the people I was interacting
with was relevant” (statistical value 3,0)
[14] “The outcome of interaction was determined
mainly by the computational features of the system”
(statistical value 3,0)
Dissensus A : Relationships, Feelings and Goals
[3] “I was following a goal ” (statistical value 2,9)
[5] “I imagined what other participants had the intention
of doing” (statistical value 2,7)
[4] “I was emotionally coupled to other participants”
(statistical value 2,6)
[15] “The outcome of interaction was determined
mainly by the active relationship among participants”
(statistical value 2,5)
[1] “I felt influenced by other participants ”
(statistical value 2,4)
Dissensus B : Creative Environment
[20/21] “My activity was coupled to the activities of my
neighbours/to the global activity” (GP)
[10/11] “My activity was influenced by colours/by
strokes and marks” (OP)
[22/23] “My activity was influenced by the pictures of
my neighbours/by the whole of all the pictures” (SITO)
[12/13] “My relationships were affected mainly by the
space of interaction/by the time of interaction ” (all)
More on the Creative Environment
Space
GP
12
12
20
20
13
21
13
21
Colours
OP
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
12
12
13
13
13
Whole picture
SITO
23
23
22
22
12
12
13
13
Time (2,9) – Space (2,1)
Anomalous
Participants
Positions
22
124
124
66
66
22
22
125
125
44
44
121
121 126
126
41
41
46
46
11
122
122
52
52
119
119 118
118
18
18
123
123
40
40
69
69
47
38
56
39
34
120
112
30
19
19
8
8
6
6
18
18
2
2
12
12
20
20
1
1
15
15
17
17
16
16
5
5
3
3
13
13
21
21
14
14
4
4
9
9
7
GP:
Chatting vs. visual activity
7
22
124
124
66
66
22
22
125
125
44
44
60
60
65
65
35
35
33
33
58
58
57
57
121
121 126
126
63
63
36
36
41
41
46
46
11
122
122
52
52
62
62
98
98
72
72
37
37
51
51
119
119 118
118
59
59
53
53
18
18
123
123
40
40
69
69
47
38
56
39
34
120
112
30
54
54
18
18
8
8
2
2
6
6
10
10
11
11
19
19
12
12
16
16
1
1
3
3
13
13
14
14
4
4
5
5
15
OP:
Mere computation vs. emotional tone
15
9
9
7
7
17
17
60
60
65
65
35
35
33
33
58
58
206 200
200 207
207 208
208
206
87
87
57
57
63
63
36
36
62
62
201 203
203 106
106 204
204
201
98
98
86
86
72
72
37
37
51
51
59
59
53
53
54
54
202 205
205
202
2
2
8
8
16
16
19
19
15
15
1
1
23
23
18
18
22
22
5
5
6
6
3
3
4
4
12
12
7
7
9
9
13
13
14
14
17
17
206 200
200 207
207 208
208
206
87
87
201 203
203 106
106 204
204
201
86
86
202 205
205
202
SITO:
Rather homogeneous
6
6
Verbal Chatting vs. Visual Activity (GP)
22
125
44
121
126
41
46
1
122
52
119
118
18
123
40
69
47
38
56
39
34
120
112
30
[6] “My interaction with other
participants was guided by the
visualization of their activity”
19
8
6
18
2
12
20
1
15
17
16
5
3
13
21
[2] “I felt that I interacted creatively
with others” (light red)
14
4
9
7
22
125
44
121
126
41
46
1
122
52
119
118
18
123
40
69
47
38
56
39
34
120
112
30
[7] “My interaction with other
participants was guided by my
chatting with them” (yellow)
5
5
Mere Computation vs. Emotional Tone (OP)
35
33
58
57
63
36
62
98
72
37
51
59
53
54
18
8
2
6
10
11
19
12
16
1
[12] “My relationships were affected
mainly by the space of interaction”
3
13
14
4
5
15
9
7
17
35
33
58
57
63
36
62
98
72
37
51
59
53
54
[13] “My relationships were affected
mainly by the time of interaction”
[14] “The outcome of interaction was
determined mainly by the computational
features of the system”
Relationships, Feelings and Goals
Attractors and Pathways
HOW DOES IT WORK?
•
It defines a number of different pathways
according to different attractors;
•
It is based on qualitative information obtained
from an open-ended questionnaire and
unstructured interviews.
WHY THIS METHOD?
•
It allows to understand different attitudes and
motivations by which creative experience is
perceived and evaluated;
•
It allows to explore information both from the
“inside” (point of view of the individual) and from
the “outside” (emerging phenomena);
•
It visually stresses diversities of subjective
interpretations and show different paradigms.
41 respondents
between 25 June and
25 August 2002
Attractors and Pathways
Categories
Attractors
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
1.
2.
3.
Relationship quality
Relationship factors
Goals
Feelings
Context features
Motivations
Habits
Emotional
Explorative
Productive
Emotional Path
GP
OP
SITO
Emotional Path
Emotional Path: Summary
Goals are to relate and to create together.
Co-operation is connected to the perception
of a creative environment as open and
unpredictable.
Participants are moved by emotions and a
wide range of intersubjective feelings, mainly
related to an existential dimension. Their
personal traits, emotional behaviours, and
interactions are strictly interrelated and
embodied in their activity.
Emotional Path : Quotations
[goals] “Blend the images together, say something with my image, respond to
something with my image, incite something on others with my image” (Lenara).
[feelings] “Love/boredom/hate” (Bob); “Agony, ecstasy, silly” (Thomas).
[context features] “Ca dépend des jeux mais àcelui-là, il n' y a pas de gagnant. Ca
n'est pas compétitif. Il n' y a pas de règles et de directives précises. C'est de l'autoorganisation comme les fourmis” (Mickael); “L'imagination” (Giulia); “Wider
expression of community” (John).
[motivations] “Caratteri dei partecipanti” (Dante); “Feeling people” (Olivier A);
“Croire au partage et au collectif. Ne plus être un mais plusieurs. Quelque choçse lié
à la dispersion momentanée” (Mickael); “Creative procrastination” (Mark S); “It
affords me a chance to be creative in ways which I had not previously been” (Nick)
Explorative Path
GP
OP
SITO
Explorative Path
Explorative Path: Summary
The goal is to explore. Co-operation is
connected to the perception of a creative
environment as open and unpredictable.
Participants are moved by emotions and
individual feelings, mainly related to fun and
discovery. They feel related to each other by
many different factors, which go from
emotional factors to the features of the
environment and the system.
Explorative Path: Quotations
[relationship factors] “La couleur... et surtout la ligne colorée horizontale ou
verticale a fini par être perçu comme un appel, une invitation”(Jean-François).
[goals] “Fare un castello di sabbia con gli altri bambini” (Gabriella); “Investigate
process” (Margaret).
[feelings] “J'ai été très agréablement surpris. J'ai resenti tout de suite quelque chose
de très relaxant, attractif, doux...poétique...bien au delà des mots dans le silence ( y
avait il du son?)” (Jean-François); “Anxiousness, frustration, elation” (Ed).
[context features] “Multiple unspecified goals, no victory conditions, collaboration
over competition (Michael); “The goals are not clearly specified. there is a wide
latitude to define the meaning of the experience” (Andy) .
[motivations] “I'm learning” (Michael); “It was neat to see how other people would
interact with your objects. It was also neat to see what people wouldn't interact with.
You get to see what is going on” (Dan); “The people are interesting, its very
alive/dynamic, new things always popping up” (John).
Productive Path
Productive Path: Summary
Goals go from exploring to creating together. But
co-operation is functional to the production of an
outcome, and the environment is not perceived
as open and unpredictable.
Participants are focused on their activity and
moved by the visual stimuli coming from the
environment. But they feel alienated from other
participants.
Productive Path: Quotations
[relationship factors] “Blind” (Borg).
[feelings] “I was much too concentrated on the process to realise what my
feelings about it were” (Federica).
[motivations] “The discovery of the outcome and the process of building it
are interesting and compelling enough for participating” (Matteo).
Frequency of Participation
Low
Frequency of Participation
Low Frequency
13%
Emotional path
Frequency
of Participation
Medium
Frequency of Participation
High Frequency
Medium Frequency
0%
High
Frequency of Participation
High Frequency
0%
22%
26%
0%
44%
44%
56%
56%
78%
61%
Explorative path
Productive
pathpath
Emotional
Emotional path
Explorative path
Productive
path path
Emotional
Explorative path
Explorative path
Productive path
Productive p
The Creative Environment
Visual Activity: Phenomenological Analysis
HOW DOES IT WORK?
•
The analysis is based on a phenomenological
observation of the ongoing visual activity;
•
It is supported by observations coming from
direct participation and unstructured interviews.
WHY THIS FOCUS?
•
The analysis of visual activity in a computational
and highly malleable environment allows to study
the link between perception and action,
sensorium and motorium;
•
It allows to explore these intermodal relations in
terms of intersubjective and creative interactions.
Visual Activity: Space
SUMMARY. Space is perceived and experienced as a proximic field.
Lines (GP) and marks (OP) express participants’ intentions (like
closure and openness). Their mode is pre-verbal and based on
sensori-motor perceptions. For some participants the experience of
such a space is “almost like touching”.
Visual Activity: Colors
SUMMARY. Colors express participants’ intentions and emotional
tone. Their mode is relational and they can: a) determine the static or
dynamic nature of the relationship; b) trigger collective phenomena
and visual empathy; c) work as transitional states or “boundary
object” or.
Visual Activity: Visual Elements
SUMMARY. Visual elements are archetypal and recursive. They can: a)
work as dynamic “boundary object”, triggering phenomena of pattern
recognition or narrative sequences; b) express participants’ emotions,
opinions or invitations; c) allow participants’ embodiment through
elements of auto-representation, like facial expressions and simulated
movements (GP) or drawing actions (OP).
Visual Activity : Textual Elements
SUMMARY. Textual elements represent a form of linguistic
embodiment. They can: a) express emotions; b) express opinions and
comments on the ongoing result; c) act for a shift in the current
emotional tone; d) allow verbal communications among participants.
Visual Activity: Time
SUMMARY. Time is perceived and experienced as a network of
intentionalities. It engeders the emotional tone of the ongoing
interaction (as disposition for action) and allows shared imaginary
and narrative sequences emerge from the embodied and non-linear
flow of participants’ activity.
Verbal Chatting: Jacobson’s Functions
METHOD
According to Roman Jacobson
language can be structured
in 6 functions.
CONTEXT
(referential)
MESSAGE
(poetic)
ADDRESSER
(emotive)
ADDRESSE
(conative)
CONTACT
(phatic)
CODE
(metalinguistic)
Functions of Verbal Chatting in GP
Private channels for multiple and simultaneous point-to-point
conversations. They can be activated by clicking on the name of a
participant or on an individual drawing area.
•RESULTS
Emotive (57%) and conative functions (29%) prevail on
other functions. The axis addresser-addresse is
predominant.
•SUMMARY
The verbal chatting is directed towards establishing or
stressing a contact between participants, expressing
feelings and emotions, rarely towards giving
instructions or co-ordinating the drawing activity. It
appears fragmented, characterised by conversational
lapses, and similar to an aloud stream of
consciousness.
Functions of Verbal Chatting in OP
A single chat room for public conversation. It can be activated
clicking on a button beside the drawing space.
•RESULTS
Emotive (61%) and referential (17%) functions prevail.
The poles addresser and context are predominant.
•SUMMARY
The verbal chatting is directed towards expressing
personal opinions about the system and the current
activity, discussing the features of the system, giving
explanations about the project and its functioning,
rarely towards giving instructions or co-ordinating the
drawing activity. It characterised by a clear sequence of
ample conversational clusters, contingent to the
drawing activity.
Verbal Chatting in SITO
WWW, IRC (ICQ or CUSeeMe), and e-mail.
•RESULTS
This summary is based on the ethnographic analysis
done by Lenara Verle in “Novas Imagens Para Um Novo
Meio: Um Estudo de Caso do Website de Arte Interativa
SITO”, MA 1999.
•SUMMARY
The verbal chatting is directed towards expressing
opinions about the community and its projects, and
discussing about the creative process (concepts,
technical aspects, interaction rules, images creation and
aesthetical issues, suggestions for development).
It is part of the dinamic continuum represented by the
creative process within the community.
Conclusions
• Co-creation is perceived as an intersubjective experience
engendered by collaborative activities.
• Main motivational paths to co-creation are emotionally
driven and based on the perception of creative environment
as open and unpredictable.
• Creative environment induces co-creation by allowing
emotional seeding through visual embodiment of users’
activities and emotional tone. Time, space, and physicality are
experienced in intersubjective terms.
• On the basis of these observations and related theories
coherent design principles can be derived in order to
sustain co-creation and allow intersubjective creativity be
computationally embodied and exploited.
A Three-Folded Scheme for Meta-Design
Intersubjective issues
BETWEEN
Supporting
social networks
Seeding
processes
Creating new
relational spaces
(creative environments)
MetaDesign
BEHIN
D
Setting
conditions
Informed
participation
Participatory
methodologies
WITH