A Classification Framework for Interactive Digital Artworks

Nardelli, Enrico

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35145-7_12

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The spectator, in turn, looks at the work and interprets it. If the piece is modified by this user interaction, it becomes interactive art (Nardelli, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participant responses to physical, open-ended interactive digital artworks: a systematic review

Luyten¹,

Braun

Hooren³

et al. 2017

IJART

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The main aim of this systematic review was to describe responses of participants to physical, open-ended interactive digital artworks. Although human-to-artwork and human-to-human responses were found in the 22 identified artworks, more human-to-artwork responses were reported. Both types of responses were further categorised into physical, verbal, and cognitive/emotional responses. The artworks varied from small table-top installations to large, dark open spaces, and had a range of interactive components and features from a heart rate interface to complete body movements. Results imply there is no straightforward relationship between the features of the artwork and the kind of response. However, two factors seemed to influence the participants' responses: the content (concrete or abstract) of the artwork, and the presence of others. Creating interactive artworks that challenge new audiences and/or evoke specific responses requires more knowledge about the dynamics of the interaction between people and interactive artworks. Participant responses to physical, open-ended interactive digital artworks 95

show abstract

“…The spectator, in turn, looks at the work and interprets it. If the piece is modified by this user interaction, it becomes interactive art (Nardelli, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%