An Investigation on the Usability of Socio-cultural Features for the Authoring Support During the Development of Interactive Discourse Environments (IDE)

Papilaya, Djordan; Nack, Frank

doi:10.1007/978-3-031-22298-6_19

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It was suggested that an adaptive sandbox system should be considered as an approach to address IDN authoring, where the creative process considers goals and constraints through a rational model that feeds into a fluid action-centric paradigm that facilitates a design process, where the sequences of analysis, design and implementation are undistinguishably connected. The aim of the authoring environment is to facilitate a space for inspiration, ideation, and implementation through which the narrative engineer refines conceptual as well as 45 Evaluation examples related to interactor experiences in IDNs are: the game experience questionnaire [168], Roth's IDN experience evaluation framework [169], and quantitative based approaches towards validation [170,171]. See also the work of the workinggroup 3 of the EU COST INDCOR project (https://indcor.eu/working-groups/wg3-evaluation/).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactive digital narrative (IDN)—a complexity case

Nack

2022

New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Any form of design 1 is a creative process considering goals and constraints that result in a product, which addresses aesthetic, functional, economic, or socio-political considerations that are established by the stakeholders involved. A design can follow two main development paradigms, namely a rational or action-centric model [1]. The rational model is plan-driven, where the plan is executed in terms of a discrete sequence of stages, such as pre-production (i.e. design brief, analysis of design goals, requirement specification, conceptualising solutions), production (i.e. development and testing), and post production (i.e. introducing the solution into the environment, evaluation and conclusion). This procedural view 2 allows for the repetition of stages at any time before, during, or after production based on accompanying best practices [2][3][4][5][6][7]. The rational paradigm understands design as informed by research and knowledge in a predictable and controlled manner. The action-centric paradigm apprehends design also as informed by research and knowledge but considers the design process as improvised, where the sequences of analysis, design and implementation are undistinguishably connected [8][9][10][11][12][13]. Within action-centric design designers conceptualise a problem (framing) by defining goals and objectives and then construct tentatively the object to be designed (move). The design process here asks the designer to simultaneously refine the mental image of the design object based on the actual perception of the context in and for which it needs to be designed (sensemaking-coevolution-implementation framework [11]). The expression of the idea through suitable design tools facilitates the critical rethinking of the perceived idea, which results in a new design cycle. The essential element in action-centric design, actually the development of any design idea, is the means of expression and perception to facilitate a space for inspiration, ideation, and implementation through which the designer refines ideas and explores new directions [12]. This way of looking at design is known as design thinking [13]. Both paradigms are essentially human-centred, in the way that they see human needs, competences (cognitive as well as knowledge) and behaviour as the basis of the investigation and only then design to accommodate those [4]. At its core, all design is experiential and that is why all design addresses fundamental concepts, such as affordance, mapping, feedback, conceptual models, and system image. Affordance refers to the relationship between the properties of an item and the capabilities of an agent that establish how that item can be used or understood. Mapping represents the relationship between the elements of two sets of items (i.e. the layout of controls and the devices being controlled). Mappings represent analogies, which can be spatial, biological, cultural, or follow principles of perception (such as Gestalt psychology) to facilitate grouping through proximity. Feedback communicates the r...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%