10.1145/2971485.2971557acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesnordichiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Understanding Fidget Widgets: Exploring the Design Space of Embodied Self-Regulation

Authors Info & Claims
Published:23 October 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

We argue that embodied self-regulation---managing attention and emotion through physical activity---is an underexplored opportunity for HCI researchers and practitioners. We present research exploring the self-regulation design space through the use of Fidget Widgets---objects manipulated with the hands alongside daily deskwork. Through a novel qualitative study method we collected 132 exemplars of these behaviors and objects. We employed Tumblr, a social media site, as a formative research instrument and used a grounded theory approach to reveal patterns in physical properties and use. Submissions were markedly varied and included evocative, colorful descriptors such as "crinkly", "squishy", and "clickyclackety" revealing a sensory experience and desires far different than those typically associated with computational work. Our analysis of the submissions revealed evidence of self-regulation towards achieving calm, focus, and creativity; additionally, design opportunities in somesthetics and social context emerged. Our ongoing research has implications for HCI practitioners working in tangible computing and peripheral interaction as well as for those supporting wellbeing through interactive technology design.

References

  1. Adler, R.F. and Benbunan-Fich, R. Self-interruptions in discretionary multitasking. Computers in Human Behavior 29, 4 (2013), 1441--1449. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Alonso, M.B. Relax! Inherent Feedback During Product Interaction to Reduce Stress. Delft University of Technology, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrade, J. What does doodling do? Applied Cognitive Psychology 24, 1 (2010), 100--106.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Ashby, F.G., Valentin, V.V., and Turken, A.U. The effects of positive affect and arousal on working memory and executive attention. ADVANCES IN CONSCIOUSNESS RESEARCH 44, (2002), 245--288.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Balcetis, E. and Cole, S. Body in Mind: The Role of Embodied Cognition in Self-Regulation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 3, 5 (2009), 759--774.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Brandt, I. The influence of rhythmic changes in lighting on breathing rhythm and relaxation. 2011, 1--41.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Branthwaite, A. and Patterson, S. The power of qualitative research in the era of social media. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 14, 4 (2011), 430--440.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Bødker, S. When Second Wave HCI Meets Third Wave Challenges. NordiCHI '06: Proceedings of the 4th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: changing roles, (2006). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Carney, D.R., Cuddy, A.J.C., and Yap, A.J. Power Posing: Brief Nonverbal Displays Affect Neuroendocrine Levels and Risk Tolerance. Psychological Science 21, 10 (2010), 1363--1368.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Craig, J.C. and Rollman, G.B. Somesthesis. Annual Review of Psychology 50, (1999), 305--331.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. de Rooij, A. and Jones, S. (E)Motion and Creativity: Hacking the Function of Motor Expressions in Emotion Regulation to Augment Creativity. TEI '15: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction, (2015), 145--152. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Dourish, P. Where the Actions Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Flack, W.F., Laird, J.D., and Cavallaro, L.A. Separate and combined effects of facial expressions and bodily postures on emotional feelings. European journal of social psychology 29, 2-3 (1999), 203--217.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Følstad, A. and Knutsen, J. Online User Feedback in Early Phases of the Design Process: Lessons Learnt from Four Design Cases. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction 2010, 3 (2010), 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Garger, S. Is there a link between learning style and neurophysiology. Educational Leadership 48, 2 (1990), 63--65.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. AldineTransaction, Chicago, 1967.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Hagen, P. and Robertson, T. Dissolving boundaries: social technologies and participation in design. OZCHI, (2009), 129--136. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Hernandez, J., Paredes, P., Roseway, A., and Czerwinski, M. Under pressure: Sensing stress of computer users. the 32nd annual ACM conference, (2014), 51--60. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Isen, A.M. Positive affect as a source of human strength. In L.G. Aspinwall and U.M. Staudinger, eds., A psychology of human strengths: Fundamental questions and future directions for a positive psychology. American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., 2003, 179--195.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Jaimes, A. Sit straight (and tell me what I did today): a human posture alarm and activity summarization system. CARPE '05: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM workshop on Continuous archival and retrieval of personal experiences, (2005). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Karlesky, M. and Isbister, K. Fidget widgets: secondary playful interactions in support of primary serious tasks. CHI'13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (2013), 1149--1154. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Karlesky, M. and Isbister, K. Designing for the physical margins of digital workspaces: fidget widgets in support of productivity and creativity. TEI '14: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction, (2014). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Khang, H., Ki, E.J., and Ye, L. Social Media Research in Advertising, Communication, Marketing, and Public Relations, 1997--2010. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 89, 2 (2012), 279--298.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Koike, H., Sato, Y., and Kobayashi, Y. Integrating paper and digital information on EnhancedDesk: a method for realtime finger tracking on an augmented desk system. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 8, 4 (2001), 307--322. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Kruglanski, A.W. and Higgins, E.T. Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles. The Guilford, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Leung, K., Reilly, D., Hartman, K., Stein, S., and Westecott, E. Limber: DIY wearables for reducing risk of office injury. TEI '12: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction, (2012). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Lewis, S., Dontcheva, M., and Gerber, E. Affective computational priming and creativity. CHI '11: Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, (2011). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Ley, R. The Modification of Breathing Behavior Pavlovian and Operant Control in Emotion and Cognition. Behavior Modification 23, 3 (1999), 441--479.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Mason, M.F., Norton, M.I., Van Horn, J.D., Wegner, D.M., Grafton, S.T., and Macrae, C.N. Wandering minds: the default network and stimulus-independent thought. Science 315, 5810 (2007), 393--395.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Matheson, K. Teachers ditch student desk chairs for yoga balls. Associated Press, 2013. http://news.yahoo.com/teachers-ditch-student-desk-chairs-152403408.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. McCarthy, J. Technology as Experience. MIT Press, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Moraveji, N., Adiseshan, A., and Hagiwara, T. Breathtray: augmenting respiration self-regulation without cognitive deficit. CHI'12 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (2012), 2405--2410. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Näkki, P. and Koskela-Huotari, K. User participation in software design via social media: experiences from a case study with consumers. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction 4, 2 (2012), 129--152.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Niedenthal, P.M. Embodying Emotion. Science 316, 5827 (2007), 1002--1005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Park, A. The Two Faces of Anxiety. Time Online, 2011. http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,2100106,00.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Philips. Mind Spheres. design.philips.com. http://www.design.philips.com/about/design/designportfolio/design_futures/mind_spheres.page.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Rasmussen, M.K., Pedersen, E.W., Petersen, M.G., and Hornbæk, K. Shape-changing interfaces: A review of the design space and open research questions. CHI '12: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (2012), 735--744. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Reyes, L.F.M. and Finken, S. Social media as a platform for participatory design. PDC, (2012), 89--92. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Rosner, D.K. and Ryokai, K. Reflections on craft. ACM Press (2009), 195.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Rosner, D.K. and Ryokai, K. Spyn: augmenting the creative and communicative potential of craft. CHI, (2010), 2407--2416. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Schott, G.D. Doodling and the default network of the brain. The Lancet 378, 9797 (2011), 1133--1134.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Shellenbarger, S. Power of Tiny Distractions. Wall Street Journal 265, 2015, D1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Tobias, S.P. Wichita fifth-graders stand up for learning. The Wichita Eagle Online, 2012. http://www.kansas.com/2012/11/27/2582854/wichita-fifth-graders-can-stand.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Ullmer, B. and Ishii, H. The metaDESK: models and prototypes for tangible user interfaces. UIST '97: Proceedings of the 10th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, (1997). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Vohs, K.D. and Baumeister, R.F. Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications. Guilford Press, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Wellner, P. Interacting with paper on the DigitalDesk. Communications of the ACM 36, 7 (1993), 87--96. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Yeykelis, L., Cummings, J.J., and Reeves, B. Multitasking on a Single Device: Arousal and the Frequency, Anticipation, and Prediction of Switching Between Media Content on a Computer. Journal of Communication 64, 1 (2014), 167--192.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Zhang, Y., Risen, J.L., and Hosey, C. Reversing One's Fortune by Pushing Away Bad Luck. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Understanding Fidget Widgets: Exploring the Design Space of Embodied Self-Regulation

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!