Articulating Soma Experiences using Trajectories

Title of the Paper

Articulating Soma Experiences using Trajectories

Paper Information

• Subject Area: Experience design in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), particularly the integration of bodily interaction design with the trajectory framework.
• Keywords: Soma Design, Trajectories, Soma Experiences, Embodiment, Body Maps, First-Person Design

Research Background and Problem

• Identified Issues or Challenges:
  • Soma design focuses on users' bodily or subjective experiences in design, but these experiences are challenging to articulate and document due to their temporal nature.
  • Current tools for expressing Soma experiences (e.g., body maps) fail to adequately describe the temporal dynamics and complexity of these experiences.
• Significance of the Problem:
  • Understanding and accurately articulating Soma experiences is crucial for designing interactive systems that better align with users' bodily and emotional needs.
• Research Motivation and Related Work:
  • The trajectory framework is a significant concept in the HCI community, used to define users' interaction paths across time and space.
  • The authors aim to explore whether the trajectory framework can help articulate the temporal complexity and individual differences of Soma experiences.
  • The research builds on theories from the discipline of Soma aesthetics, combined with design practices in HCI.

Solution

• Method or Solution:
  • Introduce the trajectory framework to articulate the temporal complexity of Soma experiences.
  • Define three Soma aesthetic dimensions: Comfort↔Discomfort, Familiarity↔Unfamiliarity, Internal↔External.
  • Propose a time-series representation called the "Trajectory Tool" to visualize the multidimensional changes in Soma experiences.
• Innovations:
  • Combining the trajectory tool with temporal and multidimensional exploration provides a new perspective on reflecting users' subjective experiences.
  • Offers a systematic and flexible method to help designers distill and compare experiences while supporting design generation and reflection.
• Implementation Steps and Key Techniques:
  1. Conduct a series of bodily perception activities in workshops, such as virtual reality walking, tactile design, and dynamic balance experiments.
  2. Collect participant data, including immediate reactions, body map entries, and long-term discussion feedback.
  3. Use the trajectory tool to analyze and map experience paths, revealing key "beats" and cross-dimensional complexities in the experience process.

Research Outcomes

• Specific Results:
  • Developed a novel tool—the Trajectory Tool—for the temporal visualization of Soma experiences.
  • Identified three critical dimensions of Soma experiences, demonstrating their impact on design and evaluation.
  • Provided multiple case studies (e.g., virtual reality tightrope experience, dual guitar-playing activity) to validate the effectiveness of the trajectory tool in capturing and articulating experiential complexity.
• Advantages:
  • Compared to traditional methods (e.g., body maps), the trajectory tool captures the dynamic temporal characteristics of experiences.
  • Supports comparison of experiences across different participants and reveals the relationship between social interaction and bodily experience.
• Experimental or Evaluation Results:
  • Case studies and participant feedback validated the tool's practicality in understanding and articulating Soma experiences.
  • Demonstrated that the trajectory framework is applicable to generative design, participant experience analysis, and retrospective trajectory review.
• Limitations and Future Directions:
  • Limitations:
    • Tension exists between the high subjectivity of Soma experiences and the readability of the tool's representation.
    • The trajectory tool may not fully capture the depth of perception in certain experiences.
  • Future Directions:
    • Further expand the definition of dimensions to accommodate a broader range of design scenarios.
    • Combine the trajectory tool with other methods (e.g., body maps) to form a comprehensive analytical framework.
    • Explore how the trajectory tool can be applied in real-time design generation processes, not just in retrospective reflection.

Conclusion

This paper demonstrates the potential of the trajectory framework in articulating the temporal complexity of Soma experiences and proposes an operational method—the Trajectory Tool—that spans the reflection, generation, and expression phases of design. This research provides new theoretical support and practical tools for deepening the understanding and design of bodily interaction.