Andrés Lucero (Google Scholar profile), associate professor at the University of Southern Denmark, visited DCC-UC on December 21st and 22nd, 2016. He gave a talk, titled “Playful Experiences”, presenting his work on designing playful experience cards (PLEX) to design playful experiences. He will also meet with @Humalab PhD students to provide feedback on their work and explore collaboration possibilities.
Talk abstract: Playfulness can be observed in all areas of human activity. It is an attitude of making activities more enjoyable. Designing for playfulness involves creating objects that elicit a playful approach and provide enjoyable experiences. The Playful Experiences (PLEX) framework is a categorization of playful experiences based on previous theoretical work on pleasurable experiences, game experiences, emotions, elements of play, and the reasons why people play. As a result of this analysis, we examined the wide range of experiences elicited by interactive products when they are used in a playful manner. The PLEX framework has subsequently been put to practical use in design- (i.e., PLEX Cards, PLEX Design Patterns) and evaluation- (i.e., PLEXQ) related activities.
Iyubanit Rodríguez, presented her paper, titled “Monitoring chronic pain: comparing wearable and mobile interfaces” – Rodríguez, Fuentes, Herskovic, Campos (available at SpringerLink), at the 10th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing & Ambient Intelligence, UCAmI 2016, in the Canary Islands, Spain.
Abstract: Technologies to monitor patients are convenient for patients and can reduce health costs. Chronic pain is a pain that lasts more than 3 months and affects the welfare of patients. Pain is subjective and there are applications to self-report pain, but their adherence rates are low. The purpose of this article is the understanding of the characteristics of technology that helps the adoption of these systems. We have implemented two solutions (mobile application and wearable device), in order to compare them to measure the rate of user acceptance, and also to get feedback about fundamental features of interfaces to report pain levels. To evaluate the two solutions we conducted interviews with 12 people. The results showed that when given the choice between both devices, 67 % of the users preferred the wearable device over the mobile application, and 16.5 % preferred the mobile application over the wearable device. We also found that a device for reporting pain must be specific to this purpose, aesthetically pleasing and allow users to report easily and at the right time.