1. Bringing intuitions of natural and virtual interactions into conflict: the POLYMECHANON experience Stamatina Anastopoulou, Zacharoula Smyrnaiou, Chronis Kynigos Educational Technology Lab, School of Pedagogy, Psychology and Philosophy, University of Athens

2. Aims To explore the ways that physical and virtual places may relate to each other for learning objectives to study the physical exploration of concepts and systems by moving within and acting upon an environment The design decisions that an interaction designer need to take. Starting points: Conflict between physical and virtual interactions so that the user can have fun. The interactive means are gestures and other body interactions

3. air-hockey: interactive game shadowsa projection of a puck moves depending on the player shadows’ position and velocity. velocityangleThe puck’s reaction depends on the velocity and the angle that the shadow hits the virtual object (puck) Air-hockey live

4. The challenge players need to realize that the sensors read not only the movement of the foot but also any part of the body players have to collaborate on the spot They need to find out ▫how they can score ▫how to avoid a goal

5. What we did Observation of how players experienced the game ▫Fieldtrip situation ▫Ages: 12-15 years old Data-collection ▫Video recording ▫Interviews ▫Animator instructions

6. First impressions Most players use their feet even though gestures and body movements are more efficient Players have difficulty understanding the difference between their movement and their shadow’s movement Most players adopt an active play without understanding ▫The number of scoring against their own team by accident is high

7. Interviews’ Procedure Two phases: a. initial trial and error, and b. reflective gaming. Initial trial & error: consists of an initial exploration of the system where the player tries to identify the important elements of the interaction. It should be short and unprompted. Reflective gaming: the player identifies the elements that influence interaction through a prompt-based discussion with the researcher that also expands on how such elements could be further explored or supported. Existing Data (work in progress): 15 interviews of “Initial trial & error” 3 of “reflective gaming”

8. How did you hit the puck? With the feet ▫Jumping, Stepping on it, kicking With the head With all parts of the body, e.g. Belly With our movement Moving hands and feet Observation: duringWhen animators gave instructions during the game, players experimented with gestures.

9. What could you learn? How to cooperate better About friction Something around the light, ▫Infrared radiation About forces, Direction of movement, Observation: Players would mention learning objectives when the animator ▫had explained how the game worked and ▫related their experience to (lack of) friction

10. Data Analysis (ongoing) A theme-based analysis of the interviews was carried out (Braun & Clarke, 2006), and the following themes arose ▫a intuitive-counterintuitive divide ▫a focus on changing the layout of the game Braun & Clarke (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77–101

11. Themes a intuitive-counterintuitive divide: ▫Counterintuitive was expressed through  blaming the sensor for false operation,  blaming the puck for crazy behavior and  characterizing the shadow as ‘confused’. ▫Intuitive:  relating to similar experiences like an Air-hockey table and an uncontrollable car. a focus on changing the layout of the game: ▫When the students were asked to identified what they’d like to change, the majority suggested changing the layout of the game (e.g. size of court, color of puck or of the shadows) rather than changing the variables of the games (e.g. degree of friction).

12. Discussion Points Gestures aren’t employed intuitively The animator influences greatly the players’ learning experience Students need further support to understand the game, e.g. with information posters or interactive displays. Innovative experiences may result in lack of trust to the interaction features that may deteriorate the students’ experience. The flexibility of the game needs to be explained further

13. Thank you for your attention sanastop@ppp.uoa.gr Stamatina’s site: http://www.syros.aegean.gr/users/manast/ http://www.syros.aegean.gr/users/manast/ Educational Technology Lab, University of Athens http://etl.ppp.uoa.gr/