How Are We Connected? Measuring Audience Galvanic Skin Response of Connected Performances."

Accurately measuring the audience response during a performance is a difficult task. This is particularly the\ud case for connected performances. In this paper, we staged a connected performance in which a remote\ud audience enjoyed the performance in real-time. Both objective (galvanic skin response and behaviours) and\ud subjective (interviews) responses from the live and remote audience members were recorded. To capture\ud galvanic skin response, a group of self-built sensors was used to record the electrical conductance of the skin.\ud The results of the measurements showed that both the live and the remote audience members had a similar\ud response to the connected performance even though more vivid artistic artefacts had a stronger effect on the\ud live audience. Some technical issues also influenced the experience of the remote audience. In conclusion we\ud found that the remoteness had little influence on the connected performance

Physiological Measurement on Students’ Engagement In a Distributed Learning Environment

Measuring students’ engagement in a distributed learning environment is a challenge. In particular, a teacher gives a lecture at one location, while at the same time the remote students watch the lecture through a display screen. In such situation, it is difficult for the teacher to know the reaction at the remote location. In this paper, we conducted a field study to measure students’ engagement by using galvanic skin response (GSR) sensors, where students simultaneously watched the lecture at the two locations. Our results showed the students’ GSR response was aligned with the surveys, which means that during a distributed learning environment, GSR sensors can be used as an indicator on students’ engagement. Furthermore, our user studies resulted in non-engaging student learning experiences that would be difficult obtained at a lab condition. Based on the findings, we found that the patterns of GSR readings were rather different when compared to the previous relevant studies, where users were engaged. In addition, we noticed that the density of GSR response at the remote location was higher when compared to the one at the lecture room. We believe that our studies are beneficial on physiological computing, as we first presented the patterns of GSR sensors on non-engaging user experiences. Moreover, as an alternative method, GSR sensors can be easily implemented in a distributed learning environment to provide feedback to teachers

How are we connected?

Accurately measuring the audience response during a performance is a difficult task. This is particularly the case for connected performances. In this paper, we staged a connected performance in which a remote audience enjoyed the performance in real-time. Both objective (galvanic skin response and behaviours) and subjective (interviews) responses from the live and remote audience members were recorded. To capture galvanic skin response, a group of self-built sensors was used to record the electrical conductance of the skin. The results of the measurements showed that both the live and the remote audience members had a similar response to the connected performance even though more vivid artistic artefacts had a stronger effect on the live audience. Some technical issues also influenced the experience of the remote audience. In conclusion we found that the remoteness had little influence on the connected performance

What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology

The purpose of this article is to critically deconstruct the term engagement as it applies to peoples' experiences with technology. Through an extensive, critical multidisciplinary literature review and exploratory study of users of Web searching, online shopping, Webcasting, and gaming applications, we conceptually and operationally defined engagement. Building on past research, we conducted semistructured interviews with the users of four applications to explore their perception of being engaged with the technology. Results indicate that engagement is a process comprised of four distinct stages: point of engagement, period of sustained engagement, disengagement, and reengagement. Furthermore, the process is characterized by attributes of engagement that pertain to the user, the system, and user-system interaction. We also found evidence of the factors that contribute to nonengagement. Emerging from this research is a definition of engagement—a term not defined consistently in past work—as a quality of user experience characterized by attributes of challenge, positive affect, endurability, aesthetic and sensory appeal, attention, feedback, variety/novelty, interactivity, and perceived user control. This exploratory work provides the foundation for future work to test the conceptual model in various application areas, and to develop methods to measure engaging user experiences

Objectively Evaluating Entertainment Technology

Emerging technologies offer new ways of using entertainment technology to foster interactions between players and connect people. Evaluating entertainment technology is challenging because success isn’t defined in terms of productivity and performance, but in terms of enjoyment and interaction. Current subjective methods of evaluating entertainment technology aren’t robust. This research uses previous literature and empirical results to create a methodology for objective evaluation of entertainment technology. By gathering physiological data in the context of game play, we intend to correlate physiological responses with subjective reports and with game events. This framework would be a powerful tool used by designers, developers, and researchers to inform their design and evaluate their decisions