Moving tangible interaction systems to the next level

In the past decade, the field of Tangible Interaction (TI) has gained significant interest. As a result, numerous systems, theories and frameworks have been developed with this vision in mind. This has led to various instantiations of TI that seem developed to make digital information tangible, rather than to optimally use and combine all important qualities of TI. We believe that TI has more to offer than what has been used advantageously so far. Therefore, this paper reflects on the foundations of TI and identifies three qualities of control and representation in TI based on existing systems, theories and frameworks

An analysis of input-output relations in interaction with smart tangible objects

This article focuses on the conceptual relation between the user's input and a system's output in interaction with smart tangible objects. Understanding this input-output relation (IO relation) is a prerequisite for the design of meaningful interaction. A meaningful IO relation allows the user to know what to do with a system to achieve a certain goal and to evaluate the outcome. The work discussed in this article followed a design research process in which four concepts were developed and prototyped. An evaluation was performed using these prototypes to investigate the effect of highly different IO relations on the user's understanding of the interaction. The evaluation revealed two types of IO relations differing in functionality and the number of mappings between the user and system actions. These two types of relations are described by two IO models that provide an overview of these mappings. Furthermore, they illustrate the role of the user and the influence of the system in the process of understanding the interaction. The analysis of the two types of IO models illustrates the value of understanding IO relations for the design of smart tangible objects

Effect of a physiotherapy-directed rehabilitation programme on patients with multidirectional instability of the glenohumeral joint: a multimodal interventional MRI study protocol

Introduction Altered neuromuscular control of the scapula and humeral head is a typical feature of multidirectional instability (MDI) of the glenohumeral joint, suggesting a central component to this condition. A previous randomised controlled trial showed MDI patients participating in the Watson Instability Program 1 (WIP1) had significantly improved clinical outcomes compared with a general shoulder strength programme. The aim of this paper is to outline a multimodal MRI protocol to identify potential ameliorative effects of the WIP1 on the brain.Methods and analysis Thirty female participants aged 18–35 years with right-sided atraumatic MDI and 30 matched controls will be recruited. MDI patients will participate in 24 weeks of the WIP1, involving prescription and progression of a home exercise programme. Multimodal MRI scans will be collected from both groups at baseline and in MDI patients at follow-up. Potential brain changes (primary outcome 1) in MDI patients will be probed using region-of-interest (ROI) and whole-brain approaches. ROIs will depict areas of functional alteration in MDI patients during executed and imagined shoulder movements (MDI vs controls at baseline), then examining the effects of the 24-week WIP1 intervention (baseline vs follow-up in MDI patients only). Whole-brain analyses will examine baseline versus follow-up voxel-wise measures in MDI patients only. Outcome measures used to assess WIP1 efficacy will include the Western Ontario Shoulder Index and the Melbourne Instability Shoulder Score (primary outcomes 2 and 3). Secondary outcomes will include the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, Short Form Orebro, Global Rating of Change Score, muscle strength, scapular upward rotation, programme compliance and adverse events.Discussion This trial will establish if the WIP1 is associated with brain changes in MDI.Ethics and dissemination Participant confidentiality will be maintained with publication of results. Swinburne Human Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 20202806-5692).Trial registration number Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12621001207808)