Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Multiple paradigms in affective computing

Authors: Michael J. Muller;

Multiple paradigms in affective computing

Abstract

This brief essay considers the three papers of the special issue of Interacting with Computers by Picard and colleagues, from several perspectives. First, I question two aspects of the work: the Computers Are Social Actors (CASA) approach, and the use of psychophysiological measurements of emotion without a stated theory of emotion. Despite these criticisms, the contributions of Picard and colleagues are valuable and powerfully challenging. I suggest three convergent ways of to pursue this important research program. I am grateful to Gilbert Cockton for the privilege and responsibility of commenting on the ground-breaking papers in Interacting with Computers by Rosalind Picard and associates (Klein, Moon, and Picard, 2002; Picard and Klein, 2002; Schreirer, Fernandez, Klein, and Picard, 2002). Although in many ways preliminary, their research calls us to reflect on the formal study of emotional interactions as conducted with and through computers, which until now have largely “reflect[ed] a view of the user as part of a productivity equation” (Picard and Klein, 2001). This is an original, provocative, and important challenge. As Cockton reminds us (2002), this work requires us to reconsider many of our theoretical and practical ideas about what emotion is, how it happens, and what we may want to do about it as we continue to do research and design with computers. In a similar vein – but with a very different methodology – Gaver and Martin (2000) have challenged what they call the “simple dichotomy between work and play” that can cause “[m]any devices [to] import values from the workplace into the home, emphasizing the requirement of ‘domestic work’ by allowing chores to be done more efficiently or productively.” McCarthy (2001) elaborates on some of these ideas in his argument to move from an HCI based in function to an HCI of “enchantment,” emphasizing delight, with overtones of magic. In another related development, Monk and colleagues have proposed alternatives to what Cockton has criticized (2002) as the “usability hardcore” approach to HCI, through a series of conferences called Computers and Fun (Computers and Fun, 1998, 2001).

Related Organizations
  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    The total number of citations received by all articles of the researcher of interest.
    16
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
The total number of citations received by all articles of the researcher of interest.
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
16
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!