Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 74, Issue 24, pp 11537–11568 | Cite as

Enhancing values through virtuality for intelligent artifacts that influence human attitude and behavior

  • Mizuki Sakamoto
  • Tatsuo Nakajima
  • Todorka Alexandrova


Embodied interaction technologies allow us to enhance physical artifacts surrounding us by adding an information layer to the artifacts. The information layer that we call virtual forms presents dynamically generated visual information representing virtual objects and creatures that influence human attitude and behavior. The focus of our research is to develop intelligent artifacts enhanced with virtual forms that influence human attitude and behavior. To suggest some ways to develop such artifacts that harmoniously integrate virtual forms into them, based on our experience with three case studies presented in the paper, we propose a value-based analysis framework, which allows us to discuss and consider some good-design implications for the design of the enhanced intelligent artifacts. We also present design implications to apply the value-based analysis framework to analyze and enhance one of intelligent artifact. Finally, our experience suggests that incorporating fictionality is a promising direction for the designing of intelligent artifacts with ideological messages intended to influence people’s attitude and behavior.


Persuasion Intelligent artifacts Values Virtuality Fictionality Ideological messages Transmedia storytelling Internet of things Gamification 


  1. 1.
    Ardenne P., Dunne A. and Antonelli P. (2009) AC/DC: Contemporary Art Contemporary Design, Jrp Ringier.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arrasvuori, J., Boberg M., Holopainen J., Korhonen H., Lucero A. and Montola M. (2011) Applying the PLEX Framework in Designing for Playfulness, In Proceedings of Designing Pleasurable Product and Interface.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baudrillard J (1994) Simulacra and simulation. University of Michigan Press, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beyer H, Holtzblatt K (1999) Contextual design. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bogost I, Ferrari S, Schweizer B (2010) Newsgames: journalism at play. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boztepe S (2007) User value: competing theories and models. Int J Des 1(2):55–63Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cagan C, Vogel J (2002) Creating breakthrough products: innovation from product planning to program approval. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cockton G. (2006) Designing Worth is Worth Designing, In Proceedings of International Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pp.165-174Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Consolvo S., Everitt K., Smith I. and Landay J.A. (2006) Design Requirements for Technologies that Encourage Physical Activity, In Proceedings of International Conference of Human Factors in Computing Systems.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dena C. (2009) Transmedia Practice: Theorising the Practice of Expressing a Fictional World across Distinct Media and Environments, Dissertation Thesis, University SydneyGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Deterding S., Dixon D., Khaled R. and Nacke L. (2011) From Game Design Elements to Gamefullness: Defining “Gamification”, In Proceedings of Academic Mindtrek Conference.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Djajadiningrat T., Overbeeke K. and Wensween S. (2002) But How, how, Donald, tell us how? On the creation of meaning in interaction design through feedforward and inherent feedback, In Proceedings of Designing Interactive Systems, pp. 285–192.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dewey J (1987) Art as experience. Southern Illinois University press, CarbondaleGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dunne A, Raby F (2013) Speculative everything: design, fiction, and social dreaming. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dunne L (2010) Smart clothing in practice: key design barriers to commercialization, fashion practice, 2(1). Berg Publishers, London, pp 41–66Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ehn P (1993) Scandinavian design: on participation and skill. In: Schuler D, Namioka A (eds) Participatory design: principles and practices. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 41–77Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fogg BJ (2002) Persuasive technology: using to change what We think and Do. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fredrikson B (2009) Positivity: Top-notch research reveals the 3 to 1 ratio that will change your life. Three Rivers Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Friedman B, Kahn PH, Borning A (2006) Value sensitive design and information systems. In: Zhang P, Galletta D (eds) Human-computer interaction and management information systems: foundations. M.E. Sharpe Inc, New York, pp 348–372Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fuad-Luka A (2009) Design activism—beautiful strangeness for a sustainable world. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fujinami K., Kawsar F. and Nakajima T. (2005) AwareMirror: A personalized display using a mirror, In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Pervasive Computing, pp.137-150.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fujinami K. and Nakajima T. (2005) Sentient artefacts: Acquiring user’s context through daily objects, In Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing, pp. 335–344.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Goffman E (1974) Frame analysis: an essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hakknas L. and Redstrom J. (2001) Slow Technology; Designing for Reflection, Journal of Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, Vol. 5, No. 3.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hara K (2011) Japanese design—aesthetics makes the future. Iwanami Publisher, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hassenzahl M. and Tractinsky N. (2006) User Experience – a Research Agenda, Behaviour and Information Technology, pp. 91–97Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hekler E., Klasnja P., Froehlich J., and Buman M. (2013) Mind the Theoretical Gap: Interpreting, Using, and Developing Behavioral Theory in HCI Research, In Proceedings of CHI 2013.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Huizinga J (1955) Homo ludens: a study of the play-element in culture. The Beacon Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    IDEO (2003) IDEO method cards: 51 ways to inspire design. William Stout, RichmondGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ishii H, Ullmer B (1997) Tangible bits: toward seamless interfaces between people, bits, and atoms. In: Proceedings of the international conference on human factors in computer systems, Atlanta. ACM, New York, pp 234–241Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Iwata T, Yamabe T, Nakajima T (2011) Augmented reality Go: extending traditional game play with interactive self-learning support, in proceedings of the 17th IEEE conference on embedded and real-tie computing systems ad applications. IEEE, Macao, pp 105–114Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jordan PW (2002) Designing pleasurable products: an introduction to the new human factors. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jull J (2005) Half-real: video games between Rea rules ad fictional worlds. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kahneman D (2012) Thinking, fast and slow. Penguin, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kim WC, Mauborgne RA (2005) Blue ocean strategy: from theory to practice. Calif Manag Rev 47(3):105–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kawsar F., Fujinami K. and Nakajima T. (2005) Augmenting everyday life with sentient artefacts, In Proceedings of the 2005 joint conference on Smart objects and ambient intelligence: innovative context-aware services: usages and technologies, pp.141-146.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kawsar F., Nakajima T. and Fujinami K. (2008) Deploy spontaneously: supporting end-users in building and enhancing a smart home, In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Ubiquitous computing, pp. 282–291.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Krippendorff K (2005) The semantic turn: a new foundation for design. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lehdonvirta V. (2009) Virtual Consumption, Publications of the Turku School of Economics, A-11:2009,
  40. 40.
    Lehdonvirta V (2009) Virtual item sales as a revenue model: identifying attributes that drive purchase decisions. Electronic commerce research, Vol.9, No.1. Springer, London, pp 97–113Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lehdonvirta V. and Ernkvist M. (2011) Knowledge Map of the Virtual Economy, Washington DC: World Bank,
  42. 42.
    Lockton D, Harrison D, Stanton NA (2010) The design with intent method: a design tool for influencing user behavior. Appl Ergon 41(3):382–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Marzano S, Aarts E (2003) The new everyday view on ambient intelligence. 010 Publisher, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Maslow AH (1970) Motivation and personality. Harper and Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mattila AS (2000) The role of narratives in the advertising of experiential services. J Serv Res 3(August):35–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    McGonigal J (2011) Reality is broken: why games make us better and how they can change the world. Penguin Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Montola M, Stenros J, Waern A (2009) Pervasive games—theory and design. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mori M. (1970) On the Uncanny Valley, Energy, Vol. 7, No.4, pp.33-35 Translated by Karl F. MacDorman and Takashi Minato, Elsevier.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Nakajima T, Lehdonvirta V (2013) Designing motivation in persuasive ambient mirrors. Pers Ubiquit Comput 17(1):107–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Petersen M.G., Iversen O.S., Krogh P.G., and Ludvigsen M.M. (2004), Aesthetic Interaction—A Pragmatist’s Aesthetics of Interactive Systems, In Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Designing of Interactive Systems, pp.269-276.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Pine BJ, Gilmore JH (1999) The experience economy: work is theater and every business a stage. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Prochaska JO, Velicer WF (1997) The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. Am J Health Promot: September/October 1997 12(1):38–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Reeves B, Nass C (1998) The media equation: how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ritterfeld U, Cody M, Vorderer P (2009) Serious games: mechanisms and effects. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ruppel M.N. (2012) “Visualizing Transmedia Network: Links, Paths and Peripheries, Dissertation Thesis, University of Maryland.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Ruth M., Schoormans J.P.L. and Schifferstein N.H.J. (2007) Product Attachment: Design Strategies to Stimulate the Emotional Bonding with Products, In Product Experience Hendrik N. J. Schifferstein, Paul Hekkert ed., Elsevier.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Sakamoto M., Alexandrova T. and Nakajima T. (2013) Analyzing the Effects if Virtualizing and Augmenting Trading Card Game based in the Player’s Personality, In Proceedings of The Sixth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human InteractionsGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sakamoto M., Alexandrova T. and Nakajima T. (2013) Augmenting Remote Trading Card Play with Virtual Characters used in Animation and Game Stories – Toward Persuasive and Ambient Transmedia Storytelling –, In Proceedings of The Sixth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human InteractionsGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sakamoto M. and Nakajima T. (2013) Micro-Crowdfunding: Achieving a Sustainable Society through Economic and Social Incentives in Micro-Level Crowdfunding, In Proceedings of International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sakamoto M. and Nakajima T. (2014) The GamiMedia Model: Gamifying Content Culture, In the 6th International Conference on Cross-Cultural Design.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Sakamoto M. and Nakajima T. (2014) Gamifying Intelligent Daily Environments through Introducing Fictionality, International Journal of Hybrid Information Technology, Vol. 7, No. 4.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Sakamoto M. and Nakajima T. (2014), Gamifying Social Media to Encourage Social Activities with Digital-Physical Hybrid Role-Playing, In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Social Computing and Social Media.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Sakamoto M., Nakajima T., and Akioka A. (2014) A Methodology for Gamifying Smart Cities: Navigating Human Behavior and Attitude, In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Distributed, Ambient and Pervasive InteractionsGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Sakamoto M., Tong T.H., Liu Y., Nakajima T. and Akioka S. (2014), Designing Incentives for Community-based Mobile Crowdsourcing Architecture, In Proceedings of 25th International Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Sakamoto M., Alexandrova T. and Nakajima T. (2014) Introducing Virtuality to Enhance Game-related Physical Artifacts, International Journal of Smart Home, Vol. 8, No. 2.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Sakamoto M. and Nakajima T. (2014) A Community-based Crowdsourcing Service for Achieving a Sustainable Society through Micro-Level Crowdfunding, In Proceedings of the International Conference on Internet, Politics, Policy 2014: Crowdsoucing for Politics and Policy.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Schwartz B (2005) The paradox of choice: why more is less. Harper Perennial, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Schwarz N, Clore GL (2006) Feelings and phenomenal experiences. In: Higgins ET, Kruglanski AW (eds) Social psychology: handbook of basic principles. Guilford Pr, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Sengers P, Gaver B (2006) Staying open to interpretation: engaging multiple meanings in design and evaluation, in proceedings of 6th international conference on designing interactive systems. ACM, New York, pp 99–108Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Fulton SJ (2005) Thoughtless acts? Chronicle Books, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Szulborski D (2005) This is not a game: a guide to alternate reality gaming. Lulu.Com, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Thaler RH, Sunstein CR (2009) Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press, ConnecticutGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Todd PM (2007) How much information do we need? Eur J Oper Res 177(Elsevier):1417–1332Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Yamabe T, Nakajima T (2013) Playful training with augmented reality games: case studies toward reality-oriented system design. Multimedia Tools Appl 62(1):259–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Wright P, McCarthy J (2010) Experience-centered design. Morgan & Claypoll Punlisher, San RafaelGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Zuckerman O. and Gal-Oz A. (2014) Deconstructing Gamification: Evaluating the effectiveness of Continuous Measurement, Virtual Rewards, and Social Comparison for Promoting Physical Activates, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, Vol. 18, No. 6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mizuki Sakamoto
    • 1
  • Tatsuo Nakajima
    • 1
  • Todorka Alexandrova
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringWaseda UniversityShinjukuJapan

Personalised recommendations