Design for Emerging Media: How MR Designers Think About Storytelling, Process, and Defining the Field

  • Rebecca RouseEmail author
  • Evan Barba
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10690)


Given mixed reality’s (MR) unique status as an emerging medium that incorporates both the physical and the virtual in hybrid space, it is a particularly interesting field in which to study the design process as a whole, and interactive narrative design in particular. How prominently does story figure in MR design? What kinds of stories are being told? As MR tools become more accessible, the field is opening up to a wider variety of practitioners. However, the full breadth of methods and techniques being brought to bear in design for MR has not yet been studied. This paper presents findings from an interview study with fifteen leading MR designers, and describes the multiplicity of approaches they use. These approaches are presented as a matrix, composed of a opportunistic—deterministic spectrum (based on designs planned in advance vs. improvisation), and a storytelling—sensationalizing spectrum (based on designs aimed at narrative creation vs. development of a sensory experience).


  1. 1.
    Barba, E.: Toward a language of mixed reality in the continuity style. Converg. Int. J. Res. New Media Technol. 20, 41–54 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Farman, J.: Introduction to mobile interface theory. Mobile Interface Theory, 1–15 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rouse, R., Engberg, M., JafariNaimi, N., Bolter, J.D.: MRx: an interdisciplinary framework for mixed reality experience design and criticism. Digit. Creativity 26(3–4), 175–181 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benyon, D.: Presence in Blended Spaces. Interact. Comput. 24(4), 219–226 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jetter, H., Zöllner, M., Gerken, J., Weiterer, H.: Design and Implementation of Post-WIMP Distributed User Interfaces with ZOIL. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 28(11), 737–747 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Billinghurst, M., Grasset, R.: Developing augmented reality applications. In: ACM SIGGRAPH ASIA, vol. 8(1) (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Craig, A.B.: Understanding Augmented Reality. Morgan Kaufman, Waltham (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hill, A., Barba, E., MacIntyre, B., Gandy, M., Davidson, B.: Mirror worlds: experimenting with heterogeneous AR. In: International Symposium on Ubiquitous Virtual Reality, pp. 9–12 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shilkrot, R., Montfort, N., Maes, P.: nARratives of augmented worlds. In: IEEE ISMAR International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cross, N.: Designerly Ways of Knowing. Birkhäuser Architecture (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schön, D.A.: The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Seago, A., Dunne, A.: New methodologies in art and design research: the object as discourse. Des. Issues 15(2), 11–17 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Norman, D.: The Design of Everyday Things, Revised and Expanded Edition, pp. 1–36. Basic Books, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dunne, A., Raby, F.: Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming, pp. 1–5. MIT Press, Cambridge (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goodman, E., Stolterman, E., Wakkary, R.: Understanding interaction design practices. In: Proceedings of CHI 2011, pp. 1061–1070 (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rouse, R.: Media of attraction: a media archeology approach to panoramas, kinematography, mixed reality and beyond. In: Nack, F., Gordon, A.S. (eds.) ICIDS 2016. LNCS, vol. 10045, pp. 97–107. Springer, Cham (2016). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gunning, T.: The cinema of attraction: early film, its spectator and the avant-garde. Wide Angle 8(3–4), 63–70 (1986)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gaudreault, A.: Film and Attraction: From Kinematography to Cinema. University of Illinois Press, Chicago (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Musser, C.: Rethinking early cinema: cinema of attractions and narrativity. Yale J. Criticism 7(2), 203–232 (1994)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    McMahan, A., Blaché, A.G.: Lost Visionary of the Cinema. Continuum International Publishing Group, Inc., New York and London (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Abel, R.: The Ciné Goes to Town: French Cinema, 1896–1914, Updated and Expanded Edition. University of California Press, Los Angeles and London (1998)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Musser, C.: The Emergence of Cinema: The American Screen to 1907. Scribners, New York (1990)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Oettermann, S.: The Panorama: A History of a Mass Medium. Zone Books, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hyde, R.: Panoramania! The Art and Entertainment of the All-Embracing View. Trefoil Publications, London (1988)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Huhtamo, E.: Illusions in Motion: Media Archeology of the Moving Panorama and Related Spectacles. MIT Press, Cambridge (2013)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ryan, M.: Will new media produce new narratives? In: Ryan, M. (ed.) Narrative Across Media. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Strauss, A., Corbin, J.: Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qual. Sociol. 13(1), 3–21 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Milgram, P., Kishino, F.: Taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. E77-D(12), 1321–1329 (1994)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rensselaer Polytechnic InstituteTroyUSA
  2. 2.Georgetown UniversityWashington DCUSA

Personalised recommendations