skip to main content
10.1145/1124772.1124854acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Interaction in creative tasks

Published:22 April 2006Publication History

ABSTRACT

The design of tools for creative activities affects the creative processes and output of users. In this paper we consider how an understanding of creative interaction can inform the design of support tools in a creative domain, and where creative needs cross domain boundaries. Using observations of musical composers we analyse the theoretical approaches to understanding creativity and their use to HCI. Cycles of ideation and evaluation are suggested as atomic elements of creative interactions, with the representation of ideas a central activity for individual and collaborating composers. A model of collaborative composition was developed, along with an analysis of the representational types used in the domain. This led to the design and evaluation of a prototype Sonic Sketchpad for musical idea representation.

References

  1. Abrams, S., Bellofatto, R., Fuhrer, R., Oppenheim, D, Wright, J., Boulanger, R., Leonard, N., Mash, D., Rendish, M., Smith, J., QSketcher: An Environment for Composing Music for Film. Creativity & Cognition 2002. ACM Press (2002). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Amitani, S. & Hori, K., Supporting Musical Composition by Externalising the Composer's Mental Space. Creativity & Cognition 2002, ACM Press (2002). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Baer, J., Evaluative Thinking, Creativity, and Task Specificity, In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Critical Creative Processes. Hampton Press, USA. (2003), 129--151.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Boden, M. A., The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. Abacus, UK, 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Boden, M. A., What is Creativity?, In M. A. Boden (Ed.) Dimensions of Creativity. MIT Press (1994).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Candy, L., & Edmonds, E., Collaborative Creativity, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 45, Issue 10, ACM Press (2002). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Craft, A., Little c Creativity, In A. Craft, B. Jeffrey & M. Leibling (Eds.), Creativity in Education. Continuum, UK. (2001) 45--61.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark, A. & Chalmers, D. J., The Extended Mind. Analysis 58 (1998) 7--19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Csikszentmihalyi, M., Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. Harper Collins. 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Diehl, M. & Strobe, W., Productivity Loss in Brainstorming Groups: Towards the Solution of a Riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53 (1987) 497--509.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Farbood, M. M., Pasztor, E. & Jennings, K., Hyperscore: A Graphical Sketchpad for Novice Composers. IEEE Emerging Technologies Jan/Feb 2004. 50--54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Fischer, G., Giaccardi, E., Eden, H., Sugimoto, M., Ye, Y., Beyond Binary Choices: Integrating Individual and Social Creativity. In Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 63 (2005) 482--512. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Gabora, L., Cognitive Mechanisms Underlying the Creative Process. Creativity & Cognition 2002. ACM Press (2002). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Grudin, J., Groupware and Social Dynamics: Eight Challenges for Developers. Communications of the ACM. Vol. 37, Issue 1. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Johnson, H. & Hyde, J., Towards Modelling Individual and Collaborative Construction of Jigsaws Using Task Knowledge Structures (TKS). TOCHI Vol. 10, No. 4 pp 339--387. ACM Press (2003). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Johnston, A. Amitani, S. and Edmonds, E., (2005). Amplifying Reflective Thinking in Musical Performance. Creativity & Cognition 2005. ACM Press (2005). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Li, T., Who or What is Making the Music: Music Creation in a Machine Age. Creativity & Cognition 3, ACM Press (1999). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Nakakoji, K. & Yamamoto, Y., Toward a Taxonomy of Interaction Design Techniques for Externalising in Creative Work. In Proc. HCII 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Nakakoji, K., Yamamoto, Y., Takada, S. & Reeves, B. N., Two-Dimensional Spatial Positioning as a Means for Reflection in Design, In Proc. DIS 2000, ACM Press (2000). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Necka, E., Creative Interaction: A Conceptual Schema for the Process of Producing Ideas and Judging the Outcomes. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Critical Creative Processes. Hampton Press, USA. (2003), 115--127.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Oxman, R., Design by Re-Representation: A Model of Visual Reasoning in Design, Design Studies 18, 4 (1997), 329--347.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Sawyer, R. K., Group Creativity: Music, Theatre, Collaboration. Lawrence Erlbaum, NJ, USA, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Shneiderman, B., Leonardo's Laptop: Human Needs and the New Computing Technologies. MIT Press, MA, USA, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Schön, D. A., Educating the Reflective Practitioner. Josey-Bass Publishers, CA, USA. 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Sedivy, J., Johnson, H., Supporting Creative Work Tasks: The Potential of Multimodal Tools to Support Sketching. Creativity & Cognition 1999, ACM Press (1999). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Shaffer, L. H. & McAngus Todd, N. P., The Interpretive Component in Musical Performance. In Aiello, R & Sloboda, J. A eds., Musical Perceptions, Oxford University Press (1994), 258--270.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Terry, M. & Mynatt, E. D., Recognizing Creative Needs in User Interface Design. Creativity & Cognition 2002. ACM Press (2002). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Thomas, S., The Tools of Online Community: The First Five Years of the trAce Online Writing Centre. Creativity & Cognition 2005. ACM Press (2005). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Yamamoto, Y. & Nakakoji, K., Interation design of tools for fostering creativity in the early stages of information design, Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 63 (2005) 513--535. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Zhang, J., 1997. The Nature of External Representations in Problem Solving. Cognitive Science Vol. 21 (2), 179--217.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Interaction in creative tasks

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '06: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2006
      1353 pages
      ISBN:1595933727
      DOI:10.1145/1124772

      Copyright © 2006 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 22 April 2006

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader