Sound Forest: Evaluation of an Accessible Multisensory Music Installation

ABSTRACT

Sound Forest is a music installation consisting of a room with light-emitting interactive strings, vibrating platforms and speakers, situated at the Swedish Museum of Performing Arts. In this paper we present an exploratory study focusing on evaluation of Sound Forest based on picture cards and interviews. Since Sound Forest should be accessible for everyone, regardless age or abilities, we invited children, teens and adults with physical and intellectual disabilities to take part in the evaluation. The main contribution of this work lies in its findings suggesting that multisensory platforms such as Sound Forest, providing whole-body vibrations, can be used to provide visitors of different ages and abilities with similar associations to musical experiences. Interviews also revealed positive responses to haptic feedback in this context. Participants of different ages used different strategies and bodily modes of interaction in Sound Forest, with activities ranging from running to synchronized music-making and collaborative play.

References

1. Mia Aasbakken, L Jaccheri, and A Wang. 2011. Evaluating User Experiences from Interactive Art Installations.
2. Jefrey Bardzell, Jay Bolter, and Jonas Löwgren. 2010. Interaction Criticism: Three Readings of an Interaction Design, and What They Get Us. Interactions 17, 2 (2010), 32--37.
3. Douglas Bates, Martin Mächler, Ben Bolker, and Steve Walker. 2015. Fitting Linear Mixed-Efects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67, 1 (2015), 1--48.
4. Benjamin M Bolker, Mollie E Brooks, Connie J Clark, Shane W Geange, John R Poulsen, M Henry H Stevens, and Jada-Simone S White. 2009. Generalized Linear Mixed Models: A Practical Guide for Ecology and Evolution. Trends in ecology & evolution 24, 3 (2009), 127--135.
5. Roberto Bresin, Ludvig Elblaus, Emma Frid, Federico Favero, Lars Annersten, David Berner, and Fabio Morreale. 2016. Sound Forest/Ljudskogen: A Large-Scale String-Based Interactive Musical Instrument. In Sound and Music Computing 2016. Zentrum für Mikrotonale Musik und Multimediale Komposition (ZM4), Hochschule für Musik und Theater, Hamburg, Germany, 79--84.
6. Douglas H Clements and Julie Sarama. 2014. Learning and Teaching Early Math: The Learning trajectories Approach. Routledge, 270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016, 43--47.
7. Karen Collins et al. 2008. Game Sound: An Introduction to the History, Theory, and Practice of Video Game Music and Sound Design. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England.
8. Richard Colwell. 2006. MENC Handbook of Musical Cognition and Development. Oxford University Press, 198 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016. 205 pages.
9. Joseph G Cunningham and Rebecca S Sterling. 1988. Developmental Change in the Understanding of Afective Meaning in Music. Motivation and Emotion 12, 4 (1988), 399--413.
10. Jon Driver and Charles Spence. 1998. Crossmodal attention. Current opinion in neurobiology 8, 2 (1998), 245--253.
11. Emma Frid. 2018. Accessible Digital Musical Instruments - A Survey of Inclusive Instruments. In Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference. The International Computer Music Association, San Francisco, 53--59.
12. Ellen Fullman. Retrieved 2 Jan, 2019. The Long String Instrument. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/mar/01/ 100-foot-instrument-long-string-ellen-fullman
13. Athanasios Gagatsis and Iliada Elia. 2004. The Efects of Diferent Modes of Representation on Mathematical Problem Solving. In Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 35 Aandwind Street, Kirstenhof, Cape Town, 7945, South Africa, 447--454.
14. Carla J Giomo. 1993. The Development of Children's Aesthetic Sensitivity to Mood in Music: An Experimental Study Comparing Five- and Nine-Year-Olds Using a Nonverbal Mode of Response. Psychology of Music 21, 2 (1993), 141--162.
15. Bruno L Giordano, Patrick Susini, and Roberto Bresin. 2013. Perceptual Evaluation of Sound-Producing Objects. In Sonic Interaction Design. MIT Press, Boston, Massachusetts, 151--197.
16. Josefna Guerrero-Garcia, Juan Manuel González-Calleros, Jaime Muñoz-Arteaga, and César A Collazos. 2017. HCI for Children with Disabilities. Springer, Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland. 80 pages.
17. AJ Johnston. 2011. Beyond Evaluation: Linking Practice and Theory in New Musical Interface Design. In Proceedings of the 11th international conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. University of Oslo and Norwegian Academy of Music, Oslo, Norway, 256--259.
18. Sergi Jordà and Sebastián Mealla. 2014. A Methodological Framework for Teaching, Evaluating and Informing NIME Design with a Focus on Expressiveness and Mapping. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. Goldsmiths, University of London, London, UK, 233--238.
19. Chris Kiefer, Nick Collins, and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2008. HCI Methodology For Evaluating Musical Controllers: A Case Study. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. University of Oslo and Norwegian Academy of Music, Oslo, Norway, 87--90.
20. Norimichi Kitagawa and Charles Spence. 2006. Audiotactile Multisensory Interactions in Human Information Processing. Japanese Psychological Research 48, 3 (2006), 158--173.
21. Benjamin Knichel, Holger Reckter, and Peter Kiefer. 2015. Resonate - A Social Musical Installation which Integrates Tangible Multiuser Interaction. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. The School of Music and the Center for Computation and Technology (CCT), Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA, 70803, 111--115.
22. Hans Lindetorp. 2017. iMusic. Retrieved September 10, 2018 from https://github.com/hanslindetorp/imusic
23. Panos Markopoulos, Janet Read, Johanna Hoÿsniemi, and Stuart MacFarlane. 2008. Child Computer Interaction: Advances in Methodological Research.
24. Charles E McCulloch and Shayle R Searle. 2004. Generalized, Linear, and Mixed m Models. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, USA.
25. James McDermott, Toby Giford, Anders Bouwer, and Mark Wagy. 2013. Should Music Interaction be Easy? In Music and Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, London, UK, 29--47.
26. Mark H McManis, Margaret M Bradley, W Keith Berg, Bruce N Cuthbert, and Peter J Lang. 2001. Emotional Reactions in Children: Verbal, Physiological, and Behavioral Responses to Afective Pictures. Psychophysiology 38, 2 (2001), 222--231.
27. Fabio Morreale and Antonella De Angeli. 2015. Evaluating Visitor Experiences with Interactive Art. In Proceedings of the 11th Biannual Conference on Italian SIGCHI Chapter. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), New York, USA, 50--57.
28. Ann J Morrison, Peta Mitchell, and Margot Brereton. 2007. The Lens of Ludic Engagement: Evaluating Participation in Interactive Art Installations. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), New York, USA, 509--512.
29. Sile O'Modhrain. 2011. A Framework for the Evaluation of Digital Musical Instruments. Computer Music Journal 35, 1 (2011), 28--42.
30. Jimmie Paloranta, Anders Lundstrom, Ludvig Elblaus, Roberto Bresin, and Emma Frid. 2016. Interaction with a Large-Sized Augmented String Instrument Intended for a Public Setting. In Sound and Music Computing 2016. Zentrum für Mikrotonale Musik und Multimediale Komposition (ZM4), Hochschule für Musik und Theater, Hamburg, Germany, 388--395.
31. Marianne Graves Petersen, Ole Sejer Iversen, Peter Gall Krogh, and Martin Ludvigsen. 2004. Aesthetic Interaction: a Pragmatist's Aesthetics of Interactive Systems. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), New York, USA, 269--276.
32. Cornelius Poepel. 2005. On interface Expressivity: A Player-Based Study. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. National University of Singapore, National University of Singapore, Singapore, 228--231.
33. Barry E Stein and Terrence R Stanford. 2008. Multisensory Integration: Current Ussues from the Perspective of the Single Neuron. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 9, 4 (2008), 255.
34. Atau Tanaka and Bert Bongers. 2002. Global String: A Musical Instrument for Hybrid Space. In Proceedings of International Computer Music Conference 2002. Michigan Publishing, Gothenburg, Sweden, 299--304.
35. Robyn Taylor, Guy Schofeld, Jonathan Hook, Karim Ladha, John Bowers, and Peter Wright. 2013. Crafting Interactive Systems: Learning from Digital Art Practice. In CHI'13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), Paris, France, 3223--3226.
36. Marcelo Mortensen Wanderley and Nicola Orio. 2002. Evaluation of Input Devices for Musical Expression: Borrowing Tools from HCI. Computer Music Journal 26, 3 (2002), 62--76.
37. Marcelo Mortensen Wanderley and Nicola Orio. 2002. Evaluation of Input Devices for Musical Expression: Borrowing Tools from HCI. Computer Music Journal 26, 3 (2002), 62--76.
38. Marcel Zentner and Tuomas Eerola. 2010. Rhythmic Engagement with Music in Infancy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107, 13 (2010), 201000121.

Index Terms

• Human-centered computing

  • Accessibility

    • Accessibility design and evaluation methods

  • Human computer interaction (HCI)

    • Empirical studies in HCI

    • HCI design and evaluation methods

      • User studies

    • Interaction devices

      • Haptic devices

    • Interaction paradigms

      • Collaborative interaction

    • Interaction techniques

      • Auditory feedback

  • Interaction design

    • Interaction design process and methods

      • User interface design