The design and emotion conference was an overall inspiring and compelling experience. The topics covered cultural values, methodological issues, usage & interaction, affect, senses and desire.
For myself, the conference began with one of the most inspiring workshops I ever participated in, it was led by Gino Yu (who works and teaches at Hong-Kong Polytechnic, the university that also held the conference). The workshop, entitled ‘Meaningful Media’ ranged from Freud to mass manipulation, and from emotion visualisation tasks (we were laying down on the floor during this one) to some ‘Qi flow’ exercises. Taking neurophysiology and eastern philosophy into consideration seems to be valuable for designers. Again, this was very inspiring!
The actual conference was set off with a keynote by Donald Norman. He talked much about ‘sociable’ design, design that respects and utilizes humans’ social capacities. In particular depth, he discussed waiting lines in banks and amusement parks. He was actually taken to the rides in Disneyland by the Disney executives, and even those were not allowed to skip the lines: In a Disney park, one will not be frustrated by being walked past in a waiting line, nonetheless how important they might be (maintenance entrances not included, though).
The central things I took home were the reported shift “from what is designed to what is experienced” (Anders Warell), and Frank Spiller’s notable paper on “synchronicity in UIs” (which Paul Hekkert once called the “dance with the machine”) – I totally agree to his opinion of bond, flow and synch as the means to successful interaction: Entrainment (not entertainment!) as a key factor in the design of interactive systems. Also, the broad range of keynote speeches was great: Jan Chipchase (designer and anthropologist at Nokia), Lorraine Justice (on cultures and beliefs, and how it affects what we want in life), Raman Hui (the director of “Shrek”) and Bill Green (Design and Emotion, historically viewed, from the stone age till today).
Having not heard about it before, this was certainly a conference I underestimated for me. The quality of the work and presentations was (mostly) good, and the overall impression was that of a professionally organized conference of high profile. It had, compared to other venues, less statistical significance, but more real-life relevance. I am looking forward to hear about the next one and submit a paper: Very much recommendable.