1887
Volume 24, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1572-0373
  • E-ISSN: 1572-0381

Abstract

Abstract

The numerous systems designed to facilitate animals’ use of computers often are specific to the animals involved, their unique context, and the applications – enrichment among them. Hence, several development methods have arisen in parallel, largely transposed from the human-computer interaction (HCI) domain. In light of that prior work, the paper presents a step-by-step guide for iteratively designing and constructing interactive computers for animals, informed by the rich history of HCI yet applying animal-centred principles, to enrich animal-computer interaction. For each stage in the iterative design (requirements, ideation, prototyping, and testing), the author reflects on real-world experience of building interactive devices for various animals. The paper concludes with overarching considerations vital for future practice of developing interactive computers for animals. Thus, it serves as a valuable reference and information source for researchers designing novel computer systems for animals.

Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/is.22045.hir
2023-11-03
2024-07-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/is.22045.hir.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/is.22045.hir&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Agassi, J.
    (2018) Ludwig Wittgenstein’s philosophical investigations: An attempt at a critical rationalist appraisal. Springer. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-00117-9. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑00117‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00117-9 [Google Scholar]
  2. Alcaidinho, J., Freil, L., Kelly, T., Marland, K., Wu, C., Wittenbrook, B., … Jackson, M.
    (2017) Mobile collaboration for human and canine police explosive detection teams. InProceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (p.925–933). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2998181.2998271
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998271 [Google Scholar]
  3. Aspling, F., & Juhlin, O.
    (2017, February). Theorizing animal-computer interaction as machinations. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud., 98 (C), 135–149. Retrieved from10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.05.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.05.005 [Google Scholar]
  4. Cabrera, D., Nilsson, J. R., & Griffen, B. D.
    (2021) The development of animal personality across ontogeny: A cross-species review. Animal Behaviour, 1731, 137–144. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2021.01.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2021.01.003 [Google Scholar]
  5. Fallman, D.
    (2003) Design-oriented human-computer interaction. InCHI ’03: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (p.225–232). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/642611.642652
    https://doi.org/10.1145/642611.642652 [Google Scholar]
  6. Farrell, J., McCarthy, C., & Chua, C.
    (2019) Exploration of technology requirements for the assistance canine training industry. InProceedings of the Sixth International Conference on AnimalComputer Interaction. 10.1145/3371049.3371059
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3371049.3371059 [Google Scholar]
  7. Fenwick, N., Griffin, G., & Gauthier, C.
    (2009) The welfare of animals used in science: How the ‘Three Rs’ ethic guides improvements. The Canadian Veterinary Journal, 50 (5), 523–530.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. French, F., Hirskyj-Douglas, I., & Väätäjä, H.
    (2021) Designing technologies for playful interspecies communication. InProceedings of the seventh international conference on animal-computer interaction. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3446002.3446003
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3446002.3446003 [Google Scholar]
  9. French, F., Mancini, C., & Sharp, H.
    (2015) Designing interactive toys for elephants. InProceedings of the 2015 annual symposium on computer-human interaction in play (p.523–528). New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2793107.2810327
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2793107.2810327 [Google Scholar]
  10. (2016) Exploring methods for interaction design with animals: A case-study with Valli. InProceedings of the Third International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction. Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2995257.2995394
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2995257.2995394 [Google Scholar]
  11. (2017) Exploring research through design in animal computer interaction. InProceedings of the fourth international conference on animal-computer interaction. 10.1145/3152130.3152147
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3152130.3152147 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2018) High tech cognitive and acoustic enrichment for captive elephants. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 3001, 173–183. Retrieved fromhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165027017303382. 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2017.09.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2017.09.009 [Google Scholar]
  13. (2020) More than human aesthetics: Interactive enrichment for elephants. InProceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (p.1661–1672). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3357236.3395445
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3357236.3395445 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2021) Concept craft cards: Deck of theoretical and practical suggestions for ACI developers. InC&C ’21: Creativity and Cognition. Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3450741.3466816
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3450741.3466816 [Google Scholar]
  15. Gaver, W.
    (2012) What should we expect from research through design?InCHI ’12: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp.937–946). 10.1145/2207676.2208538
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2208538 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gray, S., Clark, F., Burgess, K., Metcalfe, T., Kadijevic, A., Cater, K., & Bennett, P.
    (2018) Gorilla game lab: Exploring modularity, tangibility and playful engagement in cognitive enrichment design. InProceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction. 10.1145/3295598.3295604
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3295598.3295604 [Google Scholar]
  17. Grillaert, K., & Camenzind, S.
    (2016) Unleashed enthusiasm: Ethical reflections on harms, benefits, and animal-centered aims of ACI. InProceedings of the Third International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction. Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2995257.2995382
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2995257.2995382 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hirskyj-Douglas, I., Gray, S., & Piitulainen, R.
    (2021) ZooDesign: Methods for understanding and facilitating children’s education at zoos. InInteraction design and children (p.204–215). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3459990.3460697
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3459990.3460697 [Google Scholar]
  19. Hirskyj-Douglas, I., & Kankaanpää, V.
    (2021) Exploring how white-faced sakis control digital visual enrichment systems. Animals, 11 (2). Retrieved fromhttps://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/11/2/557
    [Google Scholar]
  20. (2022) Do monkeys want audio or visual stimuli? Interactive computers for choice with white-faced sakis in zoos. InDIS ’22: Designing Interactive Systems Conference (p.1497–1511). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3532106.3533577
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3532106.3533577 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hirskyj-Douglas, I., & Lucero, A.
    (2019) On the internet, nobody knows you’re a dog… unless you’re another dog. InProceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (p.1–12). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3290605.3300347
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300347 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2021) Forming the dog internet: Prototyping a dog-to-human video call device. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 51(ISS). 10.1145/3488539
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3488539 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hirskyj-Douglas, I., & Piitulainen, R.
    (2021) Developing zoo technology requirements for white-faced saki monkeys. ACI ’20: International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction. Retrieved from10.1145/3446002.3446123
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3446002.3446123 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hirskyj-Douglas, I., Pons, P., Read, J., & Jaen, J.
    (2018, Jun). Seven years after the manifesto: Literature review and research directions for technologies in animal computer interaction. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 2 (2), 30. Retrieved from10.3390/mti2020030
    https://doi.org/10.3390/mti2020030 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hirskyj-Douglas, I., & Read, J. C.
    (2016) Using behavioural information to help owners gather requirements from their dogs’ responses to media technology. InProceedings of the 30th International BCS Human-Computer Interaction Conference: Fusion!BCS Learning & Development Ltd. Retrieved from10.14236/ewic/HCI2016.42
    https://doi.org/10.14236/ewic/HCI2016.42 [Google Scholar]
  26. (2018) DoggyVision: Examining how dogs (Canis familiaris) interact with media using a dog-driven proximity tracker device. Animal Behaviour Cognition, 51, 388–405. Retrieved from10.26451/abc.05.04.06.2018
    https://doi.org/10.26451/abc.05.04.06.2018 [Google Scholar]
  27. Hirskyj-Douglas, I., Read, J. C., & Cassidy, B.
    (2017) A dog centred approach to the analysis of dogs’ interactions with media on tv screens. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 981, 208–220. 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.05.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.05.007 [Google Scholar]
  28. Hirskyj-Douglas, I., & Webber, S.
    (2021) Reflecting on methods in animal computer interaction: Novelty effect and habituation. Retrieved from10.1145/3493842.3493893
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3493842.3493893 [Google Scholar]
  29. Ishii, H., Kobayashi, M., & Arita, K.
    (1994) Iterative design of seamless collaboration media. Communications of the ACM, 37 (8), 83–97. 10.1145/179606.179687
    https://doi.org/10.1145/179606.179687 [Google Scholar]
  30. Kankaanpää, V.
    (2021) Interaction design for the unknown (Unpublished master’s thesis). Aalto University.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Kankaanpää, V., & Hirskyj-Douglas, I.
    (2023) Prototyping with monkeys: Uncovering what buttons for monkeys look like. InProceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3569009.3572735
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3569009.3572735 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kaygan, P., & Yargin, G. T.
    (2019) Design for the well-being of domestic animals: Implementation of a three-stage user research model. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 24 (3), 12–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Khan, J. A., Rehman, I. U., Khan, Y. H., Khan, I. J., & Rashid, S.
    (2015) Comparison of requirement prioritization techniques to find best prioritization technique. International Journal of Modern Education & Computer Science, 7(11), 53–59. 10.5815/ijmecs.2015.11.06
    https://doi.org/10.5815/ijmecs.2015.11.06 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kleinberger, R., Cunha, J. C., Vemuri, M. M., & Hirskyj-Douglas, I.
    (2023) Birds of a feather videoflock together: Design and evaluation of an agency-based parrot-to-parrot video-calling system for interspecies ethical enrichment. InProceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Kobayashi, H., Muramatsu, K., Okuno, J., Nakamura, K., Fujiwara, A., & Saito, K.
    (2015) Playful rocksalt system: Animal-computer interaction design in wild environments. InProceedings of the 12th International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology. Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2832932.2837012
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2832932.2837012 [Google Scholar]
  36. Lawson, S., Kirman, B., & Linehan, C.
    (2016, June). Power, participation, and the dog internet. Interactions, 23 (4), 37–41. Retrieved from10.1145/2942442
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2942442 [Google Scholar]
  37. Lawson, S., Kirman, B., Linehan, C., Feltwell, T., & Hopkins, L.
    (2015) Problematising upstream technology through speculative design: The case of quantified cats and dogs. InProceedings of the 33rd annual acm conference on human factors in computing systems (p.2663–2672). New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2702123.2702260
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702260 [Google Scholar]
  38. Makinde, A., Islam, M. M., & Scott, S. D.
    (2019) Opportunities for ACI in PLF: Applying animaland user-centred design to precision livestock farming. InProceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction. Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3371049.3371055
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3371049.3371055 [Google Scholar]
  39. Mancini, C.
    (2011, July). Animal-computer interaction: A manifesto. Interactions, 18 (4), 69–73. Retrieved from10.1145/1978822.1978836
    https://doi.org/10.1145/1978822.1978836 [Google Scholar]
  40. (2013) Animal-computer interaction (ACI): Changing perspective on HCI, participation and sustainability. InCHI ’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (p.2227–2236). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2468356.2468744
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2468356.2468744 [Google Scholar]
  41. (2017) Towards an animal-centred ethics for animal-computer interaction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 981, 221–233. Retrieved fromhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581916300180. 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.04.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.04.008 [Google Scholar]
  42. Martin, C. F., & Shumaker, R. W.
    (2018) Computer tasks for great apes promote functional naturalism in a zoo setting. InProceedings of the fifth international conference on animalcomputer interaction. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3295598.3295605
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3295598.3295605 [Google Scholar]
  43. Myers, B.
    (1994) Challenges of HCI design and implementation. Interactions, 1 (1), 73–83. 10.1145/174800.174808
    https://doi.org/10.1145/174800.174808 [Google Scholar]
  44. North, S., Hall, C., Roshier, A., & Mancini, C.
  45. North, S., & Mancini, C.
    (2016) Frameworks for ACI: Animals as stakeholders in the design process. Interactions, 23 (4), 34–36. 10.1145/2946043
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2946043 [Google Scholar]
  46. Noz, F., & An, J.
    (2011) Cat Cat Revolution: An interspecies gaming experience. InCHI ’11: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (p.2661–2664). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/1978942.1979331
    https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979331 [Google Scholar]
  47. Paci, P., Mancini, C., & Price, B. A.
    (2017) The role of ethological observation for measuring animal reactions to biotelemetry devices. InProceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction (pp.51:1–5:121). ACM. Retrieved from10.1145/3152130.3152144
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3152130.3152144 [Google Scholar]
  48. (2019) Wearer-centered design for animal biotelemetry: Implementation and wearability test of a prototype. InProceedings of the 23rd International Symposium on Wearable Computers (p.177–185). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3341163.3347750
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3341163.3347750 [Google Scholar]
  49. Piitulainen, R., & Hirskyj-Douglas, I.
    (2020) Music for monkeys: Building methods to design with white-faced sakis for animal-driven audio enrichment devices. Animals, 10 (10), Paper 1768. Retrieved fromhttps://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/10/10/1768
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Pons, P., & Jaen, J.
    (2017) Designing interspecies playful interactions: Studying children perceptions of games with animals. InProceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction. Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3152130.3152139
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3152130.3152139 [Google Scholar]
  51. Preece, J., Sharp, H., & Rogers, Y.
    (2015) Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction. John Wiley & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Rault, J.-L., Webber, S., & Carter, M.
    (2015) Cross-disciplinary perspectives on animal welfare science and animal-computer interaction. InProceedings of the 12th International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology. Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2832932.2837014
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2832932.2837014 [Google Scholar]
  53. Riek, L. D.
    (2012, jul). Wizard of Oz studies in HRI: A systematic review and new reporting guidelines. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, 1 (1), 119–136. Retrieved from10.5898/JHRI.1.1.Riek
    https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.1.1.Riek [Google Scholar]
  54. Ritvo, S. E., & Allison, R. S.
    (2014) Challenges related to nonhuman animal-computer interaction: Usability and ‘liking’. InACE ’14 Workshops: Proceedings of the 2014 Workshops on Advances in Computer Entertainment Conference. Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2693787.2693795
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2693787.2693795 [Google Scholar]
  55. Robbins, L., & Margulis, S. W.
    (2014) The effects of auditory enrichment on gorillas. Zoo Biology, 33 (3), 197–203. Retrieved from10.1002/zoo.21127
    https://doi.org/10.1002/zoo.21127 [Google Scholar]
  56. Robinson, C., & Torjussen, A.
    (2020) Canine co-design: Investigating buttons as an input modality for dogs. InProceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (p.1673–1685). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3357236.3395462
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3357236.3395462 [Google Scholar]
  57. Robinson, C. L., Mancini, C., van der Linden, J., Guest, C., & Harris, R.
    (2014) Canine-centered interface design: Supporting the work of diabetes alert dogs. InCHI ’14: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (p.3757–3766). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2556288.2557396
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557396 [Google Scholar]
  58. Ruge, L., Cox, E., Mancini, C., & Luca, R.
    (2018) User centered design approaches to measuring canine behavior: Tail wagging as a measure of user experience. InProceedings of the fifth international conference on animal-computer interaction. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3295598.3295599
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3295598.3295599 [Google Scholar]
  59. Siguln, M., Blanco, T., Rossano, F., & Casas, R.
    (2021) Modular e-collar for animal telemetry: An animal-centered design proposal. Sensors, 22 (1), 300. 10.3390/s22010300
    https://doi.org/10.3390/s22010300 [Google Scholar]
  60. Summers, K., Knudtzon, K., Weeks, H., Kaplan, N., Chisik, Y., Kulkarni, R., & Moulthrop, S.
    (2003) Contextual inquiry into children’s reading: Working with children as research partners. InProceedings of the UPA Conference 2003.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Sumpter, D. J.
    (2006) The principles of collective animal behaviour. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 361 (1465), 5–22. 10.1098/rstb.2005.1733
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1733 [Google Scholar]
  62. van der Linden, D.
    (2022) Animal-centered design needs dignity: A critical essay on ACI’s core concept. InACI ’22: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction. ACM. 10.1145/3565995.3566028
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3565995.3566028 [Google Scholar]
  63. van der Linden, D., & Zamansky, A.
    (2017) Agile with animals: Towards a development method. In2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops (REW) (pp.423–426). 10.1109/REW.2017.11
    https://doi.org/10.1109/REW.2017.11 [Google Scholar]
  64. Veasey, J. S.
    (2019) Assessing the psychological priorities for optimising captive Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) welfare. Animals, 10 (1), 39. 10.3390/ani10010039
    https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10010039 [Google Scholar]
  65. Webber, S., Carter, M., Sherwen, S., Smith, W., Joukhadar, Z., & Vetere, F.
    (2017) Kinecting with orangutans: Zoo visitors’ empathetic responses to animals’ use of interactive technology. InProceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (p.6075–6088). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3025453.3025729
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025729 [Google Scholar]
  66. Webber, S., Carter, M., Smith, W., & Vetere, F.
    (2017) Interactive technology and human-animal encounters at the zoo. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 981, 150–168. Retrieved fromwww.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581916300477. 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.05.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.05.003 [Google Scholar]
  67. (2020) Co-designing with orangutans: Enhancing the design of enrichment for animals. InProceedings of the 2020 acm designing interactive systems conference (p.1713–1725). New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3357236.3395559
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3357236.3395559 [Google Scholar]
  68. Webber, S., Cobb, M. L., & Coe, J.
    (2022) Welfare through competence: A framework for animal-centric technology design. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 91. Retrieved fromhttps://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2022.885973/full. 10.3389/fvets.2022.885973
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.885973 [Google Scholar]
  69. Weilenmann, A., & Juhlin, O.
    (2011) Understanding people and animals: The use of a positioning system in ordinary human-canine interaction. InCHI ’11: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (p.2631–2640). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/1978942.1979328
    https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979328 [Google Scholar]
  70. Westerlaken, M., & Gualeni, S.
    (2014) Grounded Zoomorphism: An evaluation methodology for ACI design. InACE ’14 Workshops: Proceedings of the 2014 Workshops on Advances in Computer Entertainment Conference. 10.1145/2693787.2693796
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2693787.2693796 [Google Scholar]
  71. (2016) Becoming with: Towards the inclusion of animals as participants in design processes. InProceedings of the Third International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction. Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2995257.2995392
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2995257.2995392 [Google Scholar]
  72. Wirman, H., & Zamansky, A.
    (2016, jun). Toward characterization of playful ACI. Interactions, 23 (4), 47–51. Retrieved from10.1145/2948127
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2948127 [Google Scholar]
  73. Yamanashi, Y., Hitoosa, K., Yoshida, N., Kano, F., Ikkatai, Y., & Sakamoto, H.
    (2022) Do chimpanzees enjoy a virtual forest? A pilot investigation of the use of interactive art as a form of environmental enrichment for zoo-housed chimpanzees. American Journal of Primatology, 84 (10), e23343. 10.1002/ajp.23343
    https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.23343 [Google Scholar]
  74. Zamansky, A., Roshier, A., Mancini, C., Collins, E. C., Hall, C., Grillaert, K., … Wirman, H.
    (2017) A report on the first international workshop on research methods in animal-computer interaction. InProceedings of the 2017 chi conference extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (p.806–815). New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/3027063.3052759
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3027063.3052759 [Google Scholar]
  75. Zamansky, A., van der Linden, D., & Baskin, S.
    (2017) Pushing boundaries of re: Requirement elicitation for non-human users. In2017 ieee 25th international requirements engineering conference (re) (pp.406–411). 10.1109/RE.2017.30
    https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2017.30 [Google Scholar]
  76. Zeagler, C., Zuerndorfer, J., Lau, A., Freil, L., Gilliland, S., Starner, T., & Jackson, M. M.
    (2016) Canine computer interaction: Towards designing a touchscreen interface for working dogs. InProceedings of the third international conference on animal-computer interaction. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from10.1145/2995257.2995384
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2995257.2995384 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/is.22045.hir
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/is.22045.hir
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error