Let us zoom in. Now that I have established some characteristics of decisions and decision making let us try applying it to my own life. Since I want to look at everyday decisions I have chosen an average day as a starting point.
The two red points are decisions I struggle with more than the others. One thing that stands out to me is that for most of the decisions there is a pretty clear cut answer as to what the ‘right’ decision would be. Should I hit the snooze button? No of course not, I’ll have to rush to get to school on time. Should I eat breakfast? Yes, obviously, it will help me concentrate at school. Chores and exercise? No doubt, it very directly betters my quality of life. However, I make the wrong choice all the time. Why? Because I feel like it. There is a very appealing temptation at play. Setting up a boxing match between short term and long term gain, and that temptation makes the long term gain seem oh so far away. Another factor is the notion of work. How much work do I have to put in to do this? Often it is not so much the actual work, but the job of starting a task. Cleaning all my clothes into the closet from the floor probably takes about seven minutes, it is the getting started that is actually hard. And going for a run, why does that seem like work when I am sitting on the couch, even though I really enjoy running once I am out. It might seem like the notion of work (or effort) is much less enjoyable than the actual tasks where I am doing work. And afterwards I always feel better, it is just hard to remember that before you start.
As data tracking and cookie consents play a big role in developing deceptive design patterns* I would like to make an excursion and dive into privacy and data protection in today’s blogpost. Due to a recent ruling of the Austrian Data Protection Authority on a case filed by noyb, using Google Analytics violates the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR, dt. DSGVO) and is therefore illegal. Other EU-countries are expected to follow this example. Reason for this is the ruling in 2020 that banned US providers within the European Union, because they violate the GDPR by giving away personal data to the US authorities.
What is noyb?
noyb is an organization founded by Max Schrems – an Austrian lawyer and privacy activist – that focuses on data protection and fights for compliance with the GDPR, thus actively protecting the privacy rights of individuals. The platform combines the work of lawyers, legal tech specialists, hackers and consumer right groups and uses PR and media as a tool to create awareness in order to force companies to comply with the European privacy laws set out in the GDPR. Their strategy is to analyze and find infringements all over Europe and litigate them afterwards. The main goal of the operation is to maximize privacy and digital freedom for all citicens.
What is Google Analytics?
Like I already mentioned in the intro of this blogpost there has been a pioneer ruling in 2020 – the „Schrems II“ ruling – which legally defined that data transfer to US providers is violating the GDPR, making the „Privacy Shield“ inadmissible. The main reason for this decision was that US authorities have access to personal data, eg. user identification numbers, IP address and browser parameters, by US law. However the big players in the tech industry like Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon and Google tried to find loopholes by editing statements in their privacy policies instead of actually making their services comply with the new laws. Consequently Schrems filed 101 complaints in many European states to against those companies. The Austrian Data Protection Authority was the first one to react on this complaint by declaring Google Analystics an illegal service in Austria. As other countries are likely to follow this will create pressure on Google and other US providers to adapt their services and protections. If they don’t choose to adapt or host foreign data inside Europe, EU websites are forced to use different tracking tools, even if Google Analytics is the most common statistics program at the moment by far. For now there is no further information on possible penalties. In the long run the responses of the US government will determine wether US providers will eventually comply with the GDPR or there will be different products for US and EU in the future.
In order to wrap up the topic, I would like to engage a collaboration of sustainability and augmented reality by showing how AR could improve sustainability in e-commerce. Additionally to the 6 criteria of sustainable fashion, AR could push sustainable practices even further. AR could support responsible fashion brands to: • Help/nudge customers to practice responsible consumption by ordering what they actually like/ what them actually fits • Reduce waste and emissions caused by returns (transport, labels, packaging, …) • Display brand transparency • Level up customer satisfaction to get more customers and a bigger budget for producing clothes ecologically and fair
Augmented Reality is a powerfully engaging medium that can support and promote sustainable practices. It can educate consumers, improve brand transparency and loyalty, and spread the messages most important to a company’s sustainable endeavours.
Let’s face it, the fashion industry is one of the dirtiest we have on this planet. It wastes water, it pollutes the air and oceans and is responsible for 2,1 billion tons of CO2 per year.
Luckily, producing clothes more responsibly isn’t just a trend anymore but became a strong movement over the last few years. Due to growing awareness, the demand for fair and ecological garments as well as the market expanded to a great amount. A term that often occurs in that context is SLOW FASHION.
But what exactly does slow fashion mean?
“Made from high quality, sustainable materials. Often in smaller (local) stores rather than huge chain enterprises. Locally sourced, produced and sold garments. Few, specific styles per collection, which are released twice or maximum three times per year.” The following graphic compares slow fashion with fast fashion.
Besides from the slow fashion aspects, there are 6 criteria that sum up what makes a fashion brand sustainable.
In order to understand how retailer help their customers to find the right garment in the right size, this blog post compares different approaches of UI/UX of online shops.
A big part of e-commerce returns happens when products don’t match their online description. Online shoppers return clothes that don’t align with their needs, that’s why e-commerce brands use size guides. With size guides, brands want to reduce return rates and improve the customer’s shopping experience. However, there are several approaches that support online store visitors to find the right fit. I tried out various e-commerce size guides and put together an overview of them in the following.
Best practice examples
As a first example, I would like to share Carhartt’s online size guide. In 6 steps, the online store helps visitors to find their size. See steps below.
A similar size guide was found on the TWOTHIRDS website.
The next best practice is more extensive than the ones before. ThirdLove is an American lingerie company that invites website visitors to take an interactive quiz about their bra fit.
SRFACE offers a sizing guide for their wetsuits based on measurements.
The jeans retailer Madewell follows a simple but effective method of size guiding by showing customers on product on different models/bodytypes.
What information about a consumer is important for size guiding and how can it be categorized?
The categories in guide sizing for women online that emerged from the examples discussed are:
• body measurements (height, weight) • body type (bust, taille, hip) • age • usual sizes (e.g. bra size) • preferred fit (loose, tight)
What are proven methods to deliver more accurate size guidance in online stores?
Additionally, the following dots should be included in fashion e-commerce websites to improve size guides.
• Include fit finder quiz (interactive online fit/size quiz) • Interactive size guide • Display product videos • Show product on multiple models/different body types • Measurement conversion charts • Feature customer reviews to validate size guide
This blog entry will be a growing collection of questions that educators, designers and practitioners in general need to consider when designing/developing educational AR products.
Questions, questions and more questions
Who is the target group? What’s their educational level?
What is the learning environment? —> Classroom? Distance learning? Workplace? Indoors? Outdoors? …
What contents are to be conveyed?
Which part of the content to learn should be enhanced by AR?
What goal(s) should be achieved by using AR technology?
In what proportion will real and augmented content be combined?
How is the content prepared didactically?
Which AR device(s) will be used?
Which AR technology fits best? —> Trigger-based, View-based?
What are the advantages of AR in the learning context compared to traditional approaches? —> Which added value has AR in this case?
How can multiple senses be addressed?
How can cognitive overload be avoided?
How can teachers easily and quickly add/adapt content?
Hello again! In the following blog entry I will be writing about the advantages and limitations of using AR technology in the educational sector, which many studies already have been conducted to establish.
Advantages & Benefits
Many studies indicate that the use of AR in the educational field brings many benefits. According to a meta-review by Garzón, Pavón and Baldiris (2019), which analyzed 61 scientific publications, a total of 100% mentioned some kind of advantage when using AR systems in education. The following factors are the main advantages mentioned in their paper:
Learning gain: When using AR systems, students can improve their academic performance or even obtain better scores than students using traditional approaches. This improvement was reported not only by data, but also for different teachers and the students themselves
Motivation: The use of AR can increase the motivation of students as well as their level of fun while learning, compared to other pedagogical tools
Sensory engagement: When AR activates multiple senses, knowledge retention can improve.
Abstract concepts: AR can ideal to explain unobservable phenomena (i.e. the movement of the sun)
Autonomy: AR technology can not only help retain knowledge, but also gives students the possibility of retaining it for longer periods of time compared to other pedagogical methodologies
Memory retention: The combination of real and virtual worlds can increase the autonomy of students taking into account their natural abilities and motivation for using technological devices
Collaboration: AR can create possibilities for collaborative learning around virtual content which can facilitate learning, since it allows learners to interact with their partners, as well as with the educational content
Accessibility (not further described in the study)
Creativity(not further described in the study)
In a blog (not scientific!) by Sinha (2021) I found some more advantages of AR in education, that were not listed in the aforementioned study:
Easy access to learning materials anytime, anywhere: AR could replace textbooks, physical forms, posters, and printed brochures. This mode of mobile learning could also reduce the cost of learning materials and make it easy for everyone to access
Safer practice:In cases like practicing a heart surgery or operating a space shuttle can be done with AR without putting other people in danger or risking millions of dollars in damage if something goes wrong
Disadvantages & Limitations
According to the aforementioned meta review by Garzón, Pavón and Baldiris (2019) 15% of the reviewed publications reported some disadvantages or problems when using AR in educational settings. The following factors are the main disadvantages mentioned in their paper:
Complexity: Complexity can be an issure especially when designing for children. AR being a novel technology, which involves multiple senses, can become a very complex tool especially for those who do not have technological abilities
Technical difficulties:Technical problems like latency of wireless networks or limited bandwidth can become a problem as well as lack of teachers’ experience with tech
Multitasking: AR applications can demand too much attention, which can be a distraction factor. This can cause students to ignore instructions or important stages of the experience
Resistance from teachers: Some teachers may prefer having total control over content, despite recognizing the benefits of using AR applications
In a blog (not scientific!) by Omelchenko (2021) and another blog by Aleksandrova (2021) I found some more advantages of AR in education, that were not listed in the aforementioned study:
Need of proper hardware: The use of AR requires at least a mobile device like a smartphone or tablet (which has to be up-to-date in order to install AR apps), which not all students may have
Content portability issues:An AR app needs to work equally well on all platforms and devices
Conclusion
Many studies indicate that AR has the potential to make learning processes faster, more fun and more effective. But some also point out that there are also several problems that can occur when AR is used in educational setting. Some studies also state that the context in which this technology is more effective than other educational media is still not clear and needs further research (Hantono, Nugroho & Santosa, 2018). Some future work could focus on support for teachers in adding and updating content as well as the comparison of AR to traditional teaching methods based on empirical data. It would also be important to do further research on special needs of specific user groups and accessibility features (Garzón, Pavón & Baldiris, 2019).
Garzón, J., Pavón, J., & Baldiris, S. (2019). Systematic review and meta-analysis of augmented reality in educational settings. Virtual Reality, 23, 447-459.
Hantono, B., Nugroho, L.E., & Santosa, P.I. (2018). Meta-Review of Augmented Reality in Education. 2018 10th International Conference on Information Technology and Electrical Engineering (ICITEE), 312-315.
The fourth in the league of blog entries on the topic of UX in the fashion industry offers some examples of companies that are using augmented reality for their e-commerce businesses. This part of my research is dedicated to find out how companies include the technology and what goals they are pursuing with it.
According to IBM’s 2020 U.S. Retail Index report, the pandemic accelerated the shift to digital shopping by roughly five years. According to a Neilsen global survey from 2019, consumers listed Augmented and Virtual Reality as the top technologies they’re seeking to assist them in their daily lives. In fact, just over half said they were willing to use this technology to assess products. AR has proven that it can add enormous value for consumers in the shopping journey. Therefore, some brands are already re-imagining retail to provide a better shopping experience for their users.
Taking a look at existing products
A virtual “try-before-you-buy” experience is already implemented by IKEA, offering a free App called IKEA Place. The app lets users virtually place furnishing in their space.
The home improvement retailer Home Depot added augmented reality capabilities to its app and mobile web before the pandemic. The feature helps lift engagement and conversion as consumers spend more time shopping on their phones.
For consumers to virtually try on luxury fashion, AR became an essential tool for brands such as Louis Vuitton and Gucci. Among some innovative AR collaborations, Gucci launched a virtual shoe ‘try-on’ called Lenses through the Snapchat platform.
Gucci’s virtual shoe try-onWith AR, Louis Vuitton allows users to play around with their luxury products
Physical stores reopening again, requires a high level of hygiene and safety. In response beauty retailer Sephora offers customers to test out makeup products with AR. Another beauty retailer, Ulta, uses the app GLAMlab to increase customers engagement to find the right shade of foundation.
The jewellery brand Kendra Scott introduced an AR tool enabling customers to virtually try-on different earring styles from the comfort of their homes.
All AR examples have the same aim: to help consumers to find the right product by offering them a preview of the product. Ar in retail seems to work and boost conversion for products such as furniture, home appliances, accessories, jewellery, shoes and makeup. Nevertheless, I couldn’t find running AR applications that are used for trying on clothes virtually and helping customers to find the right fit and size. Since body types differ enormously, clothes look different on everybody and pose a great challenge for implementing AR in the online shopping experience for garments.
In order to make this topic more tangible, I will take a look at the approaches of size guiding of clothes in online shops. The next blog entry will show best practice examples of size guiding online.
Hello again! For this blog entry I had a look at several educational AR apps (there are a loooot of them) in order to get a picture of when AR has added value for educational purposes and when it doesn’t. So I picked out a few examples and categorized them in good and bad ones and summed up why I did (not) like them. It’s also to mention that I only looked at digital apps that use visual augmentation. But first I want to give a short overview on the wide range of educational fields and educational levels existing AR products on the market cover (this list provided by Garzón, Pavón and Baldiris [2019] might not be complete):
Education levels: Early childhood education, Primary education, Lower secondary education, Upper secondary education, Post-secondary non-tertiary education, Short-cycle tertiary education, Bachelor’s or equivalent level, Non-schoolers (work related trainings) – It’s to mention that educational AR products for Master’s or equivalent level and Doctoral or equivalent level might exist, but weren’t conducted in the study
The good
Augmented Creativity
Augmented Creativity includes a total of six prototypes that can be used with mobile devides: Coloring Book, Music Arrangement, Physical-Interaction Game, City-Wide Gaming, Authoring Interactive Narratives and Robot Programming – I had a look at the first two of them.
The Coloring Book is an application available that brings colored drawings to life: It comes with several templates that can be printed out and colored. When the drawing is scanned with the app on a smartphone or tablet (iOS and Android), it detects and tracks the drawing and displays an augmented, animated 3D version of the character, which is textured according to the child’s coloring (See Fig. 1).
Advantages the authors mention:
Creative Goal: Fosters imagination, allows character individualization, helps to express feelings about character
Educational Goal: Improves coloring skills, 3D perception, and challenges imagination
Potential Impact: User-painted characters and levels, scripting virtual worlds through coloring
Why I like it:
The augmentation doesn’t intervene the act of drawing and coloring by hand (which I think is an important way of creative expression in early ages), but adds additional value by digitalizing it afterwards
Stimulates several senses
Works really well and looks super cute (smooth animations; exact coloring; live updates)
Fig. 1: Augmented Creativity – Coloring Book
The Music Arrangement is a set of flashcards where each card represents a musical element like instruments and music styles. The user can then choose instruments and styles independently and rearrange the song as imagined. By placing a card on a physical board, the app detects the marker on it and displays an augmented version of the instrument and plays the corresponding audio, as depicted in Fig. 2. AR even allows the user to change the position and the volume of the instruments while the song is playing, allowing them to direct the virtual band.
Advantages the authors mention:
Creative Goal: Experiment with different instruments and styles to rearrange a song
Educational Goal: Teaches concepts of arrangements, styles, and the disposition of the band components
Potential Impact: Collaborative music arrangement experience, learn about the disposition of an orchestra
Why I like it:
Combines physical and digital interaction
It stimulates several senses
Works really well and looks super nice
Fig. 2: Augmented Creativity – Music Arrangement
Quiver Education
Quiver Education is similar to the Coloring Book mentioned above, but with a greater focus on educational content: The user can choose from a range of coloring packs, print them and color them by hand. When the coloring is scanned with the app on a smartphone or tablet (iOS and Android), a colored, animated 3D model is displayed and additional information and interaction options are provided (see Fig. 3). The content is designed around topics as diverse as biology, geometry, the solar system and more.
Why I like it:
The augmentation doesn’t intervene the process of coloring by hand
Stimulates several senses
A wide range of topics
~ I’m still a little sceptical if it’s necessary to color a scene first in order to learn about it (i.e. a volcano)
Fig. 3: Quiver
Merge EDU
Merge EDU engages students in STEM fields with 3D objects and simulations they can touch, hold and interact with. The special thing about Merge is that the user has to hold a special cube in their hands where the augmentation is placed on, so the user feels like actually holding the object in their hands and can then interact with it (See Fig. 4). Merge is available for iOS and Android and can be used with mobile devices – It also offers glasses where a user can put their phone in to have their hands free to interact with the cube.
Advantages the authors mention:
3D tactile learning
Flexibility: Can be used at home and at school
Curriculum aligned
Multisensory Instruction
Spatial Development
Accelerate Understanding
Focused Engagement
Why I like it:
The potential of the cube: It could potentially replace physical teaching aids
Big library of topics to explore
Users can upload and share their own creations
Fig. 4: Merge EDU
Human Anatomy Atlas
With the Human Anatomy Atlas medical students can turn any room into an anatomy lab: They can view and dissect a virtual model of a human organ or complete human body by scanning a printed picture (see Fig. 5) or simply placing a model on a flat surface (see Fig. 6). It’s also possible to study human muscles in motion by scanning a person as shown in Fig. 7.
Why I like it:
Students can study from anywhere and don’t have to go to an actual lab
Doing a dissection virtually might be helpdul to prepare for doing a dissection in real life (As far as I know from several people who are currently studying medicine, preparation for dissections is mostly done with the help of books, pictures, videos and physical models, but not with interactive digital models)
Fig. 5: Human Anatomy Atlas – Image marker
Fig. 6: Human Anatomy Atlas – Placing an object in space
Fig. 7: Human Anatomy Atlas – Live tracking of muscles
The bad
Sketch AR
With Sketch AR users can learn how to draw by using their smartphone camera: They can choose a sketch from a library and display it on a sheet of paper in front of them. The user can then follow the virtual lines on the paper step-by-step (See Fig. 8). The app also offers more features like minigames and AI portraits, but I only had a look at the AR feature. In general the app is designed really well and is also personalizable, but all in all I did not see the added value that AR has in this case.
Why I don’t like it:
Drawing might be difficult when looking at the paper though a small screen
While drawing I personally like to fixate the paper with one hand, which is not possible, because you have to hold your mobile device
I don’t see the advantes of AR compared to common image tracing (by printing it out and using it as a template)
An app that does pretty much the same is “Tracing Projector”, where I also don’t see the added value.
Fig. 8: SketchAR
On a general note
There are a lot of apps on the market – especially in children’s education – that try to replace a physical game with a digital one (i.e. playing with dominos), which is in my opinion not what AR should be used for. AR is supposed to enhance the user’s physical world and not replace it. I believe that it’s important to experience the world with as many senses as possible – especially in early ages – and haptic experiences should not be limited to holding and controlling a smartphone. Furthermore there are a lot of apps where the user can just randomly place 3D objects in the real world, but can’t do anything with them, which might be fun and playful though, but doesn’t have many educational values in my opinion.
Garzón, J., Pavón, J., & Baldiris, S. (2019). Systematic review and meta-analysis of augmented reality in educational settings. Virtual Reality, 23, 447-459.
Zünd, F., Ryffel, M., Magnenat, S., Marra, A., Nitti, M., Kapadia, M., Noris, G., Mitchell, K., Gross, M.H., & Sumner, R.W. (2015). Augmented creativity: bridging the real and virtual worlds to enhance creative play. SIGGRAPH Asia 2015 Mobile Graphics and Interactive Applications.
Projects have continued to be added to the database over the last few days in order to gather sufficient information to help us verify the reality of the points analysed in previous posts. The database can be found online in the link: http://ambiby.com/project_online/projectDB/index.php
For this reason, several projects have been added (13 so far), but I would like to add even more to the database. Even so, and taking into account the long list of references pending to be analysed, the data collected are similar to those previously studied. With this, the important points that are usually repeated in any interactive exhibition for children are checked.
It has to be said that, due to the current situation with COVID, the analysis has been a bit hard. Not being able to visit certain places either because of the pandemic or lack of time, there are details that are missed. The aim was to collect information from visual materials, which limited the number of projects to be analysed.
Now, a short analysis of the different sections of data found from the analysed projects is discussed.
Interaction data
In terms of interaction, we find that the vast majority of exhibits mix GUI and TUI models, making them much more attractive to children. In addition, the spaces are usually activity-centred or user-centred. This depends on whether the project aims to teach or influence the user, or is focused on simply discovering or hanging out.
User experience for kids
Focusing on the userexperience for children, and using the questions and data studied in posts II and III, we have found very similar answers to those studied in those posts. In some cases the answers were obvious, but in others, they have varied from point to point.
All the interfaces analysed had instant feedback to the user, whether it was a GUI or a TUI, as the user was always aware of what changes were being made.
In the case of navigation, the responses were more varied. Both navigation through the digital interface and navigation through the physical space were taken into account. For this reason, there are some projects that have more than one type of navigation. Even so, navigation by steps has been the most common, as the aim is to organise the information by steps so that it is told in the form of a story and is easier to understand.
In terms of text, three parameters were taken into account: simplicity, size and quantity. In the case of simplicity and size, it was complicated in some cases to analyse it, as there were very few visual references. Even so, it has been shown that the texts are usually simple (adapted to the children’s vocabulary) and the text sizes are usually larger than usual. Surprisingly, the amount of text has been more adjusted, in some cases there was a lot of text (6 projects), and in others the text was scarce (7 projects).
If we think about the visual and auditory inputs, we find three points to analyse: sounds, animations and vivid colours. The case of sound has been complicated, because with the visual material it was difficult to observe this point. On the other hand, animations were present in 10 of the 13 projects, so it can be determined that the use of animations is common. Finally, the use of colours was clearly vivid. In almost all of the exhibits (11 out of 13), bright colours are used to create a good atmosphere. The only ones using more muted colours are those related to nature, as they are more earthy colours.
Finally in this section, two points should be taken into account: the icons and the option to customise. In the case of the icons, it was studied that in order to address children, care must be taken, as understanding them can be complicated. This is why it has been observed that in 7 projects there were no icons, and in those that did have them, the vast majority (5 of the 13) were literal, i.e. they resemble reality and leave no room for doubt. The case of personalisation was surprising. In only 5 of the projects is this option available.
The 125 Universal Principles of Design
The vast majority of the principles explained in posts V and VI are used in the projects, even so, there are big differences between them. In order to better understand the contents, the principles have been divided into three types: related to the physical space, related to the way content is displayed and related to the design.
In the important principles for the organisation of the physical space, it is clear that accessibility and the entry point to the exhibition are clear. All projects rely on these as it is necessary to adapt the interface to children. For this, it is not only a question of simplifying the text, but also of adjusting the sizes and heights of the stations to those of the youngest children.
In those related to the way information is displayed, legibility and the use of images over text are key, as well as the importance of highlighting information in texts and immersion. It should also be noted that the vast majority (8-9 out of 13) use methods such as chunking or advance organiser to divide information into islands and make it easier to remember. Finally, the use of icons is again taken into account, and how this is reduced to only 6 of the 13 projects.
In terms of design, the results were low. It is true that the importance of colour is maintained in the 13 projects analysed, but the points related to the environment (biophilia effect and savannah preference) are not very much taken into account, as the spaces are looking for a sense of immersion and leave aside the use of nature so as not to distract the user. Finally, the use of more rounded and unaggressive designs has only been observed in 5 of the 13 projects, which seems surprising.
With this we conclude that although there are points that seem to be well determined, there are others such as the amount of text, the option of personalisation or the analysis of the design (contour bias) that need more referents to determine a result. But even so, it is understood that interfaces for children follow a series of principles that tend to be repeated in the vast majority.
The results have certainly been interesting, but more time is needed to add projects. In any case, the intention is to use this website as a base and add all the references in order to keep an updated database of projects that can help me in the future.
