Emerging frameworks for tangible user interfaces

By Brygg Ullmer, Hiroshi Ishii. IBM Systems Journal, 2000

1,387 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Human-Computer Interaction

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e4cbb0010ef14098a26667793502904757309b17

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Human-Computer Interaction

Citations in the corpus

Are tangibles more fun?: comparing children's enjoyment and engagement using physical, graphical and tangible user interfaces (2008, background): “Many different research projects have studied enabling technologies, usability aspects and various applications of tangible user interfaces (e.g., [10,11,24, 31 ]).”
Getting a grip on tangible interaction: a framework on physical space and social interaction (2006, background): “Even though many researchers agree that TUIs are especially suited for collocated collaboration and build systems for such scenarios [7, 26, 31, 34], conceptual papers often only briefly mention visibility of actions and distributed loci of control as collaborative affordances.”
Illuminating clay: a 3-D tangible interface for landscape analysis (2002, background): “Highresolution topographic maps, information on soil types, population densities, variance in vegetation species and so forth are routinely used in the landscape design process.”
Designing interaction, not interfaces (2004, background): “Descriptive power - Instrumental interaction describes a wide spectrum of interaction techniques, from traditional GUIs to advanced techniques such as toolglasses [9], tangible interfaces [34] and augmented reality [37].”
What is Mixed Reality? (2019, background): “9%) were concerned with (geo)location [4, 17, 42, 63] and haptics, or the tactile sense [36, 56, 70, 81].”
Do tangible interfaces enhance learning? (2007, background): “Most theoretical work on tangible interfaces has focused on the production of taxonomic frameworks [e.g. 19, 23, 32, 53].”
The reacTable: exploring the synergy between live music performance and tabletop tangible interfaces (2007, background): “This satisfactory behaviour has not prevented us from considering container objects [35] for storing sub-patches.”
Tangible bits: beyond pixels (2008, methodology): “This model provides a tool for examining the following important properties and design requirements of tangible interfaces [ 49 ].”
The Evolution of Research on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (2009, background): “These artefacts include multi-input devices (e.g., computers with two mice), tangible objects (Ullmer & Ishii, 2000) and roomware (Prante, Streitz, & Tandler, 2004), that is, a variety of tools falling under the umbrella of 'disappearing computer' (Russell, Streitz, & Winograd, 2005) or 'ubiquitous…”
Computing in Everyday Life: A Call for Research on Experiential Computing (2010, background): “An important technological development is tangible computing (Dourish 2001b; Ishii and Ullmer 2000).”
Reality-based interaction: a framework for post-WIMP interfaces (2008, background): “RELATED TAXONOMIES AND FRAMEWORKS To date, work that attempts to explain or organize emerging styles of interaction has focused more on individual classes of interfaces than on ideas that unify several classes [16, 18, 19, 22, 35, 47 ].”
Opportunities and Challenges for Data Physicalization (2015, neutral): “The area of Tangible User Interfaces (TUI) studies interactive systems that “give physical form to digital information, employing physical artifacts both as representations and controls for computational media” [71].”
A taxonomy for and analysis of tangible interfaces (2004, background): “In their original paper, Ishii and Ullmer [28] define them as user interfaces that ‘‘augment the real physical world by coupling digital information to everyday physical objects and environments.’’”