HAL Id: hal-01899137https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01899137

Submitted on 19 Oct 2018

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open accessarchive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-entific research documents, whether they are pub-lished or not. The documents may come fromteaching and research institutions in France orabroad, or from public or private research centers.

L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, estdestinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documentsscientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,émanant des établissements d’enseignement et derecherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoirespublics ou privés.

Patterns of Creative UX in immersive collaborativedesign

Stéphane Safin, Tomás Dorta, Gokce Kinayoglu

To cite this version:Stéphane Safin, Tomás Dorta, Gokce Kinayoglu. Patterns of Creative UX in immersive collaborativedesign. 30eme conférence francophone sur l’interaction homme-machine, Oct 2018, Brest, France.10p. �hal-01899137�

Patterns of Creative UX in immersive collaborative design Patterns d’UX créatives en conception collaborative

StéphaneSafinTélécomParisTech

i3-CNRS–Institutinterdisciplinairedel’Innovation,Paris,France

stephane.safin@telecom-paristech.fr

TomásDortaUniversityofMontreal

DesignResearchLaboratoryHybridlab

Montreal,Quebec,Canadatomas.dorta@umontreal.ca

GôkçeKinayogluUniversityofMontreal

DesignResearchLaboratoryHybridlab

Montreal,Quebec,Canadagokce.kinayoglu@gmail.com

BlindVersion

ABSTRACTCreativity can be studied in many ways: processes, tools,personality, etc. In this paper, we are interested insubjectiveemotionalexperiencelinkedtocreativity.Peopleusually make rich experiences, and are more likely to beengaged in creative processes, when they face highlychallenging task, and feel confident in their skills (FlowfromCsikszentmihalyi [9]).On this base, our interest is tounderstand the dynamics of experience, how it evolves intime. We use a previously developed method, the DesignFlow2.0 [18],whichallow,ona granularway, todescribetheemotionalstatesduringdesign. Inasampleof ideationsessions, during a co-design immersive studio in designpedagogy, thanks to the granular assessment, we identifypatternsofcreativeexperiencelinkedtothecreationofnewand relevant ideas. Our results show two patterns, onewhichwasexpected(designersexperiencestressbeforetheexpressionof the idea,optimalexperience-flow-during itsexpression,andfeelincontroljustafter),andanunexpectedreversed pattern (control-flow-stress), which respectivelyillustrate a proactive and a reactive posture in design.Wediscuss these results and open perspectives, about the

usage of themethod to enhance co-design and to addressothertypesofuserexperiences.

CCSCONCEPTS•Human-centered computing→ Interaction design→Empirical studies in interaction design; Human-centeredcomputing→Humancomputerinteraction(HCI)→HCIdesignandevaluationmethods→Userstudies

KEYWORDSCreativity, Experience, Design Flow, Collaborative design,Ideation

RÉSUMÉLa créativité peut être étudiée de plusieurs façons :processus, outils, personnalité, etc. Dans cet article, nousnousintéressonsàl'expérienceémotionnellesubjectiveliéeà lacréativité.Lesgens fontgénéralementdesexpériencesriches et sont plus susceptibles de s'engager dans desprocessus créatifs, lorsqu'ils sont confrontés à des tâchestrès exigeantes et qu'ils sont confiants dans leurscompétences (le Flow de Csikszentmihalyi [9]). Sur cettebase, cette étude vise à comprendre la dynamiquetemporelle de l'expérience créative. Nous utilisons uneméthode développée précédemment, le Design Flow 2.0[18],quipermet,demanièregranulaire,dedécrirelesétatsémotionnels lors de la conception. Dans un échantillon desessions d'idéation, au cours d'un atelier pédagogiqueimmersif de co-conception, nous identifions, grâce à lamesure granulaire, des patterns temporels d'expériencecréative liés à la création d'idées nouvelles et pertinentes.Nos résultats montrent deux patterns, l'un attendu (unephase où les concepteurs ressentent du stress avantl'expressionde l'idée,unephased'expérienceoptimale - le

IHM’18, 23 - 26 Octobre 2018, Brest, France S. Safin et al. flow, pendant l'expression de l'idée, et un sentiment decontrôle juste après), et un pattern inversé inattendu(Contrôle-flow-stress), qui illustrent respectivement uneposture proactive et réactive dans la conception. Nousdiscutons de ces résultats et ouvrons des perspectivesportant notamment sur l'usage de la méthode pouraméliorer les activités de co-design et pour décrire etanalyserd'autrestypesd'expériencesutilisateurs.

MOTS-CLEFSCréativité, user expérience, Design Flow, Conceptioncollaborative,idéation

1 INTRODUCTIONCreativity is a wide notion, studied in many fields usingmanyapproaches.ForAkin&Akin[1]thegeneraldefinitionof creativity is: “Creativity is the process that leads to thecreation of products that are novel and valuable”. Thisdefinition, as many others, highlights two elements: theproduction of new things, and their adaptation to thecontext. Context should be understood in a broad sense,including evolving temporal, spatial and culturalcharacteristics. Thus, an idea may be uncreative (notsuitable) at a specific time and become appropriate later[16].Although many studies on creativity have traditionallyfocused on great artists or innovators [9], it appearsessential, in light of contemporary innovation society, toaddressandunderstand,notonlythe"historical"creativityofgreatmasters,butalso the “psychological”dimensionofcreativityinvolvedineverydaylife[3].Therearemanymethodsandwaystounderstandcreativity(see [20] for a review). A large part of studies, rooted indifferential psychology, focus on the creative personality:whichpersonalitytraitsenhancepeople’screativepotential.Othermodelsrefertothecreativeprocesses:mostofthemfocusonreasoningprocesses(heuristics)associated to theemergenceofnewandgoodideas.Designcognitionstudiesthe creative design processes and their triggers, withvariousmodelsandcharacteristics,aswellasitscomputer-supportedassistance.Inadditiontotheseapproachesbasedonpersonalityprofiles,processesandtools,someresearchtriestounderstandcreativitythroughenergeticfactorssuchas motives, emotions, desires, values, or preferences [8].This study is rooted in this latterapproach, andaddressesthe issue of the “creative experience”. Experience can beconsidered as “the stream of actions, thoughts (e.g.interpretations, expectations, assessments, etc.), emotions,and sensory perceptions (visual, auditory, kinesthetic, etc.)occurring in a given situation at a given time, of which theactorisawareorcanbemadeaware” [5]. In this study,weare particularly interested in the emotional and affectivedimensionsofthecreativeactivities,personallyexperiencedandsubjectivelyperceivedbypeoplewhichareengagedintheseactivities.Tounderstandcreativeexperience,itisthereforeimportantto link the experience with creative activities. For this

reason, we address creativity through the eyes of“professionalcreators”:designersorarchitectsforexample.Although many different people may experience creativeactivities,designersandarchitectsarespecificallytrainedinallaspectsrelatedtothedesignandideationprocess,whichare central to creativity process: analogical reasoning,divergent thinking, redefining and expanding initial“wicked” design problems, etc. such elements that arecommonly grouped under the term "design thinking" [7,11].Moreover,moststudiesonthecreativedesignprocessesarebased on an extrinsic view of the design activity byanalyzing and dissecting the behavior of designers tounderstand its essence and parameters. In this article, weproposetocomplementtheseapproachesbycharacterizingthe design experience through an intrinsic view [5], i.e.through the eyes of designers themselves on their ownactivity. The proposedmethod is based on the concept ofFlowfromCsikszentmihalyi[9],accordingtowhichoptimalexperiences, especially the creative experiences, occurwhenpeopleareengaged inactivitieswhich,ononehand,presentatruechallengeand,ontheotherhand,mobilizeahighlevelofexpertise.Wealsoaimtoassesstheexperiencedynamically: besides identifying emotional states linked tocreativity, we want to characterize how these emotionalstatesevolveandshiftinthecourseofthecreativeactivity.In this study, our goal is to identify dynamic patterns ofcreative experience in creative design activities. For thispurpose, we use a specific self-confrontation interviewmethod for assessing creative experience in design, theDesignFlow2.0method, thatwepreviouslydesigned[18],and apply it in the context a specific design studio(Augmentedco-designstudioattheUniversityofMontreal).Ourobjectivesarethefollowing-Validate theDesignFlow2.0methodona sampleof realcreativedesignactivities.Forthispurpose,ourstudyreliesonarepresentativelong-lastingdesignstudio(3months)ina design department curriculum, during which we assessthecreativeexperienceofstudentsandteacher.- Identify dynamic patterns of creative experience in co-design. The method allowing to describe experience in avery granular way (each second) and to observefluctuations in time,weaim to identify recurring temporalstructureofcreativeexperience.Someofthesepatternsareexpected, thankstoourtheoretical framework(seesection2.1.),butthegoalofthisstudyisalsotoidentifyunexpectedpatterns.- Inparticular,weaim to studyexperiencepatterns linkedto theexpressionofrelevant ideas indesign, i.e. ideas thathad a strong impact on the design project, and whichprogressed through all the successive stages in the designprocess.Arethose“goodideas”systematicallyaccompaniedbyasimilarexperiencepattern?We filmed a sample of co-ideation activities and assessed,thanks to our method, the experiences lived by thedesigners during co-ideation. We identified the precisemoments where the “new and pertinent” ideas areexpressed and describe patterns of creative experiencesurroundingthesemomentswherecreativeideasemerge.

Patterns of creative experience in collaborative design IHM’18, 23 - 26 Octobre 2018, Brest, France Inthepaper,wefirstdescribetheDesignFlow2.0methodand its fundamentals. Then we describe the context(augmented co-design studio), the process of “good ideas”identification and the hypothesis (expected patterns).Section 4 addresses the results of the study: emotionalstates and experience patterns linked to the emergence ofgood ideas. We conclude on insight from the study aboutcreative processes and co-design activities, study’slimitationsandpotentialapplicationsandextensions.

2 DESIGNFLOW2.0:amethodtoassesscreativeexperienceindesign

To assess creative experience in design, we developed anew method, named Design Flow 2.0 (See [18] for fulldescription). The method relies on retrospective self-confrontation interviews supported by an original device.After a co-design session, designers are invited to see thevideo of their own activity and to use a specific simpledevice to “rate” their experience according to twodimensions:challengesandskills.The idea is to identifyon“a very granular way” (each second) which psychologicalstatethedesignerissubjectivelyperceiving.Themethodisbased on Csikszentmihalyi’s concept of flow [9], onMassimini and Carli’s Experience Fluctuation Model [15],andonpreviouslyobservedpatternsofcreativeexperienceindesignactivities(DesignFlow[14])

2.1 FundamentalsOriginally developed by Csikszentmihalyi [8] flow is aconcept frompositivepsychology. Itpresumes thatweareconstantly engaged in activities involving a degree ofchallengeandrequireustomobilizeacertainlevelofskills.When engaged in activities with a high level of challengemobilizing a high level of skills, we are able to get into astateofoptimalexperience,orflow.Thechallengedimensionreferstotheperceiveddifficultyofthetask,howdemandingisthecurrentactivity,fromthesubject’sownpointofview.Skillsrefertotheperceivedinternalresourcesofthesubjectto complete the current task. As an illustration, ifwe takethe task of returning a tennis ball, challenge refers to thedifficulty of the ball to be returned (speed, position, spin,etc.)andtheskillsreferstotheplayer’sresourcestohittheball (body position, confidence, etc.). Therefore, a flowepisodeislikelytooccurwhentheplayerishittingtheballwhilehavingagoodposition(skill)toreturnadifficultball(challenge).This flow state is characterized by an altered state ofconsciousness, with a high level of commitment to theactivity,a lossof temporalmarkeranda lossofawarenessof theworldoutside the activity athand [8, 15].This flowstate is a fertile ground for the creative experiencecharacterizedbytheemergenceofnewandrelevant ideas.Massimini and Carli [15] identified flow episodes in dailylife. They asked subjects, at random times, to answer aquestionnaire on the degree of challenge of the task inwhich theyareengagedandofmobilizedskills,alongwithvariousquestionsrelatingtothestateofflow(engagement,

lossofnotionof time,etc.).Theydefinedeightchannelsofexperience(basedontheskill-challengeratiointheactivity,see Figure 1), that they linked with other subjective andobjectivevariables.

Figure1.Skills/challengematrixwitheightemotionalstates(adaptedfromMassimini&Carli,1988)

They showed that in Flow state (high challenge and highskills) people reported higher level of happiness,concentration, desire to do the activity, and involvement.Relaxation, defined by low challenge and high skills, ischaracterizedbypositivemoodandintrinsicmotivation,aswellaslowcognitiveinvestment.Apathy(lowchallengeandlow skills) is characterized by the lowest levels ofinvolvement,concentrationandhappiness.Whenplaced inanAnxietystate,characterizedbyahighchallengeandlowskills activity, individualsdonot feel able to copewith thesituation, and they report high cognitive investment, lowhappiness, lowsenseofcontrol,anddifficultconcentration[10].Creativityisoftenassociatedwithpositivemoodandaffects[2]. In this model, therefore, creativity “peaks” should beassociated mainly with flow state experiences: creativeexperience should arise when people are engaged inactivities with a high level of skills combined with a highlevel of challenge.Basedon these findings andhypothesis,andapplyingthemtopreliminarydesignactivities,Dortaetal. [14] developed a method to assess the psychologicalstateofdesignersinideationactivities.Byaskingdesigners,every10minutesduring theiractivity, toassignadjectivesto felt emotional states (anxiety, boredom, optimalexperience, etc.), they have identified a pattern of DesignFlow [14]. They found that designers’ experience evolvesthroughout the process and they observed that designersregularly go through a recurring experience pattern,characterizedbyastateofstressbeforethegenerationofarelevant idea,anoptimalstate(calledstateof flow)duringthe proposal of the idea, and a ‘sense of control’ after theideawasaccepted.Therefore,tension(stress)seemstobeafertile ground to the emergence of creative ideas, whichdeliveryleadstotheexperienceofflow.However, the method they used suffers from two mainweaknesses: (1) themethodwasvery intrusive,asking theparticipant to interrupt their own activity in order toidentify their psychological state and (2) even if theseinterruptionsweredoneregularly, themeasuresufferedof

IHM’18, 23 - 26 Octobre 2018, Brest, France S. Safin et al. beingtakenfromalargetimespan(10minutes).Therefore,it lacks granularity and continuity in the experiencemeasure.

2.2 PrinciplesTherefore, and to address these limitations, we developDesign Flow 2.0 method, based on the principles of astructured auto-confrontation interview. Regularly used inergonomics, auto-confrontation [21] is a method where asubject observes his own activity, often through a film ofthis activity, and expresses a subjective perspective on it,which canbea complement to theextrinsic analysesdoneby researchers (e.g. [4]). The advantage is that theretrospection allows to keep the co-ideation activityuninterrupted.Thetracesofactivity(video)helpspeopletobeengagedintotheiractivity,allowingthemtobeawareofkey elements of their lived experience [5]. The methodproposestodesignerstoassess,thankstoaspecificdevice,the perceived challenge of the activity and the perceivedskills they mobilize, in a continuous and granular way(every second). The specific setting allows to reduceinterview time at his minimum (the time to review thevideo). Based on the skills and challenges measures, weidentify, each second, the psychological state (from the 8states defined in Massimini and Carli’s model [15]) thedesigner iscurrentlyexperiencing.Weusetheevolutionofthese psychological states to identify temporal patterns ofexperience.

2.3 SettingAs mentioned, the auto-confrontation is supported with amaterial device in order firstly, to objectify our analysesand, secondly, to facilitate the holding of these interviews,reducingtheirlength(auto-confrontationcanbeverytime-consuming).To do this, at the end of a collaborative design session,individuals interviews are conducted. The participantsettles at a console to review thevideoofhis/her activity,while qualifying how s/he perceived two dimensions ofhis/her experience: thechallenges (linked to the task) andskills(linkedtotheirownconfidence),thetwocomponentsof flow theories on optimal experience. To this end, wedeveloped a specific environment consisting of a pre-existinghardwaredevice,divertedforthesetting(Figure2)and an original software interface (Figure 3). Theparticipant can control the video (play/pause) andmanipulates simultaneously two sliders, one in eachhand:challenge level on left hand and skills level on right hand.Ourpreviousstudyhasvalidatedthepossibilitytoratethetwodimensionssimultaneously[18].

Figure2.NanoKONTROL2operatingconsole:(a)thevideocontrolbuttons:play,pause,rewind,etc.;(b1-2)thetwoslidersused,leftChallenges(b1),rightSkills

(b2)

Thisdeviceprovidesrawdata,whichisthenusedtoqualifythe psychological state of the subject at all times (anxiety,arousal, flow, relaxation, control, etc.), and to generaterepresentations that can be analyzed by researchers tounderstand the dynamics of the designer's experience(Figure3).

Figure3:Theinterface:(a)videoofactivitybeinganalyzed,(b)currentstateofbothcursors,(c)timeline

(evolutionofdata)

DuringtheDesignFlow2.0interview,theparticipanttakesplace in front of the screen, the console in hand. Aresearcherstandsnexttohim/hertoexplaintheoperationof the system, to give the instruction of the experienceassessment and to respond to questions asked during theauto-confrontation. This interview is entirely recordedthrough a screenshot of procedure, which allowsresearchers,afterwards,toseetheratingsoftheparticipantin connection with the video of his/her activity and hisverbalizationsabouthisjudgments.

2.4.DataanalysisLikeMassimini and Carli [15], we believe that individualsassess their skills and challenges on their own personalscales. One can imagine that some people consistentlyunderestimate thedifficulty of the tasks inwhich they areengaged,whichdoesnotmeanthatthesetasksareactuallysimple. To compare the judgments of different individualsand different situations, removing the effects of individualscales, the scores are standardized by using classical Z-scores for each dimension: (Score - mean score of thesession)/Standarddeviationofthescores.At each second, the two standardized scores constitutecoordinates,which are placed on a challenge/skillsmatrix(seeFigure1) thatallows tosituate theexperienceononeof the 8 emotional states of our model. Therefore, eachsecond, the subject’s experience is qualified on oneemotionalstateamongst8.Moreover,our8-statesmatrixisdividedin3“experiencezones”:

Patterns of creative experience in collaborative design IHM’18, 23 - 26 Octobre 2018, Brest, France - A zone of "stress" when the level of perceived

challengesishighandtheskillslevelismediumorlow;- Optimalareawheretheperceptiononbothdimensions

ishigh;- An area perceived as "control" where the level of

competence is high and the level of challenges ismediumorlow(seeFigure4).

Figure4.Skills/challengematrixwitheightemotionalstatesandthreeexperiencezones.

Onthebaseof thecollecteddata,wegenerate timelinesofemotional experience (see Figure 5), thatmake it possibleto see the progress of the creative experience, and tocomparetheactivitiesbetweendesigners.

Figure5:timelineofemotionalstatesinadesignsession.

These timelines are used to visually understand theemotionalrhythm of the activity, to visually and intuitivelyidentify patterns of creative experience. According to ourtheoretical model, at the time of conceiving their maindesign concepts, we expect that designers will experiencethe following pattern: stressful states when tensions rise,followed by flow when identifying every good idea, thenfollowedbycontrolstates,i.e.areleaseoftensionbecauseasolution was found (Figure 6). These kinds of patterns,named Design Flow patterns [14], have been identified inprevious studies based on declarative interviews withdesigners.

Figure6:ExpectedDesignflowpatterns.

3 ASSESSINGCREATIVEEXPERIENCE

3.1 Context:Augmentedco-designstudioThe study was done in the context of a co-design studioclass, for third year students in industrial design at theUniversity of Montreal. Subjects were volunteer studentsparticipating in the studio in the framework of theircurriculum, and the teacher in charge of the studio. Thestudio includes a conventional setting: students have asemestertodeliveraproposalinresponsetoagivendesignproblem.Butitalsohasitsownspecificity: 1) The workshop is based on a co-design pedagogy:althoughstudentsareindividuallyresponsiblefortheirowndesign solution, simultaneous collaborative work sessionswere set up, during which each student designed with acolleagueanda teacher,andpunctually,withprofessionalsandstudentsfromotherinstitutionsanddisciplines; 2)Specificsessionsdedicatedtoideationwereorganizedonaweeklybasis.Thesewerecollectivesessionsofco-designconfined in half an hour, and specifically focused on thegeneration of new concepts, gathering students and theteacherinco-ideationactivities; 3) These sessions took place within an original device:HybridIdeationSpace–HIS[12].TheHISalloweduserstobe immersed in their graphical representations in real-scale, to interact with these representations throughfreehanddigital drawings, and to collaborate in co-locatedand remote settings.Dorta etal. [13] showed that theHISfacilitates ideation, creativity and the emergence of flowepisodesindesigners’activity.Thissettinghasseveraladvantagesforourstudy.Atfirst,itconstitutesa real, insitu observation.The studio ispartofthe curriculum of the students, and they have realmotivations to engage in co-design activities, which is notalwaysguaranteed in laboratoryexperiments. The “ideas”we identified were part of a large-scale project, and thestudiodurationallowedtohaveanobjectivemeasureofthepertinence of the ideas: the “good ideas” are those whichprogress through all the successive stages in the designprocess, and which constitute a part of the final project.Finally,theprojectbriefinthestudioinsistsoninnovation,whichislikelytogeneratecreativeactivities.Moreover, asmentioned, the co-design sessions tookplaceinanimmersivesetting.ThemaininterestofusingtheHISto support creativity is that it creates and delimits a timeand space specifically dedicated to ideation (i.e. creativeactivity), in which designers have a limited time, in animmersive spacewith their teacher, to produce, representand criticize ideas. In more classical settings, ideationactivity is more distributed in time (ideation takes placeoutsidetheclassroomandevaluationduringthestudio)andspace (CAD software, drawing notebooks, disseminatedsketches,etc.)andisthereforemuchmoredifficulttostudy.

3.2CreativeexperienceassessmentWesampled seven30-minutes ideationactivitiesover twodifferentweeksofstudioclasses(thirdandfourthweek,inthe workshop period specifically dedicated to conceptual

IHM’18, 23 - 26 Octobre 2018, Brest, France S. Safin et al. designandideation).TheDesignFlow2.0interviewmethodwasapplied justat theendofeachsampled immersiveco-ideation sessions in the HIS. Five students were involved.Threeofthemwereinterviewedonce(oneonsession1,twoon session 2) and two students did the flow interview onbothsessions.Theteacher inchargeof theworkshop,whowasalsoengaged incollaborative ideationprocesswithallthestudents,didtheflowinterviewforallbutoneoftheseactivities,duetologisticalissues.DuringtheseDesignFlow2.0interviews,peoplewereaskedtorate,thankstothematerialsetting(videoandcontroller)theirperceivedcreativeskills(confidenceinideas,masteryof technical issues at stake, perceived own creativity, etc.)and the creative task challenge level (complexity of theconcept, communication with the partner, technical orconceptuallocks,etc.).

3.3 IdentificationofcreativeideasAttheendoftheworkshop,anotherdesignteacherwatchedthe videos of these 7 activities (lasting about 30 minuteseach) to accurately identify themoments of occurrence ofthekeyconcepts, i.e. ideasthathavepersistedandbecomestructural elements of the final design proposal made bystudents.Over the7observedactivities,12key ideashavebeen identified, 6 authored by the student, and 6 by theteacher(seeTable1).Thosekey ideasareoriginalsourcesof inspiration foranalogical reasoningorseminal ideas forthe design solution. For example, a worm body wasproposedasaninspirationtobeappliedinthemovementofa structural solution, which has later proven to be anefficient idea. This analogy has been considered as a keyidea and themoment of its expression has been preciselyidentifiedinthevideo.We thenusedDesignFlow2.0 timelinesof flow interviewstoidentifythestateofexperienceoftheparticipantsattheprecise moment these ideas emerged, and the dynamicpattern of experience surrounding the expression of eachidea.

3.3 HypothesisForeach“goodidea”,weidentifytheemotionalstateoftheidea’sauthorandtheco-designeratthemomenttheideaisexpressed.Wealsoidentifytheauthor’sdynamicpatternofexperiencesurroundingeachideaexpression.Wehavetwomainhypotheses.1)Applying the eight-channelmodel of experience (Figure1) and according to our previous findings, we expect thatcreative ideasoccurwhenthedesignerexperiencesastateofflow,orintotheadjacentchannels(arousalandcontrol).2) We also expect that the appearance of these creativeideas is part of a pattern of Design Flow where theemotional states of the designer move from stressful tocontrolthroughtheoptimalzone(seeFigure6forexpectedpatterns).

4 RESULTS

4.1 EmotionalstatesandideagenerationTable1describes, foreachkey idea, itsauthor (teacherorstudent)andtheexperiencestateofteacherandstudentatthetimethisideawasissued.

Idea #

Session Author of idea

Student’s emotional state

Teacher’s emotional state

1 Student 1 Session 1

Teacher Flow Flow

2 Student Flow - 3

Student 2 Session 1 Teacher Boredom -

4 Student 2 Session 2

Teacher Control Worry, Apathy, Boredom

5 Student Flow Apathy 6

Student 3 Session 2 Teacher Apathy Control

7 Teacher Flow, Arousal

Flow

8 Student Flow Boredom 9

Student 4 Session 2

Student Flow Boredom 10 Student 5

Session 1 Teacher Apathy Flow

11 Student Control Flow 12

Student 5 Session 2 Student Control Anxiety

Table1:The12keyideas,theirauthorandthepsychologicalstatesofthestudentandtheteacherwhentheideaisexpressed(author’spsychological

stateisoutlinedingrey).Forlogisticreasons,Teacher’sexperientialpatternshavenotbeenrecordedforone

session(ideas2and3)

From this table,we can draw several conclusions. At first,we examine the experience state of each idea’s author.Whentheissueroftheideaisthestudent,hispsychologicalstate falls into flow (4 occurrences – ideas 2, 5, 8 & 9) orcontrol (2 – ideas 11 & 12), which corresponds to ourmodel. When the author of the idea is the teacher, hispsychological state falls into flow (3 – ideas 1, 7 & 10) orcontrol (1 – idea 6). In one activity however (idea 4), hefluctuates between worry, apathy and boredom. Is seemsthat the vastmajority of “good ideas” are expressedwhiletheauthorisinflow(7outof11ideas),andseveral(3/11)when the author is in a psychological state close to flow(control or arousal). These first results closely correspondtoourhypothesis.Wealsoinvestigatetheexperiencestateofthecollaboratorwhen an idea is expressed. When the subject is not theauthor of an idea, it seems that there is no privilegedemotional state, for both the teacher and the student:Apathy (3 occurrences), Boredom (3), Flow (2), Flow andArousal(1),Control(1)andAnxiety(1).Therefore,itseemsthere is twomainways of receiving an idea: a disengagedreception, when the collaborator experiences fewchallengesandskills(apathyandboredom),andanengagedreception when the collaborator is in the same kinds ofpsychologicalstatesthantheauthor(flow,control,arousal).Inoursmall sample thestudenthasa largerproportionofengagedreception(3/6)thantheteacher(1/5).

Patterns of creative experience in collaborative design IHM’18, 23 - 26 Octobre 2018, Brest, France In synthesis, as the emotional state of flow – optimalexperience–isclearlylinkedtothedevelopmentofcreativeideas for their author, the reception of the idea can belinked to optimal experience episodes but is also likely tooccur in a disengaged posture. This reception postureseems related to expertise, the teacher being more oftendisengaged. It may also be explained by the fact that thestudentwillberesponsibleofthesegoodideaslifecycleforthe remaining weeks of the workshop, which favors anengagedreceptionposture.

4.2 CreativeexperiencepatternsTo verify our second hypothesis, relative to experiencepatterns, we have identified the precise moment ofemergenceofeachkeyideaanddisplayeditonthetimelineof psychological states of its author, to visually verifywhether thatmoment was part of a particular experiencepattern. We expect that the author’s experience evolvesfromstressfulstates(anxiety,arousal,inorange)toflow(inblue)whentheideaisexpressedandthentocontrolstates(control, relaxation, in green). We sectioned-out theidentified patterns to compose the following figures(Figures7and8).

IDEA2(student2–session1)

IDEA5(student3–session2)

IDEAS8and9(student4session2)

IDEAS11and12(student5session2)

Figure7:Timelinesofexperiencepatternsofstudentsatthemomentofemergenceofnewideas(withauthor=student).Ideasemergenceareidentifiedbyvertical

redlines.

These timelines highlight expected patterns in 3 out of 4cases (and 5 out of 6 ideas): a predominance of “stressstates” (orange) while the group is seeking for ideas,realizingthecomplexityofsomedesignissues,amomentofflow(blue),wheretheideaoccuroraninspiringsolutionisfound, followed by a predominance of “control states”(green) when the design concept is getting stabilized andformalized. Ideas 11 and 12, although emergingwhile thedesignerisincontrol,fitwellinadesignflowpattern;theseideasemergeafterthereleaseoftension.Toillustratethis,there is tension when a given design issue is still notresolved, and a release of that tension when the designerfindsarelevantsolutionforthatissue.Foridea5,onecanobserveareversedpatternfromcontroltoflowtostresszones.Observationsrelatedtotheteacher-as-authorarethefollowing:

IDEA1(student1–session1).Author=teacher

IDEA4(student2–session2).Author=teacher

IDEA6(student3–session2).Author=teacher

IDEA7(student4–session2).Author=teacher

IHM’18, 23 - 26 Octobre 2018, Brest, France S. Safin et al.

IDEA10(student5–session1).Author=teacher

Figure8:Experiencepatternsoftheteacheratthetimeofemergenceofnewideas(withauthor=teacher).Ideasemergenceareidentifiedbyverticalredlines.

Teacherexperiencepatternsappeartobemorerandomandare shorter than those of the students. Two of thesepatterns(ideas6and7)fit intoourtheoreticalmodel.Oneisinversed(idea1),fromcontroltostress,asobservedwithastudent(idea5).Theothertwoideasdonotfit inclearlyidentifiable patterns. Idea 10 is nevertheless found duringofaflowepisode,yetnotprecededbyastressepisodeandcarryingamoreupward(inversed)overallstructure.Although we can observe some variations, which areinevitablewhencallinguponone’ssubjectivity,mostoftheobserved data fits well with our theoretical assumptionsandourhypothesis:creativeideasappeartoemergeduringepisodes of optimal experience, primarily as part ofexperience patterns starting with episodes of stress, thenoptimalexperienceandcontrol.In other words, the creative episodes occur when thechallengeishigh,causingatensiontothedesigner.Ass/hefindsasolutiontoresolvethechallenge,s/hefeelsthathisskill level increases. When the “good or relevant idea” isexpressed, challenge and skills are both high, whichcorrespondstotheflowstate.Justafterwards,thechallengediminishes, as the solution has been found, moving thedesignertoastateofcontrol.The other pattern, observed less frequently, the upwardinverted pattern, can be explained thisway: the designersare inasituationwhere they feel confident (controlzone).As they move forward, more complex problems emerge(increased challenge), which moves the experience to theflowstate,duringwhichacreativeideaemerges,solvingtheproblem. Following this, the designer’s being faced withnewchallengesgeneratedbytheunexpectedideas,his/herconfidence may decrease (stress episode), although thisstressdoesnotappearinidea10notedabove.Our hypothesis is that the former scenario describesproactive design: the anticipatedproblemcauses a tensionthat its solution decreases. In the second scenario, thedesignwasmorereactive:theproblemtobesolvedemergesduring the activity and it is directly solved by a creativeidea, which bring the design at a new level of difficulty,increasingtheuncertainty,whichcanbestressful.It should be noted that these observations can also beinterpreted in light of the level of experience of thedesigner: theexpertdesigner(the teacher)experience lessstress episodes following a segment of reactive design: forhim a creative solution to an emerging problem does notresultinafeelingofuncertaintyabouthisskills.Weseethis

quiteclearlyintheideas10and1wherestressepisodesareveryshort.

4 CONCLUSIONSThispaperusestheDesignFlow2.0method[18]inordertotackle with psychological states of designers during theideation. The method is based on a novel form of self-confrontation interview instrumentedbyamaterialdeviceandanoriginalsoftware.Itprovidesacontinuousmeasureofthechallenge(linkedtothetask)andtheskills(linkedtothe subject) levels perceived and experienced by thedesignerduringhis/heractivity.Usingthe8-channelmodeloftheExperienceFluctuationModel[15],wecandetermine,ateachmomentoftheactivity,thepsychologicalstateofthesubject, and see, thanks to the continuous measure, itsfluctuation. This allowsus to identify temporalpatterns ofcreativeexperience.This study aims at identifying patterns of creativeexperience in design. For this purpose, in the context of aco-design augmented studio, we used the method tocharacterizeexperienceofthestudentandtheteacheraftera sample of collaborative ideation activities.Retrospectively,we identified inside the ideation sessions,the moments of emergence of “good ideas”, i.e. ideas thathavebeenimportantfortheprojectinthewholestudio.Weidentified12ideas,authoredbythestudentortheteacher.According toour theoreticalmodel,basedon thenotionofFlow [9] and previous studies aboutDesign Flow [14], weexpected that the good idea emerge during a flowexperience state, preceded by states of anxiety or arousal,andfollowedbystatesofcontrolorrelaxation.In the analysis of creative experience psychological states,weobserved thatavastmajorityof ideasarisewhen theirauthorisinaflowstate,andaminoritywhentheauthorisclosetoflowstate.Thisobservationleadstotheconclusionthat, inside ideation activities, creativity is linked tomicroepisodesofoptimalexperience.Moreover,weobserve twoposturesforthecollaborator:asanengagedreceptor(flowstateofexperience)orasadisengagedreceptor(apathy).In our dynamic analysis of creative experience, weidentified experience fluctuation patterns. About 2/3 ofthese patterns are coherent with our model (stress-flow-control) and we identified a reversed pattern for severalideas (control-flow-stress). It seems that it illustrates twoways of problem solving in design: a proactive posture,where ideas are expected and their expression releasestension, and a reactive posture, where unexpected goodideassuddenlyraisesthetaskschallenge.Theseexperiencepatterns seem tobe linkedwith expertise,which is still tobeinvestigateddeeper.This first extensive study of creative experience patternshas several scientific implications. It validates and extendknowledge about creativity in the flow field, like [9] and[15], andaddresses thisquestion in the specific contextofcreativedesign.TheDesignFlow2.0method isanewwayof measuring the experience, which complement previousstudies and methods. It relies on subjective measures(perceived stress and challenge), which are objectified in

Patterns of creative experience in collaborative design IHM’18, 23 - 26 Octobre 2018, Brest, France psychological states, and standardized for each subject,allowingcomparisonbetweenpersonalexperiences. Italsoallowstoapprehendthedynamicdimensionofexperience,whichevolves throughtheactivity,constitutinganoriginalapproach to User Experience. Our study, in the field ofideation, shows that for designers, creativity is indeedlinked to flow episodes, and these episodes are part ofspecificpatterns(stress–flow–controlorcontrol–flow–stress).Creativity isadynamicprocessrelyingon tensions[17]: stress experience triggers idea generation, whichgenerate optimal creative experiences. Our study alsoreproducessomeresultsobtainedbyDortaetal.[14]abouttheexistenceofspecificpatternsinideation,butaddressingthem on a different scale, and extending them to otherpatterns.Onapracticalpointofview,ourstudyshowsthattherearecommonalities in the experience of creativity whendesigners are exposed to pertinent ideas, being in aproactive or reactive posture. Therefore, knowingexperience patterns could help to develop new co-designmethods: by being aware of their own experientialdynamics, designers should be able to identify creativemomentsand“goodideas”,beingmoreefficientindesign.Itmay also be possible for them to identify engaged anddisengaged postures in design, enhancing collaborativeprocesses.Anotherpractical implicationwouldbe tohelpdesigners–and especially students – to engage in reflexive andintrospectionactivities about theirownwaysofdesigning.Reflexivityisacrucialcompetencebutisstillhardtoteach[6]. Relying on experience patternsmay help designers tounderstand the way they apprehend a design process,enhancing reflection about action and reflection in action[19].Finally, as the Design Flow 2.0. method has proven to beefficient in identifying experience patterns in creativity, itcould be extended to other activities. One of the mainpossibility is touse thismethod toassessUserExperienceduring an interaction session (user test). By making aninstrumented self-confrontation interviewafter a user testoranin-siteinteractiveactivities,wemaybeabletoidentifypatterns of optimal interaction experience which may belinked to interface and device features. In complement toother measure (satisfaction questionnaires, usabilitytesting,eye-trackingenquiries,etc.) itmayhelp toaddressusability problems (disengaged postures) and pleasantfeatures(flow)inordertooptimizeinterfaces,butalsoandabovealltomeasureandobjectifyuserexperience,whichisstillanimportantissueinHCI.

5 LIMITSANDFUTUREWORKThis study is a first exploration of the pertinence of thedesignFlow2.0method,andoftheidentificationofpatternsofcreativeexperience.Ithasobviouslyseverallimitations.-Due to the real activity setting (design studio in acurriculum), the number of subjects is limited, and thesubjects have specific characteristics, which may have an

influenceonthecreativepatterns:theyarestudents(novicedesigners), co-designing with an expert designer, in aspecific teacher-student relation. Other settings, inprofessionaldesignactivities,havetobestudied.-Somedataaremissing,duetologisticalconstraints.-TheHybrid IdeationSpace, inwhichactivities tookplace,mayhavehadan influenceon creative experience.Resultsfromthisstudyhavetobecomparedtonon-immersiveco-designactivities.Therefore, the results of this study have to be taken as afirst exploration of dynamic micro-patterns in creativeactivities.Theyareneverthelessencouraging.Infutureworks,wewillcomplementthisexplorationbyanextensiveuseofthemethod,withthefollowingobjectives:- At first, to gain a more exhaustive knowledge of

creativeexperience,weneedtovalidatethemethodonalargerscale,andtouseitinotherco-designactivitiescontexts (non-immersive ideation, professionalcontext, ideation with non-designer stakeholders –users,citizens–etc.)

- Secondly,weneedtogainabetterunderstandingofthenatureofexperienceidentifiedinthecreativepatterns.For this purpose, measured patterns could beconfronted to other types of experience data: moreconventional retrospective interviews, stressquestionnaires, physiological measures, to gain aqualitativeunderstandingofcreativeexperience.

- Thirdly, we need to extend the identification ofpatterns: is there others patterns? What are thepatterns linkedto theexpressionof “lessgood ideas”?Wealsoplan tohavea statisticalbottom-upapproachforpatterndetection,complementarytoourvisualtop-down approach (guided by our theoretical model)presentedhere.

- Fourthly, we will explore more intensively creativeexperiencedeterminants.Forthispurpose,wewillusethemethod to characterize the experiential processesin various conditions: representational tools, types ofdesign,levelsofexpertise,etc.Wealsowanttoexplorepattern of creative experience on other publics: otherstakeholders of design projects (engineers,ergonomists, etc.) and users/citizens engaged in co-ideationactivities.Andwewilllinkittootherfacetsofdesign:designprocess,useofexternal representation,qualityofcollaboration,etc.

- Finally, we have to engage more deeply in theidentification of collective dynamics of creativeexperience. For this purpose,wewill cross data fromdifferent designers and stakeholders engaged in thesame ideation process to identify potential patternscharacteristicofcollectiveideation,andhowindividualpatternsco-evolve.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThisresearchwassupportedbytheInsightGrantsprogramfrom the Social Sciences andHumanities Research CouncilofCanada(SSHRC)(Grantnumber90803).

IHM’18, 23 - 26 Octobre 2018, Brest, France S. Safin et al. REFERENCES[1] Akin, Ö., and Akin, C. (1998). On the process of creativity in

puzzles, inventions, and designs.Automation inConstruction, 7,123-138.

[2] Baas,M.,DeDreu,C.K.W.,&Nijstad,B.A.(2008).Ameta-analysisof25yearsofmood-creativityresearch:Hedonictone,activation,orregulatoryfocus?PsychologicalBulletin,134(6),779–806.

[3] Boden,M. A. (2004).The creativemindmythsandmechanisms.London;NewYork:Routledge.

[4] Boubée, N. (2011). La méthode de l’autoconfrontation : uneméthodebienadaptéeàl’investigationdel’activitéderecherched’information?Étudesdecommunication,35(2),47-60.

[5] Cahour,B.,Salembier,P.&Zouinar(2016)M.Analysingthelivedexperienceoftheactivity.LeTravailHumain.pp.259-284

[6] Chaubet,P. (2010).Saisir la réflexionpourmieux formeràunepratique réflexive : d’un modèle théorique à sonopérationalisation.Éducationetfrancophonie,38(2),60-77.

[7] Cross, N. (2011).Design thinking:Understandinghowdesignersthinkandwork.NewYork:Berg

[8] Csikszentmihalyi,M.(1988).Motivationandcreativity:Towardasynthesis of structural and energistic approaches to cognition.NewIdeasinPsychology,6(2),159–176.

[9] Csikszentmihalyi,M. (1997).Creativity:Flowandthepsychologyofdiscoveryandinvention.NewYork:HarperCollins.

[10] Delle Fave, A., Massimini, F., & Bassi, M. (2011). PsychologicalSelection and Optimal Experience Across Cultures (Vol. 2).Dordrecht:SpringerNetherlands.

[11] Dorst,K.,&Cross,N.(2001).Creativityinthedesignprocess:co-evolutionofproblem–solution.DesignStudies,22(5),425–437.

[12] Dorta, T. (2007).Augmented Sketches andModels: TheHybridIdeationSpaceasaCognitiveArtifact forConceptualDesign. InDe Paoli, G., Zreik, K. et Beheshti, R. (Eds.).Digital Thinking inArchitecture,CivilEngineering,Archaeology,UrbanPlanningand

Design: Finding the Ways, EuropIA 11. Montréal, September2007,pp.251-264.

[13] Dorta, T., Kalay, Y., Lesage, A., & Pérez, E. (2011). Comparingimmersion in collaborative ideation through designconversations,workloadandexperience. In IntegrationthroughComputation(pp.216-225).

[14] Dorta,T.,Pérez,E.,&Lesage,A.(2008).Theideationgap:Hybridtools,designflowandpractice.DesignStudies,29(2),121-141.

[15] Massimini, F. & Carli,M. (1988). The systematic assessment offlow in daily experience. In Csikszentmihalyi, M. andCsikszentmihalyi, I. S. (Eds). Optimal experience: Psychologicalstudiesofflowinconsciousness.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,266-287.

[16] McDonnell,J.(2014).StickySquarePlatesAmongOtherThings:Some observations from a study of long-term creativecollaboration. Unpublished paper at COOP 2014 Workshop 5:Collective creativity: collaborative processes in new socio-technicalenvironments.Nice,May2012

[17] Mougenot,C.Détienne,F.,Pennington,M.,Baker,M.,Corvin,T.,Veyrier, Arai, K. & Huron, S. (2017). Tensions in CreativityWorkshops.ProceedingsofECCE2017:93-100

[18] Safin, S.Dorta,T.,Pierini,D.,Kinayoglu,G.&Lesage,A. (2016).Design Flow 2.0, assessing experience during ideation withincreased granularity: Aproposed method. Design Studies, vol.47,pp.23–46.

[19] Schön,D.-A.(1983).Thereflectivepractitioner:howprofessionalsthinkinaction,New-York:Basicbooks.

[20] Sternberg,R.J.(2006).Thenatureofcreativity.Creativityresearchjournal,18(1),87-98.

[21] Theureau, J. (2010). Les entretiens d'autoconfrontation et deremise en situation par les tracesmatérielles et le programmede recherche « cours d'action », Revue d'anthropologie desconnaissances2010/2(Vol4,n°2),287-322.