Term 1 week 6
Team
Research methods:
Bodystorming, directed storytelling
Keya Bangera
Matthew Yue
Muskan Gupta
Nicole Shu
Niki Marathia
Sakshi Pansare
Matthew Yue
Muskan Gupta
Nicole Shu
Niki Marathia
Sakshi Pansare
We thought of connecting the strings at the centre, to see whether we could eavesdrop on each other’s whispering. This experiment finally worked, as we could hear each other across the web of strings.
Figure 13a. Testing the web of string telephones for the first time.
Figure 13b. Testing the web of string telephones for the first time.
To figure out the mechanics of the experience itself, we temporarily removed the string telephones and used our lanyards instead, trying to get a sense of what users would do in the network.
By the end of the session, we had established rules and a set of prompts for users to respond to during our Thursday presentation:
Rules
- Hold your end of the string telephones
- Stand opposite your partner
- Make sure all strings are tight!
- We will read out 6 prompts
- Rotating clockwise, one person answers at a time
- Everyone can listen in
Prompts
- When is the last time you cleaned your kitchen?
- If we saw your browser history, how many tabs would we find open?
- If you were a ghost, who would you haunt first?
- If you woke up one morning and could fly, what would you do?
- If animals ruled the world, which species would be president?
- If you could eat one food forever, what would it be?
We did a material exploration to learn how we can best transmit sound with the materials available to us. In this setup, string is the medium that carries sound, so choosing the right type was important. Our research suggested that lower-density materials such as dental floss and sewing thread transmit sound more effectively (Harmon 2011).
Figure 16a. Sewing thread string telephones. Taken by Muskan Gupta.
Figure 16b. Sewing thread string telephones. Taken by Muskan Gupta.
We made a new set of string telephones using sewing thread, which produced clearer sound than the yarn we used in our first prototype. However, the thread was so thin that it tangled easily. This made it impractical for presentation day, so we decided to test a new yarn. The yarn shown in Figure 19 was the one we used for our presentation. It is more tightly spun than the yarn used in our first prototype, which we found transmitted sound clearer. We did not manage to take pictures of our testing process this time due to time constraints before presentation day.
- Although our broader idea was well received on presentation day, it was noted that the string telephones felt disconnected from the concept and somewhat forced. This happened because they were the only exploration that worked even a little after a few failed attempts, so we moved forward with them out of necessity rather than letting them grow from our research.
- Our material analysis helped explain our journey, but our presentation feedback suggested that our focus on materials made us lose sight of the overall experience. This made me reflect on how we could have prioritised the experience itself. I believe the following could have helped:
- Articulate what our user experience is meant to be before handling materials
- Reflect on how materials support the experience when we are testing them
- Record how materials affect the experience in addition to which ones work best
-
Evaluate whether we are focusing on material properties more than the experience itself
- In retrospect, the prompts we asked our volunteers on presentation day did not help tell a story. We did not have time to practice these with volunteers before the presentation, so I believe more testing would have definitely helped us address shortcomings.
- Thinking about where our experience could exist in the world, I imagine it as a larger-scale version of itself, similar to one of Yuri Suzuki’s sound installations. It could be an experience that invites people to talk to each other as they might have done when they were children playing string telephones.