Between Tools and Reactions
16 MAY 2025
Micro UX
- Explored two design directions: a tool-based device for breath and a chain reaction installation.
- The tool-based approach aids breath awareness in daily life but struggles to amplify subtle sensations.
- The installation offers visual delight, but sustaining engagement requires a clearer user and context focus.
Expanding the Design
Following the “Elephant Trunk” and “Cups” experiments, we explored possible directions through feedback review, brainstorming, and Crazy 8s. Two main ideas emerged: one focused on refining the tool-based device, and the other on an installation using “chain reactions.”
Direction 1: Tool-Based Development
Previously, we used cup-shaped, low-fidelity devices prioritising sound and ease of use. This time, we proposed designs that move beyond the cup, such as devices where breath triggers visible particles or sound, or structures that function like wind instruments. Ideas also included a “breath focus kit” for daily use or installations in public spaces to support mindful breathing.
This direction helps users sense the rhythm of breath and connect internal states with external environments—similar to meditation. But, as seen in the cup test, analogue tools have limits in amplifying subtle signals like breath, and the experience can feel too brief or personal.
Direction 2: Chain Reaction Installation
In response to the brief’s focus on aesthetic experience and brain activation, we explored a “chain reaction” system inspired by Rube Goldberg machines. A breath could trigger balls, bells, and more in a visual and playful sequence.
While this offers multi-sensory delight, interaction tends to end after activation, raising the question of how to sustain engagement beyond watching the outcome.
Finding the Right Direction
To clarify, I mapped our ideas in a design matrix crossing “aesthetic experience” and “daily life” with “amplify” and “breath”:
- “aesthetic experience – amplify”: Invisible Box experiment
- “daily life – breath”: Elephant Trunk experiment
- “aesthetic experience – breath”, “daily life – amplify”: not explored yet
These gaps suggest room for new directions. Context matters, too—when and where does breath become meaningful?
- Survival: swimming, diving
- Expression: singing, playing instruments
- Emotion: meditation, stress
- Movement: sports, running
- Precision: handcraft, photography
We need to define who the user is and what scenario fits best.
Feedback & Reflection
We struggled to choose between the tool-based and installation-based paths. I leaned towards translating breath into other senses, while others preferred the “chain reaction” aesthetic. Eventually, we saw the need to either commit or find overlap. Both ideas had solid logic and appeal, making the decision tough.
At the midpoint presentation, feedback from Kinda Studios and peers highlighted the unfamiliar, analogue nature of the “Elephant Trunk”. Suggestions included blow pen-based art activities and breath-driven multiplayer games. We were also encouraged to clarify the purpose and context, perhaps by focusing on settings like pools or scuba diving.
With two weeks to go, we’re eager to see how this takes shape.
Reference
- Goldberg, R. (2000) The Art of Rube Goldberg: (A) Inventive (B) Cartoon (C) Genius. New York: Harry N. Abrams.
- Hanington, B. and Martin, B. (2012) Universal Methods of Design: 100 Ways to Research Complex Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions. Beverly, MA: Rockport Publishers.
- Howes, D. (ed.) (2005) Empire of the Senses: The Sensual Culture Reader. Oxford: Berg. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580907074550
More Stories
Brainscapes Week 3
Brainscapes Week 5