Week 3

This week's seminars covered the various approaches to our study, including case studies, interviews, and critical journals. I felt that the case studies and the critical journal session would be the most applicable to my intended goals, so I decided to attend both. As a result of the seminars, I have a better understanding of how things work and how we might approach them for our study.

We learned how to gather them as study subjects in an efficient manner for case studies. However, the critical journal placed a stronger emphasis on the "research through design" methodology, asking us to write in a reflective manner about the experiments we conducted and the conclusions we came to.

One of the major points that the session addressed, in my opinion, ought to be the main takeaway: neither a thesis nor a conclusion are necessary for our research. After attending this session, I no longer had any reservations about the necessity of a conclusion or "a problem to solve" for our dissertation. Since the seminars have ended, I can state with certainty that the approach I will take for my topic is critical journaling.

We discussed our progress and experiments with the instructor during our second session of the week. Upon discussing my desire to have something physical for my project, he encouraged me to create an image moodboard that would visually represent my interests and the kind of work I enjoy doing.

Having a keen interest in craft projects, I felt that the critical journaling technique was a perfect fit for my objectives. A mood board would also help Andreas see them and comprehend my preferences and goals, enabling him to better understand where I am mentally at at the moment.

Dissertation

I came up with three pillars: cognitive load, interactive, and brand experience, which would serve as the foundation for the idea I had. These three words, in my opinion, most accurately describe what I am working on and attempting to learn more about. Using these three pillars, I am able to pinpoint the issue for which I am looking for answers.

The problem lies in figuring out how to use technology to effectively engage an audience without giving them too much information or stimulants while still giving them enough stimulation to feel anything. Since our first year, we have studied design principles that are frequently used in graphic designs throughout the semester. Since the subject of "experiential design" is a synthesis of several fields, I'm wondering if these design concepts also apply to that field, or if they have their own set of guidelines.

I was given the assignment to compare interaction with interactive at one point to see which was most appropriate for my subject. These conclusions were reached with the aid of ChatGPT: Technology that enables users to actively interact with a digital or physical system by submitting input and instantly obtaining feedback or a reaction is referred to as interactive technology. Its main objective is to enable user input and control, making it simpler for users to engage with and manipulate digital content or systems. It emphasises on two-way communication.

The term "interaction technology" refers to a broader class of technologies that allow users and systems to collaborate or communicate information in different ways. Supporting user contact and information exchange, frequently in social or collaborative environments, is the main objective of interaction technology.

Based on the synopsis, I'm certain that interactive—rather than interaction—is the keyword I want to focus on.