Week 4 & 5

This week, I began developing the game. I also intended to add some other features to the game. I utilised an Arduino board, similar my prior prototype for this game. In order to control the game, I added a toggle switch. Additionally, the game restarts itself after an incorrect input at any point, forcing the player to finish every round correctly.

At that point of building, I only had two push buttons with me, therefore I chose to use those two leds for the created sequence. Users are prevented from memorising the pattern because the created sequence is randomised, meaning that it changes and is unique for every round. Coding the game took some time, and there were some difficulties at this point. In order to test it and get some feedback and results, I had to finish drafting my discussion section and quickly code it.

I chose to add a green and red led to my code when I noticed that I needed to add indicators to show whether the round was correct or incorrect. I was able to get the code to function the way I intended it to with that.

I chose to move my components onto a board and solder them there after assembling the parts. I removed all of the cables surrounding the breadboard because I wanted the board to seem more organised and be easier for users to try. It is easier for my audience to see the sequence and click on their inputs without being distracted by cables when all the components are similar. This experiment would be used to test deep attention.

Additional parameters need to be added in order to factor in for hyper attention. This is where the strategies would be tested out. In order to compete for people's attention, I intend to provide both the audio and the first iteration of the two segment mechanics. I used the same game that was used for deep attention as a base and added elements.

I started by replacing my switch with a tilt sensor. I chose to integrate the tilt sensor since it has a similar effect to multitasking, based on my research from my first prototype completed during my first semester. Secondly, I want to have a more soothing audio playing in the background. The audio included is solely from my computer and isn't coded into the system because of my limited time. Third, I made a platform to support the mechanism with a wooden peck and linked the two segment mechanism to a motor system. After that, the wooden peck and the game are fastened to the table so that the motor can spin the strings and make the object move. Similarly, the motor wouldn't be coded into the system due to limited time.

With that, I had two prototypes that I can use to have user testing. I set up a google sheet and invited some of my peers to test them out and answer the questions I have on the google sheets. Questions I asked were:

1. Which of the two prototypes on the table most immediately drew your attention (Deep Attention Prototype/Hyper Attention Prototype)? Why?

2. After attempting Deep Attention Prototype, assess how challenging the task was to complete on a scale of 1 to 10.

3. After attempting Hyper Attention Prototype, assess how challenging the task was to complete on a scale of 1 to 10.

4. Did the addition of motion and music to Hyper Attention Prototype cause you to get more distracted or make the work more difficult for you to complete?

5. Did Deep Attention Prototype enable you to focus more than the prior group of prototypes for deep attention? Why?

6. Did Hyper Attention Prototype enable you to focus more than the prior group of prototypes for hyper attention? Why?

7. Of the 4 prototypes tested, which is your preferred? (Previous prototypes and this two current)

8. Why is that your preferred choice?

To ensure a fair comparison between the prior and current versions, I made it a point to gather data from the same few friends who previously tested my previous prototype version.