(Perceived) Interactivity: Does Interactivity Increase Enjoyment and Creative Identity in Artistic Spaces?

Comments
William

Summary
In (Perceived) Interactivity: Does Interactivity Increase Enjoyment and Creative Identity in Artistic Spaces?, by researchers at Cornell University, a study was presented to see the how the interactivity in an art exhibit and the relative enjoyment of the viewer are related, and if the interactivity makes a person see themselves as more creative. Interactive art, in general, is an exhibit in which the viewer's actions can affect the way things are displayed, played audibly, or moved around, and can give the user the sense that they are in control of the art, and creating things for themselves. The researchers performed an experiment that compared enjoyment of an artistic experience between groups that interacted with the system and groups that did not. The study took place in a small music studio with a system that was set up to receive interactions from viewers using a Wii remote. One group (the no interaction group) only listened to a pre-recorded session of music, and the other group (the interaction group) used the Wii remotes to change the way the music and sound effects were played. After the study, the researchers asked each participant: Did you enjoy the exhibit? Was the exhibit interactive? Did you feel more creative after interacting with this exhibit?

Their basic findings were that interactive art is more enjoyable for the viewer than art in which you have no control. But, the enjoyment of the exhibit depended on the perceived interactivity of the user, as many of the users in the no-interaction group rated the exhibit as being interactive (they were not told any information about how the music was produced). In this way, their first hypothesis was confirmed: interactive exhibits increase the enjoyment of the user. But, their second hypothesis was not confirmed: users that interact with an art exhibit do not have any changes in the perceived creativity of themselves.


Discussion
I thought this was an interesting study because the results seemed a little obvious. The exhibits at art museums, or museums in general, are always more fun if there are controls and things you can do to alter what has been shown. People in general are very hands on. But, I feel like interaction in a pure "art" exhibit is a little useless. Art museums are usually meant to showcase the creativity and vision of the artist, and if the audience can interact and change this art, then who is to say that it is the artist's creation anymore? I guess the idea of the interactive design is original to the artist, but I don't see this interactivity replacing traditional sculpting, painting, or music because those forms of expression are meant to let the artist show their feelings and ideas.