In ‘Aesthetic Interaction: A Framework,’ professors Paul Locher, Kees Overbeeke, and Stephan Wensveen introduce us to a different kind of aesthetics, this one residing within a product’s relationship to its users. Words we might find familiar in conversations about aesthetics—e.g., fun, engagement, and delight—are considered too ambiguous to properly describe the effects of aesthetic interactive experiences (71). Instead, aesthetic interactions are defined as ongoing exchanges between a user and an interface/product. They are based on both bottom-up cognitive processes (i.e., sensory stimuli we accept from our surroundings like color and sound) and top-bottom cognitive processes (i.e., interpretations of said stimuli based on what we have experienced or come to expect).
Because aesthetic interactions follow this back-and-forth process, they are rooted to the context of their use. They pull from the sociocultural attitudes and behaviors of their users as well as elements within a product’s structure and function (Petersen 270). ‘Designing Behavior in Interaction: Using Aesthetic Experience as a Mechanism for Design’ goes a step further by defining a set of four criteria for creating aesthetic interactions:
- The product has both practical use and intrinsic value
- The product contains aforementioned social and ethical dimensions
- The product takes on a “satisfying” dynamic form specific to affordances
- Its use involves the capabilities and sensibilities of a whole human being
To put all of this into perspective, I looked into two products that I believe deliver aesthetic interactions.
The first is an unboxing experience for LUXE Botanics. It is both a practical and beautiful design, providing affordances that are not alike (e.g., pulling, lifting, even ruffling with regards to the loose “bedding” beneath the products) and imagery relevant to the brand. The package also cleverly uses leading lines to direct users’ attention to its sparse but impactful messaging, first on the top layer (with a welcome message) and then on the bottom (with a thank you message). The second example I considered is really more of an experience: escape rooms. Like anything else, escape rooms are designed—only in this case, they are supporting user interactions in addition to the sociocultural and narrative elements of a fictional setting and the aesthetic beauty of said setting. Obviously, escape rooms hold a number of objects and opportunities for interaction; each one has been carefully crafted to be both functional, narratively relevant, and aesthetically inviting. However, no matter the product, the design of aesthetic interactions “requires multiple perspectives” (Petersen 275) that reach beyond the aesthetics of beauty.
Bibliography
“Blog – How We Did It: The Luxe Unboxing Experience.” By Ninja, 18 Apr. 2021, https://www.byninja.com.au/blog/the-luxe-unboxing-experience/.
Csillag , Zoltan. “PanIQ Room.” Escape Rooms Offer Travelers A Chance For Roleplay And Fantasy, Forbes, 27 Sept. 2021, https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelalpiner/2021/09/27/escape-rooms-offer-travelers-a-chance-for-roleplay-and-fantasy/?sh=720f069389c9.
Locher, Paul, et al. “Aesthetic Interaction: A Framework.” Design Issues, vol. 26, no. 2, MIT Press, 2010, pp. 70–79, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20749943.
Petersen, Marianne Graves, et al. “Aesthetic Interaction: a Pragmatist’s Aesthetics of Interactive Systems.” Jan. 2004.
Ross, Philip R., and Stephan Wensveen. “Designing Behavior in Interaction: Using Aesthetic Experience as a Mechanism for Design.” International Journal of Design, 2010, http://www.ijdesign.org/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/765/297.
