In human-computer co-creativity, humans and creative computational algorithms create together. Too often, only the creative algorithms and their outcomes are evaluated when studying these co-creative processes, leaving the human participants to little attention. This paper presents a case study emphasising the human experiences when evaluating the use of a co-creative poetry writing system called the Poetry Machine. The co-creative process was evaluated using seven metrics: Fun, Enjoyment, Expressiveness, Outcome satisfaction, Collaboration, Ease of writing, and Ownership. The metrics were studied in a comparative setting using three co-creation processes: a human-computer, a human-human, and a human-human-computer co-creation process. Twelve pupils of age 10-11 attended the studies in six pairs trying out all the alternative writing processes. The study methods included observation in paired-user testing, questionnaires, and interview. The observations were complemented with analyses of the video recordings of the evaluation sessions. According to statistical analyses, Collaboration was the strongest in human-human-computer co-creation, and weakest in human-computer co-creation. Ownership was just the opposite: weakest in human-human-computer co-creation, and strongest in human-computer co-creation. Other metrics did not produce statistically significant results. In addition to the results, this paper presents the lessons learned in the evaluations with children using the selected methods.
ARTICLE HISTORY
This simple usability analysis tool can be employed early in the system design phase, when user input can have the greatest impact on successful implementation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.