Animal-Centred Sonic Interaction Design

Gupfinger, Reinhard; Kaltenbrunner, Martin

doi:10.1145/3371049.3371062

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The general aspects of non-speciesist, animalcentred ethics in relation to ACI have been tackled by Clara Mancini (2011Mancini ( , 2017. In addition, ACI has already produced initial developments in sonic interaction design (Gupfinger and Kaltenbrunner 2019). A critical assessment of ethical challenges as well as aesthetical potentials of artistically driven ACI could (and from our point of view should) be a next step in these developments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sonic Collaborations between Humans, Non-human Animals and Artificial Intelligences: Contemporary and future aesthetics in more-than-human worlds

Ullrich

Trump

2022

Org. Sound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article sketches a theoretical framework that allows the conceptual inclusion of non-human animals and artificial intelligences in human sonic collaborations. Post-humanist concepts that question the categorical divide between nature and culture, following Donna Haraway and Bruno Latour, converge with contemporary, non-adaptationist evolutionary aesthetics. Therefore, the anthropocentric ‘othering’ of non-humans gives way to a concept of a more-than-human sociality of sound. We offer some theoretical propositions for the extension of socially engaged sound practices to collaborations between humans and non-human animals and between humans and artificial intelligences, and then exemplify such multispecies sonic collaborations by analysing some existing projects from the fields of sound art and musical performance. After drawing some more general conclusions from these analyses, we hint at potential aesthetical and ethical parallels between animal and AI creative agency. Finally, we point out a few questions we see as important for future advanced settings of such collaborations, especially when it comes to assemblages of different AI technologies and to future concepts of animal–computer interaction that might enable non-human animals and artificial intelligence to cooperate creatively.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sonic Collaborations between Humans, Non-human Animals and Artificial Intelligences: Contemporary and future aesthetics in more-than-human worlds

Ullrich

Trump

2022

Org. Sound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That seems a fair and accurate claim of what the ACI manifesto actually calls for. But other works published in the ACI conference proceedings go beyond this, already citing the manifesto to claim e.g., that "The increased use of technology for animals raises many technological, design, and ethical issues that ACI seeks to explore from an animal-centered point of view" [18] (emphasis added). That is an evidently incorrect attribution to the manifesto.…”

Section: What Animal-centered Seems To (Not) Mean In Acimentioning

confidence: 99%

Animal-centered design needs dignity: a critical essay on ACI’s core concept

Linden

2022

Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite a massive acceptance of 'animal-centered design' being at the very heart of Animal-Computer Interaction, exactly what it means to be animal-centered often remains vague. In this position paper, I question and critique what animal-centered design really means as it is used. I argue that even though the ACI manifesto and subsequent foundational works clearly set out a focus on animal user-centered design, much work since has adopted 'animalcentered' as being a synonym for 'animal user-centered'. However, I argue, the fundamental essence of ACI's intellectual origins in human-centered design's preoccupation with human values, and in turn, human dignity -which set it apart from mere user-centered design, is lost in such a straightforward adoption of the term. I then analyze what it might mean to actually adopt a value-driven approach akin to human-centered design for animal-centered design, and how this might force us to move beyond the typical welfarist position dominant across most of ACI. Rather than consider the prevention of unnecessary suffering as a central goal of technologies developed by ACI researchers, I argue that technologies that preserve animal dignity as a core value is a more appropriate understanding of the term 'animal-centered'. CCS CONCEPTS• Human-centered computing → HCI theory, concepts and models.

show abstract

“…Not only do bears appear to enjoy the stimulation provided from interacting with trainers through touchscreen training, the use of the computer presents researchers with novel ways to communicate with the bears. Computers have often been used in zoological settings to provide enrichment-most typically for nonhuman primates [8][9][10] but also for other species like parrots [11]-in the form of games, puzzles, or auditory enrichment. Computer interfaces have also been used to conduct assessments of animal well-being [9,12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing a Preference Scale for a Bear: From “Bearly Like” to “Like Beary Much”

Vonk

2023

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A preference scale for use by nonhuman animals would allow them to communicate their degree of liking for individual items rather than just relative preferences between pairs of items. It would also allow animals to report liking for images of objects that would be difficult to directly interact with (e.g., potential mates and habitat modifications). Such scales can easily be presented using touchscreen technology. Few zoos have used touchscreen technology for species other than nonhuman primates. I present a description of efforts taken to create such a scale for use with a single zoo-housed American black bear (Ursus americanus). Although the bear did not reach a high level of proficiency with assigning preferred and non-preferred food items to categorical responses of “like” and “dislike,” she was able to learn how to use the like and dislike buttons differentially for a single preferred and less preferred food item and she selected the correct response button for the preferred item at above chance levels. These data contribute to our limited understanding of black bear cognition and suggest that conditional discriminations may be difficult for black bears. This finding can inform continued efforts to create a simpler tool for nonhumans to communicate their preferences to human caregivers in a more nuanced way than is currently possible. More generally, the current study contributes to the growing body of work supporting the use of touchscreen technology for providing enrichment to less studied species like bears.

show abstract

Animal-Centred Sonic Interaction Design

Cited by 9 publications

References 23 publications

Sonic Collaborations between Humans, Non-human Animals and Artificial Intelligences: Contemporary and future aesthetics in more-than-human worlds

Sonic Collaborations between Humans, Non-human Animals and Artificial Intelligences: Contemporary and future aesthetics in more-than-human worlds

Animal-centered design needs dignity: a critical essay on ACI’s core concept

Developing a Preference Scale for a Bear: From “Bearly Like” to “Like Beary Much”

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About