Co-designing wearable devices for sports: The case study of sport climbing

Accepted Manuscript

Co-Designing Wearable Devices for Sports: The Case Study of Sport Climbing Eleonora Mencarini , Chiara Leonardi , Alessandro Cappelletti , Davide Giovanelli , Antonella De Angeli , Massimo Zancanaro PII: DOI: Reference:

S1071-5819(18)30638-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.10.005 YIJHC 2257

To appear in:

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies

Received date: Revised date: Accepted date:

31 July 2017 13 July 2018 30 October 2018

Please cite this article as: Eleonora Mencarini , Chiara Leonardi , Alessandro Cappelletti , Davide Giovanelli , Antonella De Angeli , Massimo Zancanaro , Co-Designing Wearable Devices for Sports: The Case Study of Sport Climbing, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies (2018), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.10.005

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC

CE

PT

ED

M

AN US

CR IP T

RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS  Offers a user-driven perspective on the design of wearable devices for sports;  Elicits climbers‟ values influencing wearables acceptance and the related design considerations;  Presents design activities that involve potential users in the real context of use;  Explores the possibility to augment interpersonal communication in sport through vibrotactile feedback;  Compares different design solutions in the real context of use.

1

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Co-Designing Wearable Devices for Sports: The Case Study of Sport Climbing Eleonora Mencarini1&2, Chiara Leonardi1, Alessandro Cappelletti1, Davide Giovanelli1, Antonella De Angeli2&3, Massimo Zancanaro1 1

Fondazione Bruno Kessler (FBK), via Sommarive 18, 38123, Trento, Italy 2 DISI, University of Trento, via Sommarive 9, 38123, Trento, Italy 3 University of Lincoln, Brayford Pool, Lincoln, Lincolnshire, LN6 7TS, United Kingdom

CR IP T

{mencarini, cleonardi, cappelle, dgiovanelli, zancana}@fbk.eu {antonella.deangeli}@unitn.it

M

AN US

ABSTRACT This paper presents the co-design process of a wearable device for rock climbing, an extreme sport that requires high physical, emotional, and cognitive involvement. From the preliminary investigation of climbers‟ needs, it emerged that their acceptance of wearables is mainly influenced by climbing sport-specific values like self-efficacy, trust, and adventure. Such values highlight the importance of the role technology should have beyond its functional purpose, i.e. how wearables should support climbers. Based on these insights, we designed and deployed a vibrotactile wearable device aimed at augmenting the communication between instructor and trainees and assessed its usefulness, usability, and pleasantness during an indoor climbing lesson. Finally, we conclude the paper discussing how the wearable we implemented meets the design criteria emerged from climbers‟ values and reflecting on the importance to gain new perspectives on the design of wearables for sports in general.

ED

1. INTRODUCTION

CE

PT

In the last 15 years, wearable devices have gained great popularity both in research and on the market since they radicalise the concept of portable technology and of use in mobility. Their main fields of application are health, well-being, and sport. Usually, wearable devices for sport provide support by keeping track of the sportspeople‟s performance through sensors able to track movements and vital signs (such as heart rate) that allow calculating indices such as distance walked and calories burnt during physical exercise (Shih et al., 2015). Indeed, they are often referred to as „activity trackers‟.

AC

Although many people buy activity trackers, according to several market and research studies they stop using them short time after the purchase (Canhoto and Arp, 2017; Ledger and McCaffrey, 2014; Shih et al., 2015). The reasons for this rapid abandonment are twofold. On the one hand, there are technical shortcomings, such as limited accuracy of the data collected, low number of functionalities, and the fact of not being stand-alone products, but necessarily needing integration with smartphones (Ericsson Consumerlab, 2016); on the other hand, there is a lack of a comprehensive understanding of sportspeople‟s needs and practices. From the user‟s point of view, the benefits of using activity trackers are not always clear; for example, Rapp & Cena (2016) found that new users perceive collecting data as burdensome, and Karapanos et al. (2016) found that the numbers used in data visualisation are often meaningless to them. Another reason for abandonment relates to the influence of the devices on owners‟ identities, for example Lazar et al. (2015) showed that some people stop using wearables because they feel they do not fit the ideal sportsperson that is 2

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

CR IP T

advertised by the wearable‟s brand. Similarly, Gouveia et al. (2014) reported that many users could not adapt to standardised goals and this failure led them to feelings of underachievement, incompetence, and consequent detachment from the product. The problem of standardisation also underscores the need for contextual design for such technologies. For example, the use of activity trackers in the gym had been demonstrated to be difficult because activities, context, and personal attitudes are discontinuous (Patel and O‟Kane, 2015), while their use in outdoor sports should report also the experiential aspects such as pain, sweat, fatigue, cold, etc. that characterise those kinds of sports (Tholander and Nylander, 2015). Consequently, according to these studies, the current design challenge of wearable devices is to reach out to the experiential aspects of sports, beyond the measurement of performance.

ED

M

AN US

Designing technology for sports implies considering sportspeople‟s motivations and goals, their practices, and the contexts where the activity takes place. Building on these premises, we assume that a change of perspective is needed in order to widen the design space of wearables for sports. To this end, we adopted a User-Centred Design (UCD) approach and co-design methods in order to have a comprehensive view of the aspects involved in the sport practice and in the use of wearable technology. We started our design process by investigating the factors that influence the acceptability of wearable devices in a specific community of outdoor sportspeople, that of climbers. Climbing was selected as the case study for its richness and complexity, since it entails both physical and mental commitment, and both an individual dimension (movement and emotions) and a collaborative dimension (coordination with a partner). Among the several existing types of climbing, we considered Sport Climbing, which can be practiced either in a natural environment or in a gym and involves two people: a climber who moves up the wall and a belayer who takes care of the climber‟s safety. The two are tied through a rope: while the climber moves up the wall, s/he clips the rope into protections fixed on the wall; at the same time the belayer manages the rope by means of a friction device in order to prevent the climber to hit the ground in case of fall.

AC

CE

PT

From our initial investigation, it emerged that sport values are a key aspect of climbing and that they strongly influence the acceptability of wearables in this sport. By considering sport values in the co-design process and orchestrating them with climbers‟ needs, the sport dynamics, and the cultural and physical aspects of wearing an artefact, we gained a new perspective on the possible role of wearable devices for sports, that of augmenting interpersonal communication rather than tracking activity. Specifically, the contribution of our work is three-fold. First, this paper offers a user-driven perspective for the design of wearable devices for sports, which allows expanding the design space of these kinds of devices by identifying new user needs and technology roles. We believe that the design of wearables for sports in general would benefit from this approach. Second, our work elicited climbers‟ values, which influence wearables acceptance by this sport community and the related design implications. In our view, these implications can be extended to the design of wearables for other outdoor sports, which might share similar values with climbing, such as backcountry skiing and scuba-diving. Finally, this paper presents a wearable device for augmenting interpersonal communication between instructors and beginner climbers through vibrotactile feedback. This system supports learning by enhancing its relational aspects, adapting to the different needs of each trainee and fostering their active learning. Such system could be adopted in the learning phase of those sports that, as climbing, are focused on proper movements and body posture, e.g. yoga. 3

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT In the next section, we review previous HCI research in the fields of wearables design, sports in general and specifically of climbing. In section 3, we describe our co-design process in detail. In section 4, we discuss how the outcome of the design process addresses the knowledge gap highlighted in the Related Work section. We conclude the paper summarising our work, reflecting on its generalisability and on its possible follow-up. 2. RELATED WORK

2.1. The Challenge of Designing Wearables

CR IP T

The following paragraphs present previous HCI research on the challenges entailed by the design of wearable technology in general, on wearables for sports, and in the domain of climbing.

AN US

Designing wearable devices is particularly challenging because of the direct relationship these tools have with the human body. Indeed, wearables are meant to be worn in direct contact with the body, while people are engaged in different activities and contexts. As all the objects that decorate the body, if visible to the others, they are both intimate and representational (Viseu and Suchman, 2010), influencing at the same time the wearer‟s identity and social appearance. Therefore, the design of wearables raises several challenges related to ergonomics (e.g. adapting to the body in movement), cultural acceptability, representation of self, and usability.

AC

CE

PT

ED

M

When well-designed, wearables might be perceived by the wearer as an extension of his/her body (Tomico and Wilde, 2015) that provides an augmentation of its native capabilities (Viseu and Suchman, 2010). A few studies have tried to identify the design principles that allow building wearables that are comfortable, usable, and meaningful to the users, in order to pave the way for users‟ acceptance and long-term engagement. By adopting a human factor perspective, Motti Genaro and Kaine (2014) identified 20 general design principles across the literature that influence users‟ engagement with wearables. These principles refer to both hardware and software aspects and are meant to provide guidance to designers. Among other things, they involve aesthetics, comfort, contextual awareness, and reliability. Looking at a more specific problem, Gemperle et al. (1998) have mapped the design space of wearables focusing on dynamic wearability, i.e. the understanding of the body areas where solid and flexible forms can rest according to the changes produced by movement. Whereas Dunne et al. (2014) coined the term social wearability by extending the concept of the physical comfort of wearing technology to the idea of social comfort, i.e. the influence of the device on the wearer‟s social experience. The social acceptance of a person wearing a device might depend on the aesthetics of the device as well as on the kind of interaction it requires. If interacting with the device requires gestures, there should be a balance between the distinctiveness of a gesture for it not to be performed by mistake and the social consequences such gestures may entail. Harrison et al. (2009) addressed the problem of usefulness and usability of wearables by investigating how effective they are in conveying information depending on the body part they cover. They evaluated the reaction time to a visual stimulus located on seven different body parts and found that it depends not only on the accessibility of each body part to peripheral vision but also on the activity that the person is performing when receiving the stimulus. Besides body comfort, context of interaction and the activity to be performed, Tomico and Wilde (2015) pointed out the importance to consider the wearers‟ perspective and the diversity of meanings that can be generated from the use of wearables according to their personal values.

4

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 2.2.

Wearable Devices for Sports

So far, the use of wearable devices for sports has been investigated by HCI mostly to support workout and to improve practitioners‟ sport experience. In the next paragraphs, we will present the studies conducted within these two main streams of research. 2.2.1. Wearable Devices for Improving Performance in Real-Time

M

AN US

CR IP T

The ability of wearable devices to detect performance in real time has raised challenges about how to provide also effective feedback in real time. Feedback is crucial in sport learning and performance improving because it helps athletes to know whether they are performing well. It can be inherent (or intrinsic) or augmented (or extrinsic). Inherent feedback is the information originating from the athletes‟ perception of their own movements and position in space (i.e. proprioception), while augmented feedback is the information coming from an external agent, such as the coach (Schmidt and Lee, 2011). Nevertheless, effective sport training does not necessarily mean that more feedback is always the best solution. On the contrary, excessive feedback may translate into disadvantages. One possible drawback is cognitive overload: athletes must be able to perceive, interpret, and react to the feedback while they are performing another activity as their primary task. For this reason, the feedback complexity and salience should be calibrated on the complexity of the task (Sigrist et al., 2013). Other possible drawbacks relate to the frequency of the feedback such as passive learning, i.e. the trainee does not actively perform the exercise but waits to be guided, and feedback dependence, i.e. the inability to perform an exercise autonomously without the feedback (Schmidt and Lee, 2011). Indeed, the frequency of feedback should decrease as the skill level of the trainee increases (Sigrist et al., 2013).

CE

PT

ED

Many HCI studies have demonstrated the relevance of considering the activity- and context-related constraints when deciding what feedback modality to adopt. Some studies explored different modalities of subtle feedback that could be conveyed through wearables, for example Bächlin et al. (2009) compared audio, visual, and vibrotactile feedback to assess the most appropriate for swimming. Participants were told to change swimming behaviour when they perceived a signal and the experiment showed that audio recorded the longest reaction time, probably because of the noise in the water due to the movement of swimmers. Hasewaga et al. (2012) explored sonification of skiers‟ centre-of-gravity to provide beginners with guidance on correct body posture, demonstrating that, with bio-feedback, they are able to overcome the fear of speed and improve the experience of learning.

AC

Some works used Electronic Muscle Stimulation (EMS) as a way to act directly on users‟ body avoiding cognitive load. Pfeiffer et al. (2015) employed EMS to guide people in pedestrian navigation. The stimulation helped users change direction while walking and allowed them to perform other tasks in the meantime. Hassan et al. (2017) used EMS to help runners avoid wrong movements that could lead to injuries. The EMS actuator was activated by a pressure sensor in the shoe sole and intervened by changing the foot angle before it touched the ground. Much attention has been paid to vibration as a feedback modality. Spelmezan (2012) deployed a network of vibrotactile motors on the body of beginner snowboarders to signal the right moment to turn with the snowboard. Similarly, Stewart et al. (2014) created TapTrain, a wrist-worn prototype for roller derby skaters aimed at giving them feedback on their speed. In this case, the feedback was not delivered automatically, but the skaters had to query it by tapping the wrist pad twice, and there 5

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT was a vibration dictionary of sorts to convey different meanings: the motors would vibrate fast if skaters were improving their performance or slower if they were not. Similarly, also Cauchard et al. (2016) addressed the problem of how to convey different meanings using vibration and designed and evaluated Activibe, a set of 10 tactile icons for communicating progress towards an established goal with good results in recognisability. 2.2.2. Wearable Devices for Social Interaction

AN US

CR IP T

Besides the improvement of performance, researchers explored also the potentialities of wearables to improve the social interactions in sports, in particular by increasing group awareness and social connection among teammates or augmenting the interaction between the sportspeople and their audience. For example, Choi et al. (2016), ideated and evaluated an exergame for group training where swimmers were provided group performance awareness through earphones and had to collaborate or compete with others. Mauriello et al. (2014) prototyped and evaluated a wearable etextile display aimed at supporting training in groups of runners by providing awareness of the group‟s pace, distance run and wearer‟s heart rate. Similarly, Walmik et al. (2014) investigated the potential of displaying heart rate among cyclists to foster partners‟ support during the exertion, and Page and Vande Moere (2007), designed a system of wearable displays to be embedded in basketball players‟ jerseys meant to help players take in-game decisions by showing individual information like fouls, scores, time alerts, but which, from their evaluation, resulted more useful for out-of-the-game stakeholders such as coaches, referees, and audience.

PT

ED

M

On the other hand, social connection between sport partners has been pursued using wearables as communication devices. For example, Müller et al. (2007) explored the possibility to connect joggers who run individually in different places or at different paces. Their system aimed at influencing runners‟ motivation by allowing them to speak to each other through a headset and providing a spatialised audio so that runners could hear the slower person as s/he was on the back and the faster as s/he was in front. Similarly, Fedosov et al. (2016) designed an Augmented Reality app to be visualised in the skiers‟ goggles which allowed groups of skiers to add user-generated content on shared ski areas maps to support decision-making about what slopes to take.

AC

CE

Finally, another branch of works explored communication between audience and sportspeople. Tomitsch et al. (2007) conceived a system for enhancing the participation to sport events by detecting the clapping of the public and visualising their level of appreciation on a large public display in-situ. Differently, Woźniak et al. (2015) focused on making long-distance runners feel the cheering of their remote supporters individually. They created Rufus, a system supporting a twoway communication: supporters could send three different messages, each one associated to an LED colour on a wrist-worn device signalled by a vibration, and runners could send a notification of the received message by pressing a button. 2.3.

HCI for Climbing

In the last few years, part of HCI research on sports has focused on climbing and has investigated how technology could support this specific sport. The technological solutions proposed so far by this stream of research fall into one of two main groups: technologies for augmenting the climbing environment (typically the walls of climbing gyms) and wearable devices to monitor and improve climbers‟ physical performance.

6

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 2.3.1 Augmented walls

AN US

CR IP T

A few works focused on supporting training and specifically the acquisition of climbing motor skills by projecting guidance on the wall. According to the classification proposed by Hämäläinen et al. (2015) augmented climbing walls offer exertion experiences that exploit gravity to create meaningful challenges and a diversity of movements. Kosmalla et al. (2017a) implemented ClimbVIS a system aimed to enhance the traditional learning practice of observing a more experienced climber performing a route and then trying to mimic his/her performance by projecting the next movements for the climber to make and thus avoiding any delay time between expert‟s demonstration and beginner‟s execution. Other works augmented the climbing walls with the aim to enhance the climbing experience by introducing gamification elements in the activity. Liljendahl et al. (2005) presented a climbing wall with embedded sensors, LED lights, and sound actuators in order to create paths to follow. Similarly, Kajastila et al. (2016) created interactive routes by combining computer vision and interactive projected graphics. Finally, Kosmalla et al. (2017b) explored the possibility of creating a mixed reality environment for training. They integrated the immersiveness of a virtual reality environment provided by a head-mounted display with the tactile feedback of a physical climbing wall. 2.3.2 Wearable devices for Climbing

CE

PT

ED

M

The majority of wearables for climbing have been designed as activity trackers, i.e. to track movements and assess climbers‟ performance during their workout in indoor gyms, offering a visualisation after the ascent. For example, Pansiot et al. (2008) developed an ear-worn accelerometer whose data were then interpreted as motion fluidity, strength, and endurance Similarly, Ladha et al. (2013) designed and evaluated ClimbAX, a wristband able to detect the power, control, stability, and speed of a climber. An example of wearable device for automatic route recognition can be found in Kosmalla et al. (2015) , who designed and implemented ClimbSense, a system consisting of two wrist-worn devices that allows the comparison of training sessions between climbers who climbed the same route through the visualisation of the data retrieved once the climber‟s performance is over. Conversely, Feeken et al. (2016) employed wearables to support the learning phase. These authors built a wearable system consisting in a pressure sensor and an accelerometer embedded in the climbing shoes matched with a vibrating motor placed above the ankle to provide the climber feedback in real time when the sensor detects little pressure or hasty movements.

AC

Regarding the climbing experience and how it can be enhanced by wearable technology, so far little has been investigated. Byrne and Müller (2014) investigated climbers‟ motivations to practice this sport and how the technologies developed so far match them. Regarding wearables, they found that ClimbAX by Ladha et (2013) meets the motivational elements of “maintaining challenge” and “documenting and reliving the experience” because it records the workout, and “experiencing beauty and nature” since it can be used also outdoors, while it is less suitable for satisfying the motivations of “social engagement” because it is an attempt to substitute the coach and of “risk as a measure of progress” because it fosters self-improvement through reflection rather than proactively proposing new challenges. Mencarini et al. (2016) have shown the influence of emotions in the experience of learning to climb and suggested the design of a system that could bridge the communication between the players involved in order to address the psychological aspects of this sport as well. Another representative work is that of Schöning et al. (2007), who, by shifting the 7

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT focus of research from the indoor to the outdoor practice, changed the purpose of wearable devices from performance improvement to context-related needs such as location finding, communication between partners, and awareness of the weather conditions. In order to address these needs, the authors proposed the design concept of a system that relies on Location-Based Systems and Augmented Reality and provides information embedded in the gear.

CR IP T

The two different contexts of practice, indoors and outdoors, have been demonstrated to have a strong influence in climbers‟ acceptance of activity trackers. Indeed, Daiber et al. (2016) found that while outdoor climbers are more interested in fun and recreation, indoor climbers are keen on performance and competitiveness and would be interested in monitoring themselves. Deepening the investigation on acceptance, Kosmalla et al. (2016) found that climbers would prefer to receive real-time feedback on a wrist-worn device and that, to this end, sound and vibration have a better reaction time, while visual stimuli are not appropriate since the visual attention of the climber is dedicated to the route.

ED

M

AN US

From the work presented in these two subsections, it is possible to identify the advantages and drawbacks of augmented walls and wearable devices for climbing. On the one hand, augmented walls can provide climbers with immersive environments and offer playful and engaging experiences but, on the other hand, they are confined to indoor gyms and require bulky infrastructures. Moreover, even if immersiveness favours engagement and playfulness, it could distract the climber from the execution of correct movements. Conversely, wearable devices have the potential to enhance the sportsperson and are not tied to a specific physical space but can be brought along on different routes both indoors and outdoors. Their drawback regards the interface design: being small, they raise issues about how to return information to the wearer. Furthermore, being potentially used across different contexts, they might raise issues regarding their appropriateness in each of them.

CE

PT

The related work presented here has highlighted the challenges involved in the design of wearable devices for sport, which require the twofold understanding of the issues entailed by a technology to be applied on the body (such as ergonomics, usability, and acceptability) and those associated with sport (such as practice, motivations, and needs). We addressed this challenge by adopting a UCD approach and a co-design methodology. The research questions that guided our work were:

AC

RQ1: Would climbers use wearables? For what purposes? RQ2: Which design attributes should wearables integrate in order to be accepted by climbers?

In the next section, we will present the steps of our design process. 3. THE DESIGN PROCESS Our design process aimed to identify the factors that influence climbers‟ acceptance of wearables and at progressively refining the design space of wearables for climbing. It consisted of five studies, each one exploring a specific research sub-question. The methodology of each study has been attuned to answer its specific question. Below a summary of the studies that provide an overview of the whole process is presented (Figure 1; for a more detailed view, see Table 1). In the following sub-sections, we will explain each study in detail. 8

CR IP T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AN US

Figure 1. The design process.

PT

ED

M

Study 01. Understanding Climbers‟ Attitude towards Wearable Devices In this study, our goal was to identify the acceptability issues that may prevent climbers from adopting wearables. Specifically, our research questions were “Would climbers use wearables in their sport practice? What factors influence their attitude towards wearables?”. In order to answer these questions, we organised two focus groups with experienced climbers and engaged them in a discussion about three different devices designed for climbing. The main insight from this research activity was that, typically, expert climbers who practice outdoors are reluctant to introduce wearable devices in their sport practice because they are afraid these kinds of devices might contradict what they consider the core values of climbing, i.e. self-efficacy, mutual trust between partners, and adventure. Nevertheless, our participants identified beginner climbers as a possible subgroup that could benefit from wearables and be more likely to accept them.

AC

CE

Study 02. Exploring the Opportunities of Wearable Devices in Climbing In this study, we wanted to explore the potentiality of wearable devices to address beginner climbers‟ needs while respecting the sport community values emerged in the previous study. The leading research question was “How can wearables support beginner climbers?”. In order to address this question, we organised a design workshop involving designers practicing outdoor sports. The outcome was a series of design concepts envisioning wearables aimed at improving the climbing experience and performance by raising awareness of the invisible phenomena occurring in this sport, such as the fear and balance dynamics of climbers, and the empathy and attentive presence of belayers. Notably, participants showed a strong preference for haptic feedback as communication modality. Study 03. Exploring Vibrotactile Wearables for Augmented Communication The goal of the third study was to further explore the possibilities of augmented communication through haptic feedback in climbing as emerged in the previous workshop. This time, the leading research question was “How can haptic (and specifically vibrotactile) wearables support communication in climbing?”. In order to stimulate ideas grounded in the situated practices of 9

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT climbing, we engaged climbers and designers in a co-design workshop in a climbing gym and asked them to develop design ideas by acting them out (i.e. using their bodies in the design). The design concepts that emerged show that vibrotactile feedback is a versatile form of expression that can be used to express several different meanings by combining a certain number of vibrating motors on different locations on the body and exploiting different patterns of vibration.

CR IP T

Study 04. Designing and implementing a Vibrotactile Wearable Prototype In this study, only the authors of the paper were involved. We decided to address the issue of the communication gap between the instructor and the beginner climbers when they are on the wall with a vibrotactile wearable prototype that augment the instructor‟s communication. The goal of the prototype was to support the learning of the proper climbing technique and at same time make the climbers feel reassured by the attentive presence of the instructor. The prototype was composed of eight vibrating devices to be worn by climbers and controlled by the instructor through a tablet.

ED

M

AN US

Study 05. Evaluating a Vibrotactile Wearable Prototype The leading research questions of the final study were “What are the best locations on the body? What is the perceived usefulness of a vibrotactile wearable for climbers? And how do they perceive the vibration?”. These questions were investigated by inviting ten beginner climbers and a mountain guide to experience the prototype during an indoor climbing lesson. It emerged that climbers prefer to wear the device on the ends of the limbs and on the abdomen and that, despite catching them by surprise, the vibration helped climbers to feel watched, and thus safer. Regarding the usefulness, both trainees and the guide valued the possibility to provide information in real time distributed on a specific body part and appreciated the possibility to customise its purpose as feedback or instruction according to the trainees‟ needs. Research Question

2 Focus Groups with 15 experienced climbers

How can wearables support beginner climbers?

Explorative Design Workshop with  7 designers with outdoor experience  1 sports technology company CEO

AC 02 Exploring the opportunities for wearable devices in learning to climb

Method & Participants

Would climbers use wearable devices? What factors influence their attitude towards wearables?

CE

01 Understanding climbers‟ attitude towards wearable technology

PT

Study

Facilitation Tools

Findings

Images and descriptions of 3 artefacts

Climbers‟ values (selfefficacy, trust, adventure) and the related concerns for the use of wearables. Identification of beginners as a target who need more support during the activity and might have fewer prejudices towards technology.

Slides Climbing gear to be seen and touched.

Wearables could be used to increase players‟ awareness about movements, emotions, and partner‟s presence in an unobtrusive way. Preference for haptic feedback.

10

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

How can vibrotactile wearables support communication in climbing?

04 Design and implementation of a vibrotactile wearable prototype

What shape and function should a wearable for climbing have according to the results of study 01, 02, 03?

Design & implementation by the authors of the paper

What is the perceived usefulness and the best location on the body of the vibrotactile prototype?

Experiencing the prototype as a technology probe during an indoor climbing lesson with 10 trainees and 1 mountain guide

05 Assessing the vibrotactile wearable prototype during an indoor climbing lesson

Sport artefacts: climbing gear to wear Inspirational artefacts: cards

--

1 Vibrotactile wearable prototype consisting of 8 devices

AN US

03 Exploring vibrotactile wearables for augmented communication in climbing

Environment: the climbing gym

By playing with different combinations of number of motors, location on the body and vibration patterns, it is possible to convey different meanings

8 vibrating devices to be worn on 8 body parts crucial for the learning of climbing and a tablet interface to control them.

CR IP T

Contextual Co-design Workshop with 8 people:  1 mountain guide  1 guide‟s assistant  2 designers  2 climbers  2 beginners

1 Tablet

Both the instructor and the trainees found the probe useful due to its adaptability and realtime use. Trainees preferred to wear the devices on the ends of limbs.

M

Table 1. Summary of the design process.

PT

ED

3.1. Study 01. Understanding Climbers’ Attitude towards Wearable Devices In order to start mapping the design space, we investigated what characteristics technology should have in order to be accepted by climbers. To this end, focus groups were preferred to individual interviews because they can foster rich discussions among participants and are more likely to reveal climbers‟ motivations for using vs not using technologies (Goodman et al., 2012).

AC

CE

3.1.1. Participants We conducted two focus groups, one with nine participants (three females; age M= 35 years) and one with six participants (one female; age M= 31 years). The participants were amateur climbers with expertise and understanding of the sport enough to be able to make a meta-reflection on it (years of practice M= 6; the highest-grade climbed leading ranging from 4b to 7b1). Although the level of engagement with technology was not a recruitment criterion, participants were asked about it in the selection form. It emerged that two participants owned an old type of mobile phone; four people used no apps related to climbing; nine people used weather forecast apps; and five people used geolocation apps and devices for finding routes when going outdoors. 3.1.2. Method: Focus Groups with Probes To facilitate the discussion, three devices designed for climbing were presented to the focus groups as probes around which to revolve the conversation. These had been selected among wearable or 1

French grading system (“Climbing Grades,” n.d.)

11

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

b)

M

a)

AN US

CR IP T

portable devices, which covered two main issues of climbing: communication between climbers (Mencarini et al., 2016) or feedback on performance (Ladha et al., 2013). The three probe items were: a commercial product (Figure 2a), a Bachelors dissertation prototype (“Dundee Degree Show” 2011, Figure 2b), and a research prototype ((Ladha et al., 2013); Figure 2c). The devices shown in Figure 2a and 2b are both designed to be attached to the harness and support the communication between climbing partners, but in different ways; the device in Figure 2a is a Bluetooth loudspeaker that can be used to convey voice communication, while the one in Figure 2b is a remote control that uses LED buttons to allow climbing partners to exchange simple visual messages. These two probes were used to investigate whether communication between partners is perceived as a significant problem by climbers, and what technological solution they would prefer and why. The third device (Figure 2c) is composed of two bracelets enhanced with accelerometers that are able to distinguish between moments of movement, rest, and muscle tremors during a climber‟s ascent, and a visual interface where the climber can visualise his/her performance. This probe was chosen to investigate climbers‟ ideas about “self-improvement”, i.e. their opinions on whether such measurements would be informative and useful to improve performance.

c)

ED

Figure 2. Pictures of the probes used during the focus group

CE

PT

The probes were introduced separately. For each of them, a picture and a quick explanation about the purpose and the functioning of the device was provided. The discussion was then stimulated by the facilitator asking the participants whether they thought the devices would be useful and whether they would bring them along when they went climbing. Each focus group lasted on average 40 minutes; the discussions were audio-recorded and then transcribed. The transcriptions were analysed using Thematic Analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006). Quotations are anonymized with the letter „C‟, which stands for „climbers‟, followed by a progressive number.

AC

3.1.3. Results

Six participants out of 15 explicitly said they were not in favour of using technology during their outdoor sports activities, unless it was strictly related to safety. They regarded outdoor sports as occasions to be immersed in nature, free from technology and social constraints (“I think this summer I switched off the smartphone every weekend” - C12; “Taking selfies takes off the feeling of being there, that day, on that mountain, alone” - C4; “I would use technology to let other people know that I‟m alive, but not for sharing pictures on social networks; I‟m there for myself, not for the others to know” – C10). Conversely, three out of 15 participants were not reluctant to use technology a priori (“I don‟t go to the mountains to get rid of technology; if I want a tech-free day, I can go cycling on the bike trail and leave the smartphone at home” – C1). The remaining six participants did not offer explicit opinions on the matter. 12

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

CR IP T

Regarding the three devices, participants expressed some reluctance too, but for different reasons. For what concerns the two devices for enhancing the communication between climbing partners (Figure 2a, 2b), participants admitted that they addressed a relevant issue, but offered limited solutions. Participants of both focus groups interpreted these devices as designed for the mountaineering context, where the difficulty in communicating is stronger (indeed, when climbing on multi-pitch routes2 in the mountains there is a great distance between the partners, usually from 25 to 40 m), and this interpretation strongly affected their judgment. In fact, the Bluetooth loudspeaker appeared too bulky and not handy enough to be used in the mountaineering context because it requires speaking through a smartphone (and thus phone signal) and occupies the climber‟s hands, which instead need to be free. Conversely, the LED device was deemed more appropriate for its simplicity and non-intrusiveness, but it was considered suitable only for ordinary communication and not in case of emergency, when a more detailed communication would be needed.

PT

ED

M

AN US

The performance tracking bracelets were considered inadequate since they do not frame the problems of training and self-improvement properly. When considering the bracelets, participants lingered on what „improving‟ meant for them. It emerged that „improving‟ is a complex concept in climbing, which consists not only of mastering efficient movements but also increasingly gaining self-confidence and control over negative mental states. Usually, climbers rely on their internal sensations to know when they are climbing well because in this sport flow and performance are strictly intertwined (MacAloon et al., 1983): “Climbing faster doesn‟t mean climbing better […] Well, I realise when I climb well. Sometimes I climb and I feel that I‟m moving well, while other times you stay on the wall like a gecko that looks up and doesn‟t know what to do” (C10), “I see my improvements when I feel confident and I climb a higher grade… maybe the first time you climb a higher grade you shake from head to toe [but it‟s still an improvement]” (C4). Furthermore, the way the bracelets measure movements was also criticised; some participants pointed out that for a good climbing technique using your feet is more important than using your hands, therefore the bracelets should be placed on ankles and sensors measuring muscular contraction would be more appropriate than accelerometers to obtain information about the quality of the performance.

AC

CE

Overall, from the thematic analysis of the discussions, it emerged that climbers‟ acceptance of portable/wearable technology is influenced by their sports culture and by the natural context in which the sports activity occur. In the following paragraphs, we articulate our participants‟ concerns regarding the use of technology during their practice and, consequently, we outline those aspects that would make it acceptable, desirable, and useful for them. Technology as a support, not as a substitute. The kind of support that technology aims to provide and its role for users were big concerns for climbers. Conceiving climbing as an outdoor sport that challenges physical and mental capabilities while immersed in a wild natural environment, climbers‟ main concern was to delegate to technology part of their skills. In such context, relying on technology is considered hazardous mainly for three reasons: namely, the risk to make experienced climbers lazy; the risk of getting inexperienced climbers involved in adventures they cannot handle; 2

“Multi-pitch routes are long ascents aimed to reach the top of a mountain with one or more stops (called „belay stations‟). Each section between belay stations is called a pitch” (“Multi-pitch climbing,” n.d.).

13

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

CR IP T

and the risk that technology will not work when the need presents itself. These fears were clearly stated by C12 when he affirmed: “in my experience, I have seen that people get all the fancy brand new technology, but then, when they find themselves on a glacier, in most of the cases their phone is out of battery, they don‟t have a map with them because they were relying on the GPS, and even if they had it, they wouldn‟t be able to read it. In the end, they are stuck. From my point of view, tech is surely useful, but you cannot rely on it too much”. With respect to the three main risks outlined above, the LED communication device received more appreciation because, unlike the other two, it does not require to be connected to other devices such as the smartphone. Conversely, it supports the intentional communication between climbing partners in an open manner, allowing them to set every time the meanings of the coloured LEDs. Moreover, it was considered more reliable since it is designed to perform just one function (unlike the smartphones which are used to communicate, take pictures, check the map, etc.) and uses a low-power technology. In conclusion, our participants were reluctant towards technology that holds fundamental information for their trip and safety; they trust technology, but they want to be sure that they can make it also without it.

PT

ED

M

AN US

Technology should be handy, but not intrusive. Technology should not be intrusive or hamper the flow of the activity in any way, but, at the same time, should be well perceivable and ready in case of need. For example, considering the communication between climbing partners, the LED device was preferred to the Bluetooth speaker for its lower level of invasiveness. Although it conveys less detailed messages, some participants preferred it also to walkie-talkies since their communication channels are often disturbed (“It would make sense to use something to communicate that is not noisy. I think this is the key element of this device” – C12). On the other end, it was found to be even too discreet risking not being noticed. Therefore, a few participants suggested adding an audio or vibrotactile notification to make the change in the LED status more noticeable. Similarly, the self-tracking bracelet was regarded as too passive; according to the participants, it lacks either realtime feedback to know what movement one should adjust during the performance or some elements of gamification to sustain motivation for training (“I like to train, but when I‟m alone I‟m lazy. Now I have an inconvenient schedule so it‟s hard to find a partner… but if this device was able motivate me, maybe through some gamification elements or immediate feedback, then I would like it” - C15).

AC

CE

Maintain a social image of competence. Another design-relevant concern regarded the influence of the use of technology on social acceptance by other climbers. Participants showed reluctance to the idea of using the bracelets during practice because they feared the negative judgment of their climbing mates, (“my friends would tell me: what have you put on? You don‟t need it; leave it in your backpack!” – C10, “If you are the only one to use you will look like a fool” - C15). In this regard, participants tended to consider all the devices proposed as suitable for beginners, who typically encounter fewer problems of social image because -being still in the learning phase- they need support to improve their climbing style and still need to develop their own strategies for communicating with the partner, e.g. “A person that wants to start climbing and thinks to buy a walkie-talkie [might consider also this kind of devices]” (C12), “Or a mountain guide with a client” (C11), “If you started climbing before this device even existed, it‟s hard to accept it. While, if when you take a climbing course, the instructor proposes it to you right from the start, then it becomes normal to carry it along with the rope and the quickdraws” (C15). The commitment to maintain a social image of competence influenced also the judgment on the aesthetics of the device: both the Bluetooth loudspeaker and the LED device were found bulky and ugly. 14

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AN US

CR IP T

Minimal equipment and perceived usefulness. The assessment criteria for the communication devices were strongly influenced by the mountain context and the type of climbing (mountaineering) that climbers had in mind. In such context, climbers‟ main concerns are safety and the limitations in the equipment they can carry with them due to logistic reasons (climbers need to carry all their gear, apparel, and food in their backpacks). These concerns lead them to prioritise gear and tools over any other thing. Gear is perceived as the most reliable (and thus important) thing, and climbers would not accept to bring any extra weight if not motivated by a strong perception of usefulness and benefit. As C12 explained, “I would bring it with me on a multipitch since it‟s useful in that case, but on a mountain multipitch I would rather bring two more protections, I mean... between the two, I choose safety”. On the other hand, the perceived usefulness of the tracking device was linked to the motivation for climbing, i.e. if the climber is more competitive and focused on the measurable aspects of the performance (“I think it‟s something for competitive men, those that are always challenging themselves and say, „you loser, yesterday you did only [few easy ascents]” - C9) or on the experience (“If I had to train and keep track of my progress for climbing, I would be bored to death” – C14).

AC

CE

PT

ED

M

Reliability. One of the strongest concerns that emerged was that whatever the purpose of the technology, it has to be reliable. During the focus groups, participants asked many questions about battery duration and the signal range of the devices; they discussed the robustness of both materials (plastic vs. metal) and components (e.g. LEDs were judged more resistant and waterproof than microphones), as well as the risk of accidental errors. In this regard, the specificity of a device, i.e. the fact that the device is designed for just one purpose, was preferred because the common perception was that specificity entails battery duration and easiness of use in difficult situations. More than the reliability of technology, climbers valued the reliability of the partner, who was mentioned explicitly by five participants as a key element for the success in an ascent and a good climbing day. The ideal partner is technically capable and independent, provides a sense of safety, and boosts morale (“it may happen that the conditions are not the best and, on these occasions, it is important to have a partner that, when you meet at the belay station, is willing to exchange few words with you and to keep spirits up” – C12). Nevertheless, anyone can have problems with the rope or not feel well; therefore, the devices supporting communication were regarded more positively since they allow monitoring the partner‟s actions and conditions when they are far or out of sight and making decisions together. Minimum encumbrance and handiness. Considering the outdoor context, climbers would prefer a device that is as small and light as possible. Therefore, wearables were preferred to portable devices because the latter are usually heavier, out of sight and could be caught in small passages (“Once I destroyed my backpack while I was climbing in a chimney3, I think that with such device… [it wouldn‟t be possible to climb in such place]” – C7).

3

A rock cleft with vertical sides mostly parallel, large enough to fit the climber's body into it. (Glossary of Climbing Terms, n.d.)

15

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AN US

CR IP T

In conclusion, from these focus groups it emerged that climbing is a sport discipline with its own culture, according to which people do not climb only to get fit and release tension, but also for the relationship they can establish with the environment, their sport partner, and themselves. Besides the practicalities entailed by the activity, the criteria used by the participants to assess the probes reflect their motivations, goals, and values to practice climbing. These values can be related either to the climbers themselves (such as expertise, independence, self-efficacy, and flow); to the community of climbers (such as trust, sense of belonging, and pride); or to the natural environment in which climbing is conducted (such as the pleasure of an immersion in nature, safety, and adventure) and they strongly affect the climbers‟ idea on the purpose, the role, and the aesthetics of wearable technology, thus affecting its likelihood of acceptance. Specifically, the need to gain the necessary expertise and to maintain a sense of self-efficacy both in front of themselves and the community determines the preference for a technology that does not substitute the skills required to a climber; the need of not interfering with the flow of an ascent is reflected in the preference for a technology that is at hand but not intrusive; while the relevance attributed to reliability is linked to the high level of risk that this sport entails, both when practiced indoors and outdoors, which requires a system that can be trusted as much as a partner. Finally, the requirements of perceived usefulness, minimum encumbrance and handiness are linked to the willingness to search for an outdoor adventure, where technology can be brought along. 3.2. Study 02. Exploring the Opportunities of Wearables in Climbing

PT

3.2.1. Participants

ED

M

According to the results of the focus groups, climbers are generally reluctant to use technology in their sport practice, even if they are more positively inclined towards wearables. In particular, the participants recognised the potential usefulness of wearable technology for beginners, who need support to learn the proper techniques and, to this end, might be more open to the use of technology during the activity. In keeping with these results, a design workshop was organised to explore what kind of wearable devices could support beginner climbers in their sport activity and how. The expected outcome of this workshop was a series of design concepts for innovative wearables.

CE

Eight participants (three females; age M= 35 years) took part in the workshop. Of these, seven were designers with experience in creative brainstorming and one participant was the CEO of a company that develops technology for mountain sports. Among the seven designers, three were climbers and four had experience of mountain activities (such as via ferrata, hiking, etc.).

AC

3.2.2. Method: Explorative Design Workshop The workshop took place in a room of the University of Trento designated for brainstorming sessions and lasted three hours. The first half hour was dedicated to participants‟ introductions. In the next half hour, the facilitator (i.e. the first author of this paper) explained to participants how sport climbing works, using illustrative slides and by showing the essential gear used in the sport, i.e. harness, rope, quickdraws, etc. (see Figure 3A). The climbing gear was distributed among the participants to provide a tangible stimulus for them to inspect and touch. Following this, the facilitator outlined the main problems experienced by beginner climbers that had emerged in the focus groups and are confirmed by the literature (Caruso, 1993; Hämäläinen et al., 2015; Mencarini et al., 2016), namely: performing climbing movements properly; being aware of body posture and balance (i.e. proprioception); acquiring self-confidence; trusting the belayers and coordinating with 16

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

CR IP T

them in joint actions (such as rope). These problems were presented as design opportunities and the values emerged in the focus groups were presented as constraints for the creative and technological exploration in this workshop.

Figure 3. A) Showing the climbing gear; B) working in pairs; C) the drawings of the concepts

AN US

The creative activity lasted 90 minutes and it was set at a rapid pace where five minutes of production alternated with four minutes of feedback. This brisk rhythm was chosen with the aim of helping participants to speak out their ideas without being held back by any mental filters or brakes and focusing primarily on the feasibility of the ideas. Participants brainstormed first individually and then in pairs.

PT

ED

M

Participants were paired by the facilitator in such a way that members were not too familiar with each other and their competencies were balanced. The facilitator provided a description of the design opportunities in a written format, each one on a separate sheet of paper. Participants were asked to read them, pick one up, and brainstorm ideas for it by sketching a design concept. Sketches were preferred to notes on post-its since sketches typically allow presenting detailed ideas more quickly, where shape-related factors and interaction details can readily emerge. During the activity, pictures and notes were taken by the facilitator, and the final presentations of the ideas and the feedback were audio-recorded so that the researcher could later reflect on and understand the rationale behind the participants‟ choices. Also, the sketches were collected at the end of the workshop. 3.2.3. Results

AC

CE

The concepts produced were analysed on the basis of the problem addressed and the solution offered in terms of technology, actors, interaction modalities, content of the communicative exchange, and sensory channels involved. Three out of the four concepts produced reflected the importance of the relationship between the climbing partners and took into consideration the emotional involvement of climbers, while the fourth one addressed the topic of learning how to perform climbing movements properly. We sum up each concept below: 1. Sonification of performance. This concept addresses the issue of learning the proper climbing technique, and specifically to learn to rely more on their legs rather than their arms during the ascent (a typical mistake of beginners is pulling themselves up with their arms rather than pushing with their legs). As the climber moves up, s/he triggers music that changes according to the pressure s/he applies on the holds. The belayer can hear the music in real time so that s/he can get a preliminary idea of what the ascent requires. The music is also recorded so that the climbing partners can listen and reflect on it together after the performance. 17

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

M

AN US

CR IP T

2. Emotional communication through augmented T-shirt. This concept envisages a solution to the problem of how to reassure the climber when s/he is stressed or panicky and thus risks performing incorrect movements. The climber wears a T-shirt enhanced with Galvanic Skin Response and heart rate sensors, as well as pressure and heat actuators. On the other side, the belayer wears a similar T-shirt that helps him/her feel the emotions felt by the climber, thus fostering feelings of empathy. When the sensors detect that the climber is scared, the belayer can make the actuators in the climber‟s T-shirt react correspondingly simulating a hug. 3. Personalised training and notification of fear. This concept tries to tackle both the issue of improving performance and that of managing negative emotions. Sensors placed on the four limbs track the climber‟s performance and a visualisation system gives him/her feedback at the end of the ascent. The data of the performance can be used also to create personalised ascents in climbing gyms. Moreover, in critical moments, the sensors capture data about the climber‟s emotional state and communicate it to the belayer through a vibration on the harness. 4. Monitoring the belayer‟s attention to foster trust. This concept tries to address a common problem among beginners, which is the fear that the belayer will not pay sufficient attention to him/her. This concept proposes a solution were the belayer has to demonstrate his/her attention. In particular, while the climber moves up the wall, the belayer has to look at something every few seconds to prove that s/he is attentive and engaged in his/her task. The object on the wall can detect the belayer‟s glance through a camera. If s/he does not look at it, s/he receives a vibration on his/her harness. The climber receives no feedback about the belayer‟s attention, but s/he knows s/he can rely on the system.

AC

CE

PT

ED

The concepts produced during this workshop allowed for an initial mapping of the design space of wearable devices for climbing. As initially hypothesised, it emerged that wearables could be deployed to create greater awareness of the sometimes invisible physical and psychological mechanisms entailed by climbing, such as balance, fear, and attention. In the concepts produced, wearables were used to enable the actors involved either to perceive these invisible mechanisms, as in the sonification concept where they are informed about the changes in the pressure applied by the climber, or to express those mechanisms, as in the augmented T-shirt concept where the information about the climber‟s mood enabled the belayer to intervene in support of the climber through the communication of his/her presence or suggestions. The communication of these messages occurred through feedback which was deployed and characterised in different ways. Feedback was either generated automatically by the technology or it was sent by the belayer, and it was used to express both functional and emotional messages, e.g. the level of pressure in the holds or „I hold you‟. However, across all of the concepts, feedback had a common feature: when used in real time, it had to convey simple messages via a subtle modality in order to avoid surprise and cognitive overload for the climber. The participants judged the visual and auditory modalities to be inappropriate for real-time feedback in this context, given that the visual attention of both climbing partners should be focused on the activity and that the auditory channel is used for exchanging instructions and monitoring the environment. Consequently, haptics emerged as the participants‟ preferred modality and was selected as feedback in three concepts because it is a non-invasive form of communication and can easily be embedded in the gear and apparel already used in climbing. 18

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

CR IP T

Overall, the explorative workshop shed light on how wearables can support beginners at climbing, which is by enhancing the communication between climbing partners. Specifically, it emerged that real-time feedback about the actor‟s physical and psychological state is important both to increase climbers and belayers‟ awareness of a situation and help them intervene to improve it. Moreover, haptic sensations, such as vibration, heat, and pressure emerged as the preferred feedback modality. Yet, a few questions, such as the most suitable position for the wearable on the body, the communicative goal of the vibration, and through which type of input the feedback may be sent, remained unanswered. Based on this outcome, we organised a second workshop with both climbers and designers aimed at exploring the potentialities and drawbacks of haptic feedback in enhancing the communication in climbing. 3.3. Study 03. Exploring Vibrotactile Wearables for Augmented Communication

3.3.1. Participants

ED

M

AN US

The goal of this second workshop was to inform the design of a haptic wearable device from a product-, communication-, and interaction design point of view. We chose vibrotactile feedback as sub-modality of haptic feedback since vibrating motors are more convenient, ready-to-use, and easy to modulate compared to heat pads and pressure strings, which, although interesting alternatives, are less easily adjustable and more battery consuming. Furthermore, given the importance of personal expertise and mutual trust between partners emerged in the focus groups, we decided to focus the workshop on the exploration of vibration as a way to augment the communication between the players involved in climbing. Finally, since the knowledge of climbing is mostly tacit and practice-based, and thus difficult to convey, we organised this workshop as a co-design activity with both climbers and designers and conducted it in the premises of a climbing gym. By doing so, we aimed at fostering a process of mutual learning between people with different expertise and inspiring them through bodily engagement in the typical location where beginners approach climbing, i.e. the indoor climbing gym.

CE

PT

We involved eight participants (four females; age M= 33 years): two mountaineering professionals (a mountain guide and a member of the Mountain Rescue Service) to conduct the climbing lesson and provide the point of view of the instructors, one amateur climber, three interaction designers (one of which was an amateur climber himself), and two people interested in learning how to climb to collect the beginners‟ point of view. 3.3.2. Method: Contextual Co-design Workshop

AC

We chose bodystorming (Schleicher et al., 2010) as the workshop method since it has been shown that, when designing wearables, representations such as renderings and visualisations cannot provide the same accuracy of experience, while situated experiences and technological explorations allow the emergence of embodied and collocated interactions (Tomico and Wilde, 2015). Moreover, climbing is made of tactile, auditory, and kinaesthetic sensations, as well as emotions and social dynamics, which are hard to convey through words. The goal of our bodystorming was two-folded; on the one hand, it aimed at involving designers in a sensorial experience where they could use their bodies to get experiential awareness of the artefacts, the context, and the activity; and on the other hand, at making climbers consider the possibility to use technology in their sport and be proactive about it. Finally, bodystorming enabled all participants to act out their envisioned scenarios in the real use context. 19

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

CR IP T

The workshop was divided into three main activities: i) climbing experience, ii) bodystorming, and iii) refinement of concepts. The first activity was meant to introduce designers and beginners to climbing and create a common understanding of the experience among the participants. Since the activity of climbing is carried out in pairs, also the following creative activities were organised for pairs. In this way, we expected climbing pairs to reflect together on the experience just concluded and build on it. Pairs were set by the facilitator in order to balance participants‟ expertise in climbing and in creative workshops; only the pair composed of the mountain guide and his assistant was made of experts. The last activity was meant to be a moment of reflection and refinement of the concepts proposed in the bodystorming. The workshop lasted six hours with a one-hour lunch break. We collected data by taking pictures and notes during the whole workshop, video-recording the presentation of concepts and collecting the drawings participants made during the refinement phase. In the following paragraphs, we will describe each activity in detail, explaining the goal and the tasks of each of them.

ED

M

AN US

Climbing experience. The workshop started with a 90-minute climbing lesson held by the mountain guide (Figure 4). By making participants embody the climbing experience, the designers could feel the required movements, the focus, the emotional involvement, and partner coordination; while the climbers could experience the feeling of climbing with an unexperienced belayer holding them.

PT

Figure 4. Contextual Co-design Workshop: the climbing session.

AC

CE

Bodystorming. Next, the group moved to the bouldering area (Figure 5) and we prompted a discussion on communication in climbing by asking the participants whether they had exchanged any communication with their partners or with the instructors while on the wall during the just concluded short practice and, if so, to report their experience. Then, the facilitator explained the problems that voice communication can encounter in a climbing environment (both indoors and outdoors) and the possible benefits that augmented communication could bring. At this point, she described the characteristics of vibration and made participants try different modulations of a string of vibrating motors in their hands (Figure 5, on the right).

20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

CR IP T

Figure 5. Introduction to the bodystorming study.

PT

ED

M

AN US

Finally, participants were asked to start discussing a new vibrotactile wearable to be used during the learning of climbing. The device they were asked to conceive should allow the communication for multiple purposes (e.g. convey instructions to the climber about how to move, make the climber feel safer, improve the coordination in joint actions, etc.). To facilitate the generation of concepts, we provided several inspirational artefacts such as elastic bands that may be worn on the knees, wrists or ankles, and small rounded felt pads, which served as placeholder for vibrating motors. By using the felt pads, participants could explore the number, the location on the body, and the arrangement of the vibrating motors (see Figure 6, on the left). Moreover, being in the bouldering area where the walls are low and there are mattresses on the floor, they could act out their ideas quickly, without the hassle of handling the rope. The bodystorming session lasted for 30 minutes; each pair produced a concept and then explained it to the others, who provided feedback.

CE

Figure 6. The use of the felt pads to explore the arrangement of vibrating motors (left) and a pair of participants play-testing an idea as part of the bodystorming (right).

AC

Refinement of concepts. For the last part of the workshop, we moved to the Fondazione Bruno Kessler (FBK) research centre. The change of setting was aimed at favouring detachment from the embodiment experience and facilitating reflection by providing a more suitable environment. Participants were asked to refine their concepts by integrating the feedback they obtained at the end of the bodystorming and focusing on how to exploit the versatility of vibration (in terms of arrangement on the body, intensity, repetitions, etc.) to express the content they were considering. Since we expected difficulty in thinking of augmented communication through vibration due to the possible low familiarity of both climbers and designers with this technology, we created 18 inspirational cards to support this activity. The cards were created taking inspiration from other design cards, such as the Design with Intent Cards (Lockton et al., 2010) or the IDEO Method Cards, and were divided into four categories: i) content of the message, i.e. what to communicate; 21

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT ii) expressive possibilities of vibration, i.e. how to communicate the message; iii) interaction, i.e. how to send a vibration; iv) form factor and placement on the body (for an example, see Figure 7).

AN US

CR IP T

Each card contained a title identifying the item represented, a short description, and an inspirational picture. For example, each card about the content of communication contained a possible message exchanged by climbing partners during an ascent (e.g. reassurance), examples of verbal sentences used to express that kind of content (e.g. “take a rest”, “breath”); and then a list of the paraverbal and non-verbal features of that kind of communication, which could possibly be of inspiration for the translation in vibrotactile communication, e.g. calm, persuasive voice; low volume; gentle physical touch. The cards were meant to help participants consider aspects that they had not thought of before and motivate their design choices.

M

Figure 7. On the left: a pair of participants reflecting on using cards. On the right: two cards for the ‘content’ category.

PT

ED

Participants had 20 minutes to refine their concept and sketch a drawing of it; then, they had to explain it to the other participants who would give their feedback on it. The concepts were analysed integrating the drawings made during the refinement activity and the audio recordings of both the explanations and the feedback received. In the analysis, we looked at the form factor of the devices conceived, the vibration patterns, the content of communication, and the interaction modalities.

CE

3.3.3. Results

AC

The concepts produced were all on topic, i.e. they dealt with communication and made use of vibration as communication modality, even if to different extents. The concepts proposed addressed different situations of climbing, in some cases going beyond the indoor experience participants had in the first phase of the workshop and grounding on personal experiences in outdoor multi-pitch routes. We present each of them below: 1. Points of attention. Since beginner climbers often do not know what limb to move first or are not fully aware of their body posture, this concept proposes to place several vibration motors along all the climber‟s body, each one in correspondence of a crucial joint, so that the belayer can send vibrations to recall the climber‟s attention on specific body parts. The belayer speaks and his/her instructions are recognised by a speech recognition system. In addition to movements, specific vibrating motors and instructions are dedicated to breathing. 2. Directional messages from a pedalboard. Also, this second concept addresses the problem of how the belayer can provide suggestions to the climber, but it deals only with movements and 22

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT tries to convey messages that are more precise. In fact, according to this concept, the belayer has a pedalboard that s/he can use to suggest the climber what limb s/he should move and in which direction. On his/her part, the climber wears a band containing an array of motors on each limb, which can vibrate in sequence to simulate directions. In addition, the climber can communicate his/her needs to the belayer by means of a contact microphone inserted in a collar and the belayer can hear the climber‟s voice through loudspeakers embedded in the pedalboard.

AN US

CR IP T

3. Functional and emotional messages through a necklace. This concept proposes that both the climber and the belayer wear a necklace for communicating messages related both to movements and reassurance. Each necklace has five different pendants that work both as buttons and as vibrating actuators. The two outermost pendants are meant to signal the direction to follow, the halfway ones are meant to ask for the partner‟s attention, while the central one has different meaning depending on the role of the wearer: for the belayer, it is meant to send a message of reassurance to the climber, while for the climber to ask for a rest. Being located centrally with respect to the body, the necklaces allow interaction with just one hand, so that the climber does not risk losing his/her balance and the belayer can keep holding the rope with one hand.

ED

M

4. Automatic status communication through a smartwatch. The fourth concept deals with the problem of communication during a multipitch route and consists in making both partners wear a watch with three LEDs (green, yellow, red) that light up to signal what the climber is doing. The climber‟s apparel has embedded sensors that classify his/her movements in three standard situations and codify them in one of the three lights: moving up (green), setting up a belay station (yellow), being stuck (red). The change of light status is notified by a vibration. The smart watch can also be used by the belayer to actively request information from the climber about his/her status by sending him/her a vibration. In this case, the climber would answer by pushing one of the three buttons in correspondence of the 3 lights.

AC

CE

PT

In all concepts, vibration was used to express a wide range of messages, such as the direction the climber should follow (as in the pedalboard concept), reassurance (as in the necklace concept), and a general recall of attention for both the climber and the belayer (as in the points of attention and in the smart watch concepts). Notably, different communication purposes influence the number of vibrating motors and their placement on the body, resulting in different shapes of wearables. In the design concepts, when the vibration is meant to give suggestions about the body, the vibrating motors are spread along the body resulting in multiple wearable devices to be worn on the limbs or embedded in clothes; but, while for suggesting direction they are grouped into clusters in order to exploit sequential vibration (see pedalboard), for recalling attention on specific body parts, just one motor is sufficient (see points of attention). Conversely, when the vibrotactile feedback is meant to communicate emotional messages, such as reassurance, or to ask for a general state of the person, the vibrating motors are clustered in a single body location (e.g. the necklace, the smartwatch). Vibration is then inflected differently according to the messages to be expressed by playing with intensity, repetitions and the sequential vibration of multiple motors or the modulated vibration on the spot in case there is just one motor. Three concepts presented a two-way communication (from belayer to the climber and vice versa) and one presented just one-way communication (from the belayer to the climber, i.e. points of attention). All the concepts allowed the belayer to send vibrotactile messages because s/he has a better view of both the climber and the wall and can give 23

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT suggestions and reassurance without a specific request from the climber. Finally, it emerged also that designing wearables for interpersonal augmented communication in this context raises big issues of input modalities. The feasibility of technological solutions is strongly influenced by the fact that climbers and belayers‟ bodies and minds are already engaged in the main activity. In the concepts produced in this workshop, solutions to the problem of the input of vibration have been found in the use of voice, of feet, in the recognition through touch of different buttons, or in the automatic sensing of technology. 3.4. Study 04. Designing and Implementing a Vibrotactile Wearable prototype

PT

ED

M

AN US

CR IP T

In this section, we report our design choices, their rationale, and their implementation in the device proposed. In Study n. 1, we relied on experienced climbers to learn about the point of view of the climbers‟ community on the use of technology during the sport practice because we needed participants with enough expertise to be able to develop a meta-reflection on the sport. Participants of that study indicated beginners as the target that would benefit most and possibly be more likely to accept to use technology in the sport practice. Additionally, it emerged from the workshops that wearable technology for learning to climb should aim to generate awareness of emotions and movement dynamics in the actors involved, and to improve communication between them. Integrating the insights from these previous studies, we designed and developed a vibrotactile wearable for augmented interpersonal communication that allows one-way communication from the instructor to the climber when the latter is on the wall. Our goal was to provide on-body information for proper movements and body posture through vibration and to investigate how climbers would perceive the vibration. We chose the instructor to be sending the vibrational messages from the ground because we considered situations where the belayer is as much novice as the climber, so s/he might not have sufficient knowledge to provide suggestions to the others. Moreover, although the messages were related to the body, by having a system controlled by the instructor we aimed also to have a positive effect on the emotional aspects of the ascent. Since movements and emotions in climbing are strictly intertwined (Mencarini et al., 2016), our assumption was that the climbers would feel reassured by perceiving the attentive presence of the instructor on them and by the practical suggestions that help them when they are stuck.

AC

CE

We developed a wearable composed of eight vibrotactile devices and a tablet that controlled them via Bluetooth. Each device consisted of four vibrotactile motors and was independently driven by an Arduino compatible Bluetooth module (Simblee) and powered by a small battery of 110 mAh (Figure 8). Each device was embedded in a cloth pouch and the pouch was attached to a strap so that it could be easily adjusted to different body sizes. Each device was located on a body part crucial for learning to climb, i.e. one on each limb and four were placed orthogonally on a belt that would be placed on the hips of the climber (so that the devices would face the back, the left hip, the right hip, and the abdomen).

24

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

CR IP T

Figure 8. The Vibrotactile Wearable Prototype.

AN US

The interface on the tablet represented a human silhouette with labels/buttons for each point where the instructor could send a vibration (see Figure 9a). Although we acknowledge that interacting with a touchscreen interface could distract the instructor‟s attention from climbers and belayers, at that time our focus was on the reception of the climber‟s feedback, so we opted for an input interface that was handy and simple to connect via Bluetooth, such as a tablet. 3.5. Study 05. Assessing The Vibrotactile Wearable Prototype

PT

ED

M

The last activity of the design process was devoted to assessing the prototype and finding answers to further design questions. Specifically, the assessment was meant to investigate i) the best location on the body where to wear the vibrotactile wearable devices in terms of acceptability, comfort, and perceptibility; ii) the level of perceived usefulness of the wearable; and iii) how climbers would experience the vibration in terms of pleasantness or annoyance, in the context of learning to climb indoors. To this end, we adopted the „Technology Probes‟ method (Hutchinson et al., 2003). Technology probes are interactive devices which embed one or few functions and are designed for open-ended use and reinterpretation by users. Since in this study we introduced a new element, i.e. the vibration, in an already quite risky activity, we asked and obtained the ethical approval from the University of Trento. 3.5.1. Participants

AC

CE

We involved a mountain guide (male, 51 years old, two years of professional experience) and 10 of his trainees (five females; age M= 31 years). When we contacted the guide, he was finishing two courses and starting a new one; therefore, despite all beginners, the level of expertise in climbing varied among the trainees: four were about to start a new course, four had just finished a beginner course, and two had just finished an advanced course. 3.5.2. Method: Experiencing a Technology Probe during a Climbing Lesson

Participants were asked to try two different set-ups of wearables. By doing so, the investigation sought to compare the efficacy and pleasantness of identical information conveyed to different points of the body. The two different configurations of the eight devices were chosen on the basis of the most important parts of the body usually employed in climbing: the hips, the oscillation of which allows climbers to shift their weight and manage their balance; the legs, for pushing the body up; and the hands as support for keeping balance and pulling the body up. The configurations were as follows (see also Figure 9b):

25

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT



In SET1, the devices for conveying communications about the hands and the legs were placed on wrists and ankles respectively, while the devices for communications relating to the hips were arranged on a belt placed below the chest. In SET2, the devices for conveying communications about the hands and the legs were placed on the deltoid area and inside the harness thigh bands respectively, while the devices for communications about the hips were arranged on a belt placed just above the harness.

B

AN US

A

CR IP T



Figure 9. A) The tablet interface S; B) SET1 & SET2.

M

The preference for one configuration or the other would influence the design of the final system. For example, if the vibration was perceived better on the wrists and ankles, it would suggest the design of a kit of auxiliary artefacts, such as belts/bracelets; conversely, if the vibration was perceived better on the shoulders and thighs, it would be better to embed the vibration actuators in the climbing gear and apparel (for example, in the T-shirt for the shoulders, in the harness thigh bands for the legs and belt for the hips).

AC

CE

PT

ED

The study was organised in three sessions in order for the facilitator to have smaller groups of participants and make it easier to follow the activity closely. Each session lasted on average two and a half hours. At the beginning of each session, the facilitator explained to the participants that the system allowed the instructor to send a vibration to one of the body parts where the climber was wearing the devices, without giving any detailed explanation about the possible meanings of the vibration. This left a lot of flexibility in the use of vibration and free interpretation of the purpose of the system. The guide was asked to send the vibration whenever he deemed it necessary. In this way, it was possible to assess the perceived usefulness of the wearable, even if to the possible detriment of the assessment of the feedback perception on all the parts of the body bearing the devices. The number of available devices was enough to outfit one climber at a time; therefore, the session was organised as an assembly line, with each climber trying a configuration at a time and one after the other. Five climbers tested the configuration SET1 first and SET2 second, while the other five climbers took the reverse order, to counterbalance the effects. Climbers were asked to fill in a questionnaire after trying each configuration, and a comparative questionnaire after trying both. The questionnaire completed after each configuration trial investigated the level of comfort of the wearables, the embarrassment generated by wearing them, and the perceptibility and usefulness of the vibration. The intensity of sensations was measured via Likert scales ranging from 1 (low) to 5 (a lot), while the effects of the vibration on the mood and the cognitive load of the climber were investigated using semantic differential pairs (distracted/focused; unsafe/safe; relaxed/stressed), as were the perceived qualities of the vibration 26

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

CR IP T

(expected/unexpected; weak/strong; irritating/delicate; hurting/itching). In the comparative questionnaire, climbers were asked to express their preference about the devices locations on the body, by comparing the two configurations for the upper limbs (wrists vs shoulders), for the hips (low vs high belt), and for the lower limbs (ankles vs thighs). First, they had to express their preference in absolute terms and to explain it in their own words; then they had to check their preferences with regard to i) comfort, ii) intuitiveness (i.e. appropriateness of that body part for the type of communication conveyed), iii) ease of perception, iv) acceptability, and v) perceived usefulness. Additionally, the researcher took notes and pictures during each session of the study and conducted an interview with the mountain guide at the end of each session. Quotations from participants‟ free answers are reported in anonymized form using the letter T (for „trainee‟) followed by a progressive number. 3.5.3. Results

AN US

Sense-making of the vibration. As explained above, no specific instructions about the use or meaning of the vibration were provided to the participants. Therefore, at the beginning of every ascent, the guide and the climbers needed to negotiate the meaning of the vibration (T09: “So, I feel the vibration and then what do I do? Do I have to turn and speak to you?”). This level of openness in the design allowed the participants to adapt the wearable to the different learning needs of each trainee. The guide experimented with two main uses of the vibration: Signalling errors: “I send you the vibration when you do something wrong, so when you feel it, you will stop for a while and think of what you could have done wrong” (Guide).



Suggesting the right movements to do, especially focusing on the hips, e.g. either to suggest shifting the weight of the body onto one leg before starting to move up: “If I send you a vibration on the right side, you need to load your body weight on the right leg and move the left foot” (Guide); or to suggest bringing the hips closer to or further from the wall.

ED

M



AC

CE

PT

The guide reported that he used the vibration to signal errors both to the more experienced trainees and to the beginners who were still unknown to him. Conversely, he used the suggestion mode with the beginners he was already familiar with and who still needed to assimilate the proper movements but who already had a sense of how to perform them (“To the trainees of the beginner course, I wanted to give a suggestion about what limb to move first, so I sent the signal before the movement; while to the trainees of the advanced course, I signalled an error in a movement already performed”; “This time I didn‟t send the signals to the hips so often, mainly because I haven‟t spoken yet of these things with the guys… I met them for the first time today, so if I told them to shift the hips sideways, they would not even know what it means” Guide). A participant pointed out that the meaning of a vibration might depend on the climber‟s status, i.e. if the climber is moving, the vibration could signal an error; while if the climber is stuck, it could signify a suggestion about what/how to move. Expressive capacity of the vibration. Soon the guide realised that the vibration could be used to refer only to the climber‟s body and movements, and not to the climbing wall (“Sending feedback on the hips works, the problem is when a climber uses the right foot on the wrong foothold. [How can I signal that?]”). In order to increase the expressive capacity of the vibration, T10 suggested increasing the number of devices or differentiating the kinds of vibration within the same device (“Maybe it could be useful to have two actuators on each leg, one on the right side and one on the 27

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT left side, or two different kinds of vibration in order to know in which direction the leg should be moved” - T10).

AN US

CR IP T

Reception and interpretation of the vibration. Some interesting issues were raised in terms of interpersonal communication mediated by the tool. On the one hand, the instructor was not always sure whether the vibration was perceived by the climbers, and on the other hand, when climbers perceived it, they were not sure how to interpret it. A few times the guide sent the vibration, but the climber did not show any reaction (“I‟m sending her the vibration, but she doesn‟t feel it” Guide), leaving the doubt whether the system did not work, or it worked but the climber was too focused on the route to perceive it or s/he perceived it but ignored it. For this reason, one climber chose to address the instructor‟s need for confirmation by answering “Received!” to every vibration she perceived. Another issue was that once the climbers received the vibration, it was not always easy for them to understand the error it was meant to signal. Usually, if the climbers were still low enough on the wall they would speak about it with the guide, for example, Guide: “Did you receive my vibration?”, T1: “Yes, but I did not understand want you meant”, Guide: “You lost your balance because…”. Otherwise, if it was not possible to hear each other, the climbers would climb following the suggestions when possible. Then, after each ascent, the guide had a chat with the climber, summarising all the vibrations he sent and what he meant by them.

PT

ED

M

A notable exception is what happened with T7. When T7 received the first vibration, he was still close enough to the ground to be able to speak with the guide, but when he asked for explanations the guide told him “try to think of another solution”, basically adding no further information to the vibration and leaving it to the climber to identify the error and the solution. It is likely that the guide‟s decision was due to this participant already having some knowledge of climbing. T07 later affirmed this in the questionnaire: “the guide‟s voice helps since it mentions the mistake clearly, but it is not fundamental since the most important thing is to identify the body part ”. Another participant suggested exploiting the open nature of the system to adapt to the individual needs of each climber, “it would be useful to reveal in advance the most typical errors of a person so that it would be possible to associate the vibration with the kind of mistake and correct it immediately” (T08). These findings show that the ambiguity of the vibrotactile wearable communication could be helpful to foster active learning by trainees and personalisation of the system.

AC

CE

Preferences about location on the body. In general, participants found wearables in SET1 and SET2 equally comfortable, with 3.7 points on average. They were not embarrassed to wear the devices on any part of the body proposed (all participants checked 1 in the Likert scale in both conditions). However, when comparing the corresponding body locations, different patterns of preference emerged. Between wrists and shoulders, six out of eight people preferred wrists (two people did not express their preference because they received no feedback for the upper limbs) along all the five dimensions. In their comments, participants remarked that wearables on the wrists were more comfortable and more intuitive, less invasive and less distracting. Further, wrist devices did not interfere with the rope, and allowed a clearer perception of the vibration. When choosing between a belt on the chest (high) or on the abdomen (low), six out of 10 participants preferred the abdomen for the same reasons they preferred the wrists. However, looking more closely at the comparison, the difference between the two positions was not very marked; participants rated the level of comfort of the high and the low belts as equal (four mentions each and two for „both‟), while the perceptibility of vibration in the higher belt was clearer (five mentions for the higher belt, 28

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT versus three for the lower one). Both belts were judged useful and appropriate to the same extent, for the kinds of communication they conveyed (six mentions each). Between thigh loops and ankle bands, the latter were strongly preferred (nine out of 10) on all the five dimensions. Participants found them more comfortable (six), the perception of the vibration was clearer (two), and the information was more intuitive (three). The guide expressed his opinions about the best location on the body in terms of usefulness: “in climbing, everything starts from the hips and climbers make errors with their feet, I sent almost no feedback on the hands”.

CR IP T

Perceptibility. Participants perceived the vibrations more clearly on the hips in SET2 (five entries) and on the ankles in SET1 (five entries). However, in no case was the vibration clear enough to allow participants to determine the correct number of vibrating motors and the kind of vibration. There were four vibrating motors and they vibrated sequentially in both sets. Climbers perceived three motors on average and these were perceived mainly as vibrating simultaneously (eight entries in SET1, five in SET2). It is possible that the perception of the vibrating motors was influenced by: The sensitivity of the parts of the body where the devices were placed and the level of adhesion to the skin.



The level of the climbers‟ cognitive engagement with the route due in part to its difficulty, e.g. “I was in distress, and I wasn‟t able to perceive the vibration anymore” (T8), “This time I was tired, and I was climbing on a route that was hard for me, so I focused less on the vibrations and much more on the holds. Moreover, the belt on the chest tended to slide down" (T7).



The distance between each vibrating motor, which could have been too small for climbers to determine the number of motors correctly.

M

AN US



ED

Finally, the intensity of vibration was perceived as slightly stronger in SET2 (3.3 on the Likert scale, versus 3.1 of SET1), but also slightly more annoying (2.5 of irritation against 2 in SET1).

AC

CE

PT

Effects on the climber’s cognitive status. The level of surprise with which climbers received the vibration was high in both conditions (3.6 in SET1 and 3.8 in SET2). This might have been due to the climbers‟ level of self-awareness or the level of cognitive engagement. In both conditions, the vibration was considered helpful in maintaining the focus of attention on the ascent (the score was on average 3.1) but, at the same time, it also stressed the participants slightly (with an average of 3.1 in SET1 and 3.3 in SET2) probably because it signalled that something they were doing required adjustment. Nevertheless, knowing that they could receive a vibration at some point seemed to improve their sense of safety (with 3.3 in SET1 and 3.5 in SET2), e.g. “I felt indirectly safer because I was sure that who is standing on the ground is looking at me, not looking around” (T9). Perceived Usefulness. Participants found the system very useful (4 points on the Likert scale) and affirmed that they would accept it in a climbing course if the instructor proposed it. They affirmed that it was a “very interesting system, useful to improve body posture” (T5), “the vibration is very useful to stop and be able to immediately correct the mistake” (T8), “I believe that this system is definitely useful; maybe it is more suitable for beginners, but it can be used for improving at every level” (T7). Specifically, participants said that the system helped them understand their errors, recall their attention to their technique (“to focus more on the right technique” - T9), and they valued the instructions (“they enhance the voice indications” - T3, “Used in this way it is much more useful, I 29

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AN US

CR IP T

usually never unload the foot that I want to move next” - T1. Usefulness was perceived as especially high because the feedback was received in real time (“to understand immediately what I was doing wrong” - T8. Some participants reported that the system would be more helpful with the integration of voice indications from the guide, “the vibration itself is useful, but combined with the voice indications it is much better” (T8); while others commented that to really appreciate the system, climbers need to get used to it: “it needs to be used regularly; the first time you wear it you don‟t really appreciate it, it‟s a new tool, it requires getting acquainted with it” (T8). The guide found the system quite useful too. “In the beginning, I thought it would have been more useful for beginners, but now I think it‟s a useful system for those that know already the basics of climbing” and “I think this system would be especially useful for disabled people such as deaf and blind people, and for children as a playful experience”. In his usual teaching methods, the guide used a laser pointer to indicate the holds to his trainees, so the researcher asked him to compare the laser pointer to the vibration system and he affirmed that “the laser pointer has a good reach, but on the other hand, when using it, very often climbers get distracted because they focus more on searching for the light than on what they are doing. Maybe with this [vibration] system, climbers can keep focused and notice the errors only when I signal them”. Timing. The perceived usefulness was closely related to the timing of the vibration. Although four out of six participants reported that the guide‟s timing of the stimulus was generally good both in SET1 and SET2, some issues were reported. As T1 described, there are three kinds of timing problems: the vibration is not received on time because the guide wants the climber to find the solution on her/his own (“I think it‟s difficult to understand which is the right moment to send the vibration: the instructor usually waits before sending the signal in order to see whether the trainee understands what to do by him/herself, but it may happen that in the meanwhile it is the trainee who asks for help because s/he doesn‟t know how to solve the problem”);



the vibration comes in too late, i.e. when the trainee is already correcting his/her mistake and the feedback generates confusion (“sometimes the vibration would come in when I was already doing the [correct] movement that the instructor wanted me to do”);



the vibration is premature, and the trainee would prefer to reflect on the movement before intervention (“sometimes the vibration came in too early and I would have preferred to have some more time to think of a solution by myself”).

CE

PT

ED

M



AC

For the guide, it was difficult to send the vibration at the right moment because of the continuity of the climber‟s movement (“he climbs fast, it‟s hard to send him feedback”) and the visual interface for sending the vibrations (“it would be better to have something that you don‟t need to look at to give instructions, like for example a joystick, because, by the time I look at the interface, the climber has already moved further up and is performing the next movement”). One trainee suggested pairing the vibration with the guide‟s voice instructions to improve the timing of the feedback, “[I think the system would work better] in this way: while the instructor is speaking, when he mentions the right hand, he sends the signal to that part of the body too” (T2). The possibility to catch the right timing remains one of the key aspects of this system (“The best aspect of the system is the immediacy of feedback” - T8) and a challenge worth exploring.

30

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

M

AN US

CR IP T

From this evaluation study, it emerged that beginner climbers who approach this sport indoors prefer to wear the vibration devices on the wrists, ankles and abdomen, between the two alternative configurations. These positions were found to be more comfortable, sensitive to vibration, appropriate for the message content and socially acceptable. Moreover, participants found the communication system useful overall; climbers valued it because it made them aware of their mistakes acting as a reminder or nudge, while the guide valued the fact that the system works in real time but does not distract climbers from the ascent. Since vibration can refer only to the parts of the body where it is applied (and not to the context), it was demonstrated to be particularly suitable for enhancing proprioception and it was used either to signal errors (i.e. as feedback) or to give instructions (i.e. as feedforward). In both cases, appropriate timing of the vibration was important to interpret it according to its agreed meaning and for the system to maintain its usefulness. Despite the vibration was not always easy to interpret, its ambiguity of meaning had the advantage of fostering active learning and personalisation of training and although the vibration surprised and stressed climbers a little, it also helped them focus more on the climbing technique and to feel safer. The probe allowed identifying two areas of potential improvement: implementation of bi-directional communication to make the instructor aware that the climber has received the vibration; and development of an input interface for instructors which does not divert their attention from the trainee for too long and allows them to intervene quickly in case of need. Overall, the key strength of this vibrotactile wearable appears to be its adaptability to individual learning needs and to the progressive evolution of a climbing course. These findings, along with climbers‟ preference to wear the devices at the ends of their limbs, open up an opportunity for the future design of a kit of lightweight hybrid vibrotactile wearable devices such as strings or patches that can be adapted to the individual body shapes. This kit should be given to the instructors who can deploy it according to their teaching goals and integrate it with other teaching tools.

ED

4. DISCUSSION

PT

In this paper, we presented a design process aimed at gaining insights on how to design acceptable, desirable and useful wearables for climbers starting from a thorough understanding of the climbing experience. It emerged that the values of this community of sportspeople play a fundamental role in framing the kind of support technology should provide in this context.

AC

CE

Our findings show that climbers usually are reluctant to the idea of using technology in their sport practice because it would contradict their values and motivations for climbing. Indeed, climbers do not practice only to get fit and release tension, but also to measure their skills against the challenges that the natural elements pose them. This perspective is reflected by the values of self-efficacy, trust, and adventure, which emerged from the focus groups and are confirmed by the literature (Cheverst et al., 2018; Levenhagen, 2010; Lewis, 2000; MacAloon et al., 1983). The value of selfefficacy, which consists in acquiring all the necessary competencies to face the challenges offered by the vertical rock wall, requires a technology that will support rather than substitute climbers‟ abilities, and that will consequently help them maintain an image of competence in front of the others. The value of trust is twofold: on the one hand, it reflects the importance of a trusted partner for the success of an ascent and requires a technology that will provide awareness of the partner‟s status and allow communication and coordination with him/her; on the other hand, it requires a technology that will be extremely reliable in order to be accepted. The value of adventure is reflected by the desire to have a technology that is not obtrusive of the flow of the activity. These 31

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT values are rooted in the sport vision of experienced climbers, who suggested to focus on developing a technology for beginners both because they might need more support to practice the sport and might not have developed yet their own vision of the sport.

M

AN US

CR IP T

From the creative phase, it emerged that wearables could help beginner climbers gain awareness of the invisible mechanisms of the body (such as the relationship between changes in the centre of gravity and balance) and of the mind (such as emotions). The best way to increase this awareness would be by letting the players involved in the activity communicate by means of subtle augmented communication, such as haptics. Based on these findings, we developed and assessed a wearable device for augmenting interpersonal communication from the climbing instructor to the beginner climber by means of vibration. The assessment during a lesson in an indoor climbing gym has shown that our wearable system addresses the value of self-efficacy both of the instructor and of the beginner climbers. By leaving the assessment of the situation and the decision-making about whether to send feedback or not to the instructor, the system respects his/her expertise as a climber and as a teacher. On the beginners‟ side, by recalling their attention on specific body parts through vibration, it helps them to acquire climbing skills by letting them try different movements on their own, thus encouraging active learning and fostering a sense of self-efficacy. Moreover, being a system for augmented interpersonal communication, the wearable prototype responds to the value of trust by making beginners feel the instructor‟s attentive presence thus promoting a sense of safety. Finally, the system does not hamper the feeling of flow since it leaves the delivery of vibration in control of the instructor, who, based on his expertise, can try not to interrupt climbers‟ ascent too often and keep their cognitive load low. Being evaluated indoors, these results are limited to this kind of climbing experience: the influence of the prototype on the sense of adventure entailed by the outdoor climbing experience require further investigation.

CE

PT

ED

In conclusion, the contribution of our work is three-fold. First, this paper offers a user-driven perspective for the design of wearable devices for sports, which allows widening the design space by identifying new user needs and roles for this kind of technology. Second, the work presented in this paper elicits climbers‟ values and the related design considerations, which influence wearables acceptance. Finally, this work introduces a wearable system for augmenting interpersonal communication in sport through vibrotactile feedback. This system offers support with learning a new sport by enhancing the relational aspects of learning and by fostering at the same time adaptation to the specific needs of a trainee and active learning.

AC

5. GENERALISABILITY OF FINDINGS An arguable limitation of this paper is that it focuses on a single case study – climbing – and it has investigated mainly indoors. Nevertheless, we believe that to some extent our findings can be generalised to other sports and provide guidance for HCI researchers, practitioners, and designers who work in the field of design of technology for sports. First, the approach we adopted - UCD and co-design– was crucial to elicit the many aspects that are involved in sport such as the sport culture, practice, and experience, and to orchestrate them with the cultural and physical aspects of wearing an artefact. This approach helped us gain a new perspective on the role that wearable devices could play in supporting sports and widening the design space for this field. In the case study we analysed (climbing), this approach led to the design of wearable technologies for augmented communication; if applied to other sports it may lead to 32

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT other functions and roles for technology. In any case, in our view this approach is particularly appropriate and informative because sports are shared, situated and embodied practices and we believe it can be of inspiration for the investigation of other types of sports.

CE

PT

ED

M

AN US

CR IP T

Second, as results of the investigation phase, we presented a set of considerations for the design of wearable devices for climbing, which combines the values and the practicalities of the activity. We believe that the concerns related to the use of technology during the climbing practice and the underlying values can be extended to other outdoor sports. In fact, although this is a very recent field of investigation, HCI literature in the domain of sports has shown that outdoor sportspeople search for similar things when practicing these kinds sports. Woźniak et al. (2017) have shown that climbers, runners and skiers across different European countries practise their sports seeking the pleasure that derives from the immersion in nature and the challenge of tackling risks. Similarly, Tholander and Nylander (2015) stressed the importance of the lived experience of these kinds of sports, which often provide also not-so-pleasant sensations such as exertion, resistance to cold and pain, etc. but are practised also with the purpose of feeling those sensations. Indeed, the experiential aspects of outdoor sports have also an influence on the personal growth of who practise them. Müller at al. (2017) define these experiential aspects according to five lenses. These lenses are „Reverie‟ which defines the liberation of mind that characterises low-exertion experiences, „Pleasure‟ which describes the feeling of overcoming difficulties, „Humility‟ as the effect of challenges highlighting our flaws, „Sublime‟ as the experience of fear and fascination at the same time, „Oneness‟ as the feeling of connection with the world that these exerting experiences provide. Recently, considering specifically a sub-discipline of climbing, i.e. mountaineering, and reflecting on the use of technology in the sport, Cheverst et al. (2018) highlighted the importance of mastery on the environment as an internal motivation to practice the sport and to comply with the rules given by the community of practitioners. In such context, a technology aimed to reduce the technical skills needed in the performance would be perceived as a way of cheating, while technologies aimed to register the performance and to prove it to the others would be accepted. The findings of these studies resonate with the values of self-efficacy, trust, and adventure in climbing and their implications for the design of wearable devices that we identified in our work. Therefore, in our opinion, the design considerations we elicited for climbing can apply to other outdoor sports, which share with climbing the same dynamics and values, i.e. sports that are practiced in touch with nature and require an individual performance but are conducted in groups for safety reasons such as scuba diving, backcountry skiing, trail running, etc.

AC

Finally, our evaluation has demonstrated the system to be appropriate for indoor climbing. Further evaluation in outdoor context is needed in order to generalize our findings to the activity of learning to climb in general, i.e. in both the indoor and the outdoor context. As for now, we consider the system to be applicable in sports characterized by given body postures (e.g. yoga) and distance between trainee and instructor (e.g. skiing). 6. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK In conclusion, the work presented in this paper offers a new perspective on the role that wearable technology can play in supporting sports, which derives from a deep investigation of the sport dynamics and practices. By adopting a UCD approach and participatory and situated design practices, we were able to start mapping the design space of acceptable, desirable, and useful wearable devices for sports. Our findings highlighted the relevance of sport values and of activity33

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT related concerns in shaping the role that technology could play in order to be adopted during a sport activity.

CR IP T

In the case of climbing, in order to be used, wearable devices should support the competencies of expert climbers or help beginners acquire them, for example by gaining awareness of themselves and the surrounding environment, and to communicate and coordinate with the partner. Following these findings, we developed a wearable technology that allows instructors to send distributed information on the beginner climbers‟ body in the form of vibration in order to recall their attention on their climbing technique and feel reassured. The system was appreciated because it succeeded in conveying useful information in real-time and allowed adaptation to different trainees‟ needs.

AN US

This work offers several possible developments for future work. First, we plan to conduct the evaluation of the prototype also in outdoor climbing lessons in order to expand the validity the results of our first indoor evaluation to the sport of climbing in general. Second, we plan to apply a UCD approach to the investigation of other outdoor sports to prove the generalisability of the values and the design implications we identified for climbing. Third, an interesting research direction would be to further improve and investigate our wearable prototype, e.g. i) by developing a “glossary” of different vibrations in order to investigate their understandability in situations of high cognitive load; ii) by improving the usability for the instructor through the design and implementation of an interface that will not require his/her visual attention, e.g. a tangible interface; iii) by conducting a long-term study to investigate climbers‟ adoption (besides acceptance) of the new technology.

ED

M

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank all the climbers, the mountain guides, and the designers from the University of Trento and from the FBK research institute who took part in the studies. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

AC

CE

PT

REFERENCES Bächlin, M., Förster, K., Tröster, G., 2009. SwimMaster: a wearable assistant for swimmer, in: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing. pp. 215–224. https://doi.org/10.1145/1620545.1620578 Braun, V., Clarke, V., 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Byrne, R., Müller, F. “Floyd,” 2014. Designing Digital Climbing Experiences through Understanding Rock Climbing Motivation, in: Entertainment Computing – ICEC‟14. pp. 92–99. Canhoto, A.I., Arp, S., 2017. Exploring the factors that support adoption and sustained use of health and fitness wearables. Journal of Marketing Management 33, 32–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2016.1234505 Caruso, P., 1993. L‟arte di arrampicare su roccia e su ghiaccio. Edizioni Mediterranee, Roma. Cauchard, J.R., Cheng, J.L., Pietrzak, T., Landay, J.A., 2016. ActiVibe: Design and Evaluation of Vibrations for Progress Monitoring, in: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 3261–3271. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858046 Cheverst, K., Bødker, M., Daiber, F., 2018. Technology and Mastery: Exploring Design Sensitivities for Technology in Mountaineering, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI‟18. p. 5. 34

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC

CE

PT

ED

M

AN US

CR IP T

Choi, W., Oh, J., Edge, D., Kim, J., Lee, U., 2016. SwimTrain: Exploring Exergame Design for Group Fitness Swimming, in: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ‟16. pp. 1692–1704. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858579 Climbing Grades [WWW Document], n.d. Wikipedia. URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_(climbing) (accessed 9.17.16). Daiber, F., Kosmalla, F., Wiehr, F., Krüger, A., 2016. Outdoor Nature Lovers vs. Indoor Training Enthusiasts: A Survey of Technology Acceptance of Climbers, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI‟16. Dunne, L.E., Profita, H., Zeagler, C., Clawson, J., Gilliland, S., Do, E., Budd, J., 2014. The social comfort of wearable technology and gestural interaction, in: Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. pp. 4159–4162. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2014.6944540 Ericsson Consumerlab, 2016. Wearable technology and Internet of things. Fedosov, A., Niforatos, E., Elhart, I., Schneider, T., Anisimov, D., Langheinrich, M., 2016. Design and Evaluation of a Wearable AR System for Sharing Personalized Content on Ski Resort Maps, in: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (MUM‟16). pp. 141–152. Feeken, C., Wasmann, M., Heuten, W., Ennenga, D., Müller, H., Boll, S., 2016. ClimbingAssist – Direct Vibro-Tactile Feedback on Climbing Technique, in: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct. pp. 57– 60. Gemperle, F., Kasabach, C., Stivoric, J., Bauer, M., Martin, R., 1998. Design for wearability, in: Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Wearable Computers. pp. 116–122. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISWC.1998.729537 Glossary of Climbing Terms, n.d. Goodman, E., Kuniavsky, M., Moed, A., 2012. Observing the User Experience: A Practicionner‟s Guide to User Research, Second. ed. Morgan Kauffman. Gouveia, R., Barros, S., Karapanos, E., 2014. Understanding users‟ disengagement with wearable activity trackers, in: Proceedings of the 2014 Workshops on Advances in Computer Entertainment Conference ACE ‟14 Workshops. pp. 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1145/2693787.2693802 Hämäläinen, P., Marshall, J., Kajastila, R., Byrne, R., Mueller, F. “Floyd,” 2015. Utilizing Gravity in Movement-Based Games and Play. ACM Press, pp. 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1145/2793107.2793110 Harrison, C., Lim, B.Y., Shick, A., Hudson, S.E., 2009. Where to Locate Wearable Displays? Reaction Time Performance of Visual Alerts from Tip to Toe, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI‟09. pp. 941–944. https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518845 Hasegawa, S., Ishijima, S., Kato, F., Mitake, H., Sato, M., 2012. Realtime Sonification of the Center of Gravity for Skiing, in: Proceedings of the 2012 Augmented Human International Conference. pp. 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/2160125.2160136 Hassan, M., Daiber, F., Wiehr, F., Kosmalla, F., Krüger, A., 2017. Footstriker: An EMS-based foot strike assistant for running, in: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies. Presented at the IMWUT, ACM, pp. 1–18. Hutchinson, H., Mackay, W., Westerlund, B., Bederson, B.B., Druin, A., Plaisant, C., BeaudouinLafon, M., Conversy, S., Evans, H., Hansen, H., Roussel, N., Eiderbäck, B., Lindquist, S., Sundblad, Y., 2003. Technology Probes: Inspiring Design for and with Families, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI‟03. pp. 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1145/642611.642616 Kajastila, R., Holsti, L., Hämäläinen, P., 2016. The Augmented Climbing Wall: High-Exertion Proximity Interaction on a Wall-Sized Interactive Surface, in: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI 35

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC

CE

PT

ED

M

AN US

CR IP T

Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ‟16. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 758–769. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858450 Karapanos, E., Gouveia, R., Hassenzahl, M., Forlizzi, J., 2016. Wellbeing in the Making: People‟s Experiences with Wearable Activity Trackers. Psychology of Well-Being 6, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13612-016-0042-6 Kosmalla, F., Daiber, F., Krüger, A., 2015. ClimbSense - Automatic Climbing Route Recognition using Wrist-worn Inertia Measurement Units, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI‟15. pp. 2033–2042. Kosmalla, F., Daiber, F., Wiehr, F., Krüger, A., 2017a. ClimbVis: Investigating In-situ Visualizations for Understanding Climbing Movements by Demonstration, in: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Interactive Surfaces and Spaces. ACM, pp. 270–279. Kosmalla, F., Wiehr, F., Daiber, F., Krüger, A., Löchtefeld, M., 2016. ClimbAware - Investigating Perception and Acceptance of Wearables in Rock Climbing, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI‟16. Kosmalla, F., Zenner, A., Speicher, M., Daiber, F., Herbig, N., Krüger, A., 2017b. Exploring Rock Climbing in Mixed Reality Environments. ACM Press, pp. 1787–1793. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027063.3053110 Ladha, C., Hammerla, N.Y., Olivier, P., Plötz, T., 2013. ClimbAX: Skill Assessment for Climbing Enthusiasts, in: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, pp. 235–244. Lazar, A., Koehler, C., Tanenbaum, J., Nguyen, D.H., 2015. Why we use and abandon smart devices, in: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing UbiComp‟15. pp. 635–646. https://doi.org/10.1145/2750858.2804288 Ledger, D., McCaffrey, D., 2014. Inside wearables: How the science of human behavior change offers the secret to long-term engagement. Endeavour Partners 200. Levenhagen, M., 2010. A Stage Model of Why Climbers Climb and How It Frames the Discussions of Recent Climbing Controversies. Journal of Mountaineering 16–33. Lewis, N., 2000. The Climbing Body, Nature and the Experience of Modernity. Journal of Body and Society 6, 58–80. https://doi.org/0803973233 Liljedahl, M., Lindberg, S., Berg, J., 2005. Digiwall - an Interactive Climbing Wall, in: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGCHI International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology. pp. 225–228. Lockton, D., Harrison, D., Stanton, N.A., 2010. The Design with Intent Method: A design tool for influencing user behaviour. Applied Ergonomics 41, 382–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2009.09.001 MacAloon, J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Harris, J.C., Park, R.J., 1983. Deep Play and the Flow Experience in Rock Climbing, in: Harris, J.C., Park, R.J. (Eds.), Play, Games and Sports in Cultural Contexts. pp. 361–384. Mauriello, M., Gubbels, M., Froehlich, J.E., 2014. Social Fabric Fitness: The Design and Evaluation of Wearable E-Textile Displays to Support Group Running, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI‟14. pp. 2833– 2842. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557299 Mencarini, E., Leonardi, C., De Angeli, A., Zancanaro, M., 2016. Design opportunities for wearable devices in learning to climb, in: Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on HumanComputer Interaction. ACM. Motti Genaro, V., Caine, K., 2014. Human Factors Considerations in the Design of Wearable Devices, in: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 58th Annual Meeting. pp. 1820–1824. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931214581381 36

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC

CE

PT

ED

M

AN US

CR IP T

Müller, F. “Floyd,” O‟Brien, S., Thorogood, A., 2007. Jogging over a Distance, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI‟07. pp. 1989– 1994. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240866.1241045 Müller, F. “Floyd”, Young, D., 2017. Five Lenses for Designing Exertion Experiences, in: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM. Multi-pitch climbing [WWW Document], n.d. Wikipedia. URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multipitch_climbing (accessed 6.3.17). Page, M., Vande Moere, A., 2007. Evaluating a Wearable Display Jersey for Augmenting Team Sports Awareness, in: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Pervasive Computing - PERVASIVE‟07. Springer-Verlag, pp. 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3540-72037-9 Pansiot, J., King, R.C., McIlwraith, D.G., Lo, B.P.L., Yang, G.Z., 2008. ClimBSN: Climber performance monitoring with BSN, in: Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Wearable and Implantable Body Sensor Networks - BSN2008. pp. 33–36. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSMDBS.2008.4575009 Patel, M., O‟Kane, A.A., 2015. Contextual Influences on the Use and Non-Use of Digital Technology While Exercising at the Gym, in: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 2923–2932. Pfeiffer, M., Dünte, T., Schneegass, S., Alt, F., Rohs, M., 2015. Cruise Control for Pedestrians: Controlling Walking Direction using Electrical Muscle Stimulation, in: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Presented at the CHI 2015, ACM. Rapp, A., Cena, F., 2016. Personal informatics for everyday life: How users without prior selftracking experience engage with personal data. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 94, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.05.006 Schleicher, D., Jones, P., Kachur, O., 2010. Bodystorming as embodied designing. Interactions 17, 47. https://doi.org/10.1145/1865245.1865256 Schmidt, R.A., Lee, T.D., 2011. Motor Control and Learning. A Behavioral Emphasis. Human Kinetics. Schöning, J., Panov, I., Kessler, C., 2007. No vertical limit - Conceptual LBS design for climbers, in: Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI EA‟07. pp. 1–5. Shih, P.C., Han, K., Poole, E.S., Rosson, M.B., Carroll, J.M., 2015. Use and Adoption Challenges of Wearable Activity Trackers, in: IConference Proceedings. pp. 1–12. Sigrist, R., Rauter, G., Riener, R., Wolf, P., 2013. Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: a review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 20, 21– 53. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0333-8 Spelmezan, D., 2012. An investigation into the use of tactile instructions in snowboarding, in: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services - MobileHCI‟12. ACM Press. Stewart, C., Traitor, P., Hanson, V.L., 2014. I‟d Tap That! Providing Real Time Feedback on Roller Derby Skills. Tholander, J., Nylander, S., 2015. Snot, Sweat, Pain, Mud, and Snow: Performance and Experience in the Use of Sports Watches, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI‟15. pp. 2913–2922. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702482 Tomico, O., Wilde, D., 2015. Soft, Embodied, Situated & Connected, in: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services Adjunct. pp. 1179–1186. Tomitsch, M., Aigner, W., Grechenig, T., 2007. A concept to support seamless spectator participation in sports events based on wearable motion sensors, in: 2nd International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Applications - ICPCA‟07. pp. 209–214. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPCA.2007.4365441 37

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC

CE

PT

ED

M

AN US

CR IP T

Viseu, A., Suchman, L., 2010. Wearable Augmentations: Imaginaries for the Informed Body, in: Technologized Images, Technologiezed Bodies: Anthropological Approaches to a New Politics of Vision. pp. 161–184. Walmink, W., Wilde, D., Müller, F. “Floyd,” 2014. Displaying Heart Rate Data on a Bicycle Helmet to Support Social Exertion Experiences, in: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction - TEI‟14. Woźniak, P.W., Fedosov, A., Mencarini, E., Knaving, K., 2017. Soil, Rock, and Snow: On Designing for Information Sharing in Outdoor Sports, in: Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. Presented at the DIS, ACM, pp. 611–623. Woźniak, P.W., Knaving, K., Björk, S., Fjeld, M., 2015. RUFUS: Remote Supporter Feedback for Long-Distance Runners, in: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on HumanComputer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. pp. 115–124. https://doi.org/10.1145/2785830.2785893

38