Make Magazine has an interesting piece on emotionally interacting with a digitally created piece of art in their January 2010 issue. The two links below are the creator’s own website showing the ‘creature’ and then the link to the Make Magazine blurb titled ‘Emotional Aquatics’. The article goes into a little bit of depth about how the interactive process actually works – namely a person comes to observe the piece, the ‘creature’ detects that someone is watching and has one of two reactions – ‘shy but playfully curious, or totally terrified.’ Apparently the viewers tend to favor the more dramatic, terrified response!
http://www.eyalohana.com/axolotl/
http://www.make-digital.com/make/vol21/?pg=23
Anyway, there are some fascinating things happening here. The article describes the piece as inspired by Julio Cortazar’s short story about a “man’s emotional obsession with aquarium life.” I’m not sure, exactly, if what is happening here in this setting is really based on emotions, although it certainly makes sense that the story would inspire this piece. Clearly, artificial beings elicit an emotional response in us as we interact with them, but as the technology becomes increasingly more sophisticated, what happens when our emotional state begins to influence them? For example, our car may be a computer and may elicit an emotional response in us, but isn’t trying to manipulate us (advertising aside, of course!) Isn’t an artificial creature ‘emotionally’ responding to us always going to be entirely contrived? Do we need artificial emotional intelligence?
I’m curious what others think…
Alex Russell
Alex is a Program Manager for Six Seconds focused on implementing effective social emotional learning programs with schools and educational organizations. She conducts research on school climate and the links between EQ and success.
Hi Alex, thanks for the fascinating links. Has anyone reviewed the Princeton University studies regarding people’s emotions, especially heart centred ones,altering predicted outcomes on random number generators on computers? As well, the ‘mood lights’ that change colour apparently affected by the mood in a room. What I found interesting was that distance had no bearing on outcome. I have had some experiences, I think most people have (or is that defensive
) regarding emotional ‘messages’ that are received by people who are in some way connected. I am also interested in the phenomenon of group adaptation to mood, and even instruction given silently by one or more dominant members of the group, which people respond to.
Some people are definitely susceptible to other people’s mood, while others seem impervious. Sorry Alex, your article prompted my fascination with this topic. The aquarium creature seems to be based on some scientifically driven computerised animation, while the studies I am referring to were based on transmitting emotion and intention to a computer. Anyone have any understanding of this? cheers, Sandra.
Sandra you have brought up some interesting points. I too, am interested in these areas you have referenced, but only as an amateur. I had a boyfriend who was a plumbing contractor, and had this uncanny ability to move groups of people as the dominant personality. I was with this man for over 15 years and it was an amazing thing to watch. He was never challenged though many times I personally believe he should have been. I don’t know what it is, but I sure wish I had it. He has always been prosperous at everything he does. Strange towns, with strangers, he can have a group following him within the first week. If it is the physical world we are talking about, this is my response.
As for connections made mentally … it does happen to me with people I am close to. I have no control…It is scary to me, and I avoid it as much as I can.
As for transmitting emotion and intention to computers, I know the government is trying to figure out that very thing. I feel it is a Pandora’s box that shouldn’t be opened. However, we have at least 3 (as of 2010) groups of fighting robots in Iraq right now. They are armed with M-two-forty-nine light machine guns. They are called SWORD units. (Special Weapons Observation Remote Direct Action System). They cannot discern when or who to shoot, so they have as yet, not fired a shot. Robots when used should be for peacekeeping, surveillance and pack mules….No more than that. I quiver to think they should ever be given the ability to decide who lives and who dies.
Who will raise the red flag, and when? With technology that has over-stepped it’s bounds? Who will decide when enough is enough? Currently, it appears their is no one. Scary times we live in.
Hi Sandra,
Thanks so much for your comments. Interesting questions! I like that your points illustrate the complexities of people/machine interactions, or any interactions for that matter. What kind of power do our emotions really have over others or even over machines? Group dynamics are indeed an interesting topic as well, especially since each situation is it’s own case study based on the given group. I liken this to something I mentioned in an earlier post about how our reactions and indeed, our very personality, are influenced by the people we are with. When you add in non-living ‘creatures’ or computers, of course the equation changes.
Thanks! Finding this a fascinating topic…