Essay: TRNKT – interactive lamps that monitor and feed back energy saving behavior

Many results were obtained from this user test despite the slight lack of focus in specific research questions. A lot of specific critique was given on the usability of the application. Overall, the results were encouraging, all participants enjoyed using the application
and found the concept simple and clear. All except for one indicated they would enjoy using it if it were implemented. The digital and physical parts of the concept had more connection than before and heir interdependence was perceived as much more logical and straightforward than during the WTTV tests.
Installation
Some requests for additions to the application were made. A quiz game was suggested that would tests gained knowledge from other games. The physical installation was also subject to suggestions for improvement, as one user suggested using extra lamps for students not housed in studios who longed to participate. One participant proposed re- purposing the installation when not in use to display other data.
It was pointed out that the link with energy use was still perceived as too vague, this link needs to be seen in the physical part of the installation as much as in the digital part.
Visual communication
One participant commented on the fact that there was no visible scoring feedback at all. While removing this from the application was done on purpose to encourage intrinsic motivation instead of extrinsic, It might be wise to give some form of feedback, still without implying reward.
Recruitment and absence
A request was made for an absence function with which users can indicate whether or not they are in the building. This would prevent users from getting messages when not in the building. Users also indicated that sign-up would be easier if it were based on student numbers, and that registration could easily be required by a teacher (making a reference to another app used at TU Delft to make lectures interactive called “feedback fruits”)
X. Personal reflection iteration 3
Iteration 3 was again an exercise filled with discoveries and surprises. Testing was harder than expected, recruiting cost more effort than in prior experiments and engaging users over a longer time period was challenging. I learned that it is important to carefully examine a testing context and that it is important to adjust to it accordingly.
The testing at Welcome to the village festival was, however disappointing in terms of data generation, very inspirational, and put me in contact with a lot of influential people. My week in Leeuwarden was a week filled with realizations and eyeopeners.
In its continuation, the iteration stressed the makeability of the product and usability of the application, It has made the product very much more concrete in terms of technical detail and working, but also user experience, design detail and architecture/structure. Redesigning the front end of the application was an important step that had to be taken. I was very satisfied by the fact that the digital part of the installation was now more than an HTML form.
The need remains ,however, for large group testing, as the design feels somewhat unverified without it. Whether this takes place within the context of this thesis or not, it should definitely be done before implementing the design definitively.
Having completed the iterative part of the project I now evaluate the steps taken to arrive at this point. Most of my research questions have been answered to a certain extent, But how was the experience of getting there and how effective were the methodologies used ?
Structuring and framework
Defining a direction for the project took a long time. I struggled early on with having many variables in my design requirements, this was a consequence of wanting to personalize the assignment. I aimed for a complete redesign, with own research and own approach. In hindsight adopting more conclusions from prior work would have facilitated the process greatly.
The research phase should have been concluded before starting iteration, and findings from this should have been neatly condensed into some form of framework. In reality, research was an ongoing process and often complexified the design process even further. Overall, it can be said that clarity is key in a design process, and would strongly encourage prioritizing the finding of this over generation of concepts.
Reverting back to familiar design methods such as VIP helped greatly in creating grip on the project. When lost, do what you know best.
What is iterative design? And is it applicable to this project?
I found myself not being entirely clear on the definition of iterative design throughout the process of designing. To this day, my guidance team and I have different views on the subject.
What I learned about iterative design during graduation, is that it is wise to focus an iteration on a specific sub problem instead of creating a very fuzzy but complete concept. This focus on one particular feature allows a designer to avoid making assumptions in designing that can be disproved later in the process. After a final iteration, all findings can then be condensed into a definitive design.
My own version of an iterative approach starts with the definition of a strong concept that is then refined (completely in every interaction) in steps until a final product is reached. The actual approach I took in this project snaked between these two forms, which might have added to confusion.
I found that the approach I was expected to follow lacked a “bigger picture”, which made testing and explanation complex. While I think my own approach lacks focus, and is
not necessarily user centered. Consciously combining both approaches could be very interesting for following projects. Build a solid first concept, then zoom in on specific parts of it during iteration
independent designing
The project needed a more medium independent approach. I took the requirements and implications of the existing design too seriously which resulted in fixation and lack of exploration of possibilities. In effect, the outcome of the design process was set from the start. Having the freedom to explore different shapes, sizes and applications in the design of this installation might have produced a more exciting result, maybe even with more tangible properties than the produced design. Design is about finding the best solution to a problem, not about transforming a design into the best solution for a problem.
Fixation
As can be deducted from the last two topics, fixation played its part during the design process. While it is of-course frustrating to observe that a design is not evolving dynamically, fixation also helped to a certain extent. “Fixating” gave the hold I needed to move on at certain points in the process. While the final design really does not a great deal from the initial concept, its nuances are very different. These make the outcome valuable. Fixation was used to my advantage to get rid of unknowns and variables, and while it makes a design process less free there is value to be found in it.
Not finishing iterations on evaluations
Instead of evaluating and writing new research questions from findings, I often moved straight back into designing. A designer can keep iterating almost infinitely, and a product is never finished, but it is imperative to learn when to stop and when insights amassed can be translated into a new direction for research. This is something that I will take from the process to better implement in future designs, as it will save time and create clarity.
Writing effective questions and deciding on qualitative / quantitative
Writing the correct questions for evaluation of a design takes a lot of time. Also, requires a lot of thought to determine whether an evaluation needs a qualitative or quantitative approach. This was often rushed throughout the project. It often felt like questionnaires steered test subjects into giving the sought after answers. Similarly, doing only observations was experienced as being not scientific enough. It is wise to spend a good amount of time on thinking about the format of data produced and how these will lead to insights instead of worrying about their scientific relevance.
Prototyping
Prototyping is an amazing tool. I am a huge supporter of translating ideas into working physical models to feel and experience them. However, I underused it in this design process. In prototyping, I often focused too much on the building itself, making it work technically was more important than the experiences the prototype provided. Initially
I was scared to start building, and really overcomplexified designs for prototypes. I have realized that It is important to start with simple lo-fi prototypes and to work up complexity over time, i cannot stress this enough. Prototyping is not about selecting the right chip for the job… Its about finding out what you want the chip to actually do.
Project approach
This project was my first in depth venture into the world of persuasive behavioral psychology, which I found a fascinating and complex subject. Influencing behavior through design forcibly is logical, easy and guarantees result, but doing this by suggestion or persuasion is much more vague and open to interpretation.
The chosen persuasive approach to behavior change was the right approach in my opinion as it matches my vision in design as well as being suited to the context of the project. However, designing persuasively is something that requires practice in the same way writing persuasively would.
Social design
As mentioned before, Social Design by Nynke Tromp helped greatly in defining the project approach, but it also confused me greatly. Social design was a logical follow up
to starting with a VIP exploration, but next to selecting an approach it left me empty handed. Further research into more specific literature on persuasive design was required to actually grasp the topic and continue with it.
Fogg behavioral model / Persuasive technology
The Fogg behavioral model is incredibly useful, its clear and easy to apply, but its very focused on human computer interactions. Fogg’s book on persuasive design gives many examples of persuasive designs, but almost all of these are based on dialog boxes or screen based interfaces. I found it hard to translate these communication based examples into physical designs, which is why my final design remains very text and communication heavy. I have not found research on persuasive product design that compares to Fogg’s in depth analyses of computer programs. I found that many of the so called “persuasive” products that i could find were either overly obvious, lacking in nuance or subtlety and generally a little bit one dimensional.
Because I knew what I wanted to achieve, but could not completely grasp how I should achieve it, I often felt like i was trying to reinvent the wheel. I really had to work hard at recreating a persuasiveness in design, and found that I stimulated it both accidentally and intentionally. Many findings from testing are very much in line with literature, but it was most of the time only with hindsight that this was noticed. Many “persuasive” design ideas came from own experience with other persuasive solutions and were not necessarily a result of approach or methodology.
Other models
It was good to realize that there are many different approaches with common ground concerning behavior change and encouraging pro environmental behavior. It was also good to realize that layering different effects and techniques can have a positive impact on your design, however it is very easy to overcomplexify a design as a result.
Integration of findings
The following section contains a list of requirements generated from relevant findings that came from the iterative design process. This checklist is to be used during design of the final concept to verify completeness of the presented solution. These findings are both general and specific to the prototype testing done.
Energy
• The design must stimulate an energy culture at IDE
• The design must inform users about energy, and instill a feeling of problem ownership
• The design must follow trends concerning sustained productivity and flexibility of 
hours
• The design might take advantage of monitoring technology that is being used at TU 
Delft
• The design should focus on behavior change as a method to reduce energy waste
• The design should communicate goals of the TU Delft with respect to energy saving 
Behavior
• The design must provide an external motivator to perform sustainable behavior.
• The motivator should be preferably intrinsic as this will effect a more longterm and 
more ethical solution.
• The design should follow a persuasive strategy with gamification and product 
attachment as possible activators. 
Context
• The solution should have a tangible component since many solutions focus purely on digital feedback.
• The solution should be made with the most negative users in mind to keep the reach broad.
• The solution should not overuse imagery connected to sustainability in order to not turn users off.
• The design should fit the location in terms of size, placement, and light.
• The design should exploit the high traffic moments in a day at 9:00 and 17:00.
• The design should have appealing aesthetics and not be too businesslike or boring.
• The design should integrate different elements into one coherent whole.
• The design should not be obtrusive for passers by or annoying to users of the space it 
will be positioned in. 
Vision & Ideation
• The design and interaction with the design should mimic dynamics found in a community garden (care,education, community)
• The design should use vertical movement as a feedback mechanism for progress.
• The design should use a plantlike metaphor.
Care iteration
• The design should attempt to stimulate care through designed features.
• The design should allow for customization by the user and be nostalgic in some way.
• The design should set simple, achievable and non time consuming goals for the user.
• The design should exploit the curiosity of the user to grab their interest. 
Social iteration
• The design should be focused on bachelor students following one of the PO courses.
• The design should exploit the strong studio culture that is present at IDE.
• The design should allow for low barrier activities.
• The activities presented in the design should be varying to retain the interest of the 
user.
• The design should allow the user to indicate attendance or need/want to participate.
• The design should be adaptable to the workload the user is experiencing.
• The design should nudge the user when friends or teammates complete activities or 
join in.
• The design should not include overly competitive activities and scoring systems.
• The design should exploit surprise to trigger discussion.
• The design should make sure that participants join in large numbers. 
Community iteration
• The design should use a communications network that is reliable to prevent loss of data or downtime
• The design should be easily join-able outside of the standard sign-up procedure.
• The design should explain its own function quickly and directly
• Participants need to be subdivided by location into teams.
• The design should provide a quick interaction that is instantly satisfactory
• The design could include an extra module for non PO subject students
• The design should verify whether or not the knowledge is received well by users
• The design could be re-purposed as an alternative data visualization when not in use
• The design should show scoring, but not place too much emphasis on this.
The Final design
This is TRNKT, a community of interactive lamps that collectively monitor and feed back energy saving behavior. TRNKT is an installation that employs persuasive strategies
to motivate less wasteful actions, and uses gamified elements to educate, inspire and stimulate a social energy culture.
TRNKT is a two part system that consists of a modular light installation (the TRNKTs) that gives physical feedback concerning user performance, and an input application that collects subjective data and activates users intrinsically through a number of minigames.
The TRNKT installation has been designed for use in the IDE building in Delft and targets groups of young students working together in project teams. Each TRNKT lamp is bound to a location in the building and can be adopted by students studying in the corresponding studio.
Interacting with a TRNKT takes place over a period of 8 weeks parallel to the normal education schedule. The manageable nature of the designed games mean that they can easily and effortlessly be completed during downtime in-between periods of study.
The TRNKT installation hopes to reduce energy waste by changing the behavior of building occupants and teaching them about reduction goals and way to influence these.
name: TRNKT
A trinket is a piece of jewelry or an ornament that has little value. However, their owners are often very emotionally attached to them. The name TRNKT embodies how I want users to look at my installation, it blends into the environment but is still so precious and personal that it deserves attention and care.
How do you use it ? (Storyboard)
Step 1: Getting introduced
The TRNKT system is a system that is tightly interlocked in education at IDE. The process of participation starts during the introductory lecture for a course like PO1. Here, students are requested to activate their account by downloading the TRNKT application and logging in with their NetID (a password and username already used for blackboard and Eduroam services.)
Step 2: TRNKT mascot creation
Once installed and logged in, the application can be opened to begin customization of the appropriate studio TRNKT lamp and character. This customization must be unanimous among studiomembers, a small exercise in teamwork. Users can enter a name, facial expression and color for the TRNKT. The light module on the corresponding lamp will change color according to the input. Once customization is done, users are instructed to wait until they receive a push message with instructions and can close the application.
Step 3: Morning message!
At 9:30 each morning, users will receive a push notification telling them an activity
has been posted. Opening the application will lead users directly to the corresponding game page. Completing a game will score a user’s team points, these points will be used to move the TRNKT closer to its goal. Games are designed in such a way that they are done independently but contribute to a group total. Games increase knowledge and awareness on energy related issues.
Step 4: Afternoon message!
At 16:30 a reminder notification is issued to users who have not completed their daily task, and their team members. This message signals the last half hour in which a daily task can be done. At 17:00 group scores are tallied up and a climbing distance for the group TRNKT is calculated. Users can come and observe the lamps “growing” at this time, as they do so one by one in a showy fashion. The goal is to move the group’s TRNKT from its starting position (down) into it’s housing past the red mark over a period of 8 weeks.
Step 5: Repeat!
The process repeats daily, varying games and activities each day until the time period
is over or the goal is reached. New users can join at any time during the process by downloading the app and registering. Through active participation awareness and energy savings will be accomplished !
Sign-up procedure: After accessing the TRNKT website, a user is prompted to download the application corresponding to his or her operating system. Once installed the application opens a sign up dialog. Users register their name, student number and select the studio they want to join. After registration a short introductory animation plays explaining the goal and functions of the application. Next, users are allowed to customize their team TRNKT, this choice must be unanimous for it to take effect.
Figure 83: TRNKT’s push messages and absence checker
Push message notification: The application only functions once the user has received a push notification. Once received, a daily game becomes active until 17:00. Users are asked to indicate whether they want to participate immediately, postpone until later or not participate because of absence in the dialog that follows the push message.
Game 1: Find it Find it is a treasure hunt game that users complete individually. By finding and scanning a sticker with a QR code, challenges can be completed. The application will give a concise hint or short description of the location that needs to be found, after which users are presented with a scanning button. Stickers are tactically placed around the building to highlight features of a space that relate to energy use, like AC controls, light switches or radiator knobs. Find it allows users to discover features of a building they had never realized existed. Once all participants have scanned the QR or entered the manual code, the game ends.
Figure 85: TRNKT’s stir it up game
Game 2: Stir it up is the most basic game in the collection of activities. This game aims to surprise a user with an interesting and visual fact . One group-member receives this message at a time, and this needs to be passed along like a game of Chinese whispers. Once the all users have read the message, the game ends.
Game 3: Contribute is not necessarily a game, but a way for users to give input about their daily activities. Users are asked to share a sustainable act by writing about it, taking a picture or recording a sound-clip. All submissions are rewarded. Once submitted, users are presented with the last 3 submissions by other participants. Input from this game could be displayed on screens around the building or simply used to improve the application.
Figure 87: The TRNKT quiz game
Game 4: Quiz is a very straightforward knowledge check. Users are asked an energy related question and asked to answer in the form of a poll. If the right answer is democratically decided upon, the team is rewarded.
Game 5: Again, “Evaluate” is not so much a game. “Evaluate” allows the user to reflect on his or her energy saving behavior in the prior week by indicating a grade from 1 to 10. This activity will let users recollect the activities leading up to this evaluation moment.
Figure 89: The TRNKT push reminders
Final push reminder: At the end of each playing day, users are presented with a final push message. This message is either positive (when all users have completed tasks) or negative when there are still activities to carry out.
Prototype detail
The construction of the TRNKT lamp put a high amount of focus on being easily build- able by using rapid prototyping techniques. The embodiment is built up of stacked laser- cut rings, these form the top casing of the lamp. Inside this casing most of the electronics controlling the lamp are housed. A stepper-motor spinning a 3d printed winder controls the height of the attached light module. A slip ring makes sure no cables tangle during winding. Inside the light module, 4 bright white LEDs simulate blinking eyes, and a Neopixel LED ring makes color change possible. All electronics are connected to a Particle core board, which allows for WiFi connectivity. Power is supplied through the power cord and comes from an external PSU. The light module is designed to resemble the character displayed in the TRNKT application.
Internet connectivity
Users need to be able to control their trinket from a distance. Games need to be completable in study downtime, in a range of different locations. A number of different wireless communications systems were looked examined before settling on 3g enabled WiFi as a connectivity method (Zigbee, Bluetooth, RF for example). From experiences gained during testing and general connectivity problems encountered at IDE it was deemed wise to have the installation function on its own 3G connection. Using 3G means bypassing security features of Eduroam and functioning independently of any network issues that Eduroam might encounter. The connection is established with the help of a small 3g sim card router..
The 3g network speaks to the Particle core microprocessor on board of the lamps and can actuate the stepper and LEDs this way. The 3g network is connected in turn to the internet, which allows input into a web interface by the users. By sending simple requests to the microprocessor functions can be triggered telling the lamp what to do.
Digital prototype
Next to the physical prototype there is also a digital application prototype. This prototype is a click-able version of the application presented in the next section. The application is built in Axure (front end prototyping /wire-framing software) and was exported as an HTML page to be viewed in a web browser anywhere and on any device. The HTML generated was adjusted to incorporate simple API request sending on button clicks. This way, actual physical feedback can be given as a reaction to actions performed in the digital prototype
Behavior & state transition diagram
The physical part of the design has its own behavior that is dependent on how users handle performing activities the application requests of them. This behavior is meant to remind passers by of the installation how their team is performing on the whole and on a day to day basis. To explain this behavior you will find a state transition diagram below. This state transition diagram shows how the TRNKTs become anxious when there is low input and little time left to complete daily games, but also how it celebrates receiving of input and completion of the overall goal.
How does it fit the strategies and how is it persuasive ?
So how is the product designed to persuade users to better their behavior, what qualities found from research show in this final design? And how do they work at increasing the likelihood of a behavior change? The diagram below explains how each step in the activity of interacting with TRNKT boosts motivation to change behavior.
Medium qualities: The physical part of the installation provides the experience of visual representation of energy saving motivation throughout the building. Users can see and compare their own input as compared to that of their peers. The comparison is meant to promote feelings of peer evaluation, competition and peer pressure in order to achieve behavior change.
Social actor qualities: The TRNKT application is a persuasive system that takes on
the role of a social actor. The created character talks to the user in the form of informal prompts as if it were a living thing or being. Upkeep of the relationship becomes a driving factor in behavior change.
Endowed progress: By requiring sign-up in a first lecture, TRNKT creates an “Endowed progress” effect. This dictates that humans are naturally inclined to finish something they’ve started and that the closer we are to completing a goal the more effort we will put into it (Nunes et al., 2006).
Attachment as motivator: TRNKT replacements motivation for sustainability related tasks by attachment for towards a product. The bond forged through the customization of the character is meant to subconsciously stimulate a feeling of attachment to the product which in turn will make users care for it by changing their own behavior.
Appointment dynamic: The application follows a set schedule and creates a daily pattern that keeps the user coming back. This “appointment dynamic” is beneficial to reinforcing habit formation.(Badgeville, 2015)
Gamified: TRNKT focuses on gamifying without giving extrinsic motivation. No rewards, badges or levels are given or earned, participation in itself is meant to be sufficiently gratifying.
Variation: The application offers a variation in games and activities and makes activities even more variable by allowing user input. This variation postpones “hedonic adaptation”. Hedonic adaptation describes the decline in state of happiness over time in relation to
a new product or service.(Lyubomirsky ,2011) By making a product unpredictable and varying we can change this.
Social as motivator: The application provides a social stimulus for doing sustainable actions. Games are designed in such a way that they can be completed individually, but their effect increases when done in group. Social activity is of-course also rewarding in itself. The final progress feedback moment is a collective activity that can be observed in a group setting.
Vision check
So do the interactions resemble the intended or envisioned interactions? It was determined that these should resemble a community garden and this has definitely been achieved to a large extent in that:
The activities are social, there is a physical place created where users can congregate and enjoy the fruits of their efforts. There is a caring factor at play, where users take care of an object together and users are being educated and stimulated to exchange information and knowledge concerning sustainability. The only threat to achieving this interaction is elements of competition, which i have attempted to downplay by removing reward, but it remains to be seen if this holds up in a real use scenario.
Checking integration
Next to doing an evaluation of the vision, it is also necessary to check whether we have fulfilled the entire list of requirements composed in previous sections. The next section runs through each point and illustrates how the design has dealt with it.
Does it stimulate energy culture ?
Yes, by encouraging conversation, knowledge exchange, groupwork and discussion TRNKT promotes an energy as being an important topic.
Does it inform users about energy, and instill a feeling of problem ownership?
TRNKT is informative in a number of ways: It presents surprising and visual facts, encourages discovery, tests knowledge and stimulates contribution of information. Through its educative content, users will be made more aware that energy waste is everyone’s problem.
Does it follow trends concerning sustained productivity and flexibility of hours
TRNKT allows the user to postpone games to another more convenient moment, it follows a set 9-5 schedule so it does not specifically take flexibility of hours into account
Does it take advantage of monitoring technology that is being used at TU Delft
TRNKT is based on subjective self reporting, no monitoring technologies are needed.
Does it focus on behavior change as a method to reduce energy waste?
TRNKT’s energy savings are purely behavior based
Does it communicate goals of the TU Delft with respect to energy saving?
The introduction animation explains clearly what the goals of the TU Delft are.
Does it provide an external motivator to perform sustainable behavior?
TRNKT uses a number of external motivators to encourage behavior: Product attachment, Gamification, Persuasive prompting etc.
Is this an intrinsic motivator?
Yes! The motivation generated is completely self sustained, there is no gain to be had from participating in the TRNKT program other than gratification!
Does it have a tangible component ?
TRNKT is a two part system that has a tangible component. The tangible component takes the form of a physical data feedback visualization
Is it made with the most negative users in mind to keep the reach broad ?
TRNKT was made for every one, it does not adopt a very pronounced style or character. It is customizable to the user’s needs and wants.
Does it not overuse imagery connected to sustainability in order to not turn users off ?
It does not, TRNKT uses only subtle amounts of “green”.
Does it fit the location in terms of size, placement, and light?
While TRNKT uses light as a communication tool, its main feedback mechanism is movement. Hanging the installation will require slight modification to the environment.
Does it exploit the high traffic moments in a day at 9:00 and 17:00 ?
TRNKT follows a daily schedule, morning high intensities are used to send out daily activities, the afternoon intensities are used for giving visual feedback in the installation part of the design.
Does it have appealing aesthetics, not be too businesslike or boring.
This is somewhat subjective but TRNKTs do not have a businesslike aesthetic, nor are they boring.
Does it integrate different elements into one coherent whole?
While TRNKT is a hybrid, two part system, there is clear coherence between the application and physical elements of the design.
Is it obtrusive for passers by or annoying to users of the space it will be positioned in?
The TRNKTS don’t use sound or extreme amounts of light or movement, they
are not very distracting. Interaction happens purely via the application, therefore obstructive situations will not occur!
Does it use vertical movement as a feedback mechanism for progress?
Yes it does !
Does use a plantlike metaphor?
The installation does not employ this metaphor directly, the used metaphor evolved along with the design process. However, lamps to “grow”.
Does it attempt to stimulate care through designed features?
TRNKT stimulates care through attachment to the created personal character, it uses social actor qualities to bond with the user.
Checking integration
Next to doing an evaluation of the vision, it is also important to check whether we have fulfilled the entire list of requirements composed in previous sections. The next section runs through each point and illustrates how the design has dealt with it.
Does it allow for customization by the user and is it nostalgic in some way?
The TRNKT app allows for customization of a character as mentioned.
Does it provide simple, achievable and non time consuming goals for the user?
The activities and games are simple and quick, they can be completed individually.
Does it exploit the curiosity of the user to grab their interest?
The behavior of the physical installation is meant to attract attention and create curiosity. Instead of being completely static the individual modules have a mood that is dependent on amount of participation.
Does it focus on bachelor students following one of the PO courses? And Does it exploit the strong studio culture that is present at IDE?
Yes, the TRNKT system is specifically tailored to PO students that are studying in the studios at IDE. Each studio has its own module that groups collectively care for.
Are the activities presented in the design varied to retain the interest of the user?
To retain the user’s interest TRNKT has 5 different “games”. Some of these games even allow user input.
Does it allow the user to indicate attendance or need/want to participate?
Yes! The attendance prompt asks a user whether he/she is in the IDE building.
Is it adaptable to the workload the user is experiencing?
Yes! The attendance prompt also allows postponing or ignoring of activities.
Does nudge the user when friends or teammates complete activities or join in?
The physical part of the installation goes into celebration state every time user input is received, reminding users that teammates are using TRNKT.
Does it not include overly competitive activities and scoring systems?
There is no scoreboard or reward/point system, this takes the competitive edge off the games. Of-course the physical installation creates an overview, creating a form of competition.
Does it exploit surprise to trigger discussion.
The “stir it up” game is based entirely on this principle, presenting surprising and novel facts to create a topic of conversation
Does it make sure that participants join in large numbers?
TRNKT makes use of lectures to kindly request participation, through this it hopes to gain a large number of adopters.
Does it use a communications network that is reliable to prevent loss of data or downtime
Instead of using the institution’s own network, the TRNKT installation connects to the internet via a 3g router, this means it can function independently.
The design should be easily join-able outside of the standard sign-up procedure.
Everyone can join in, provided you resister to a studio (if you are not currently following education in studios your old studio is also allowed). Posters placed in the area surrounding the installation will advise users to visit the TRNKT website and register.
The design should explain its own function quickly and directly
The function of the installation is not entirely clear at a glance, however, once the application is installed the introductory animation takes care of explaining purpose and function.
Participants need to be subdivided by location into teams.
Participants participate as teams by studio
The design should provide a quick interaction that is instantly satisfactory
The design provides a short physical feedback moment when a game is completed as it goes into the celebration state… However this takes some time and effort.
The design could include an extra module for non PO subject students
Not currently in the design, but since the system is modular, this is alway possible through expansion.
The design should verify whether or not the knowledge is received well by users
The Quiz game takes care of knowledge verification
The design could be re-purposed as an alternative data visualization when not in use
Absolute possibility, TRNKT module code can be updated wirelessly.
The design should show scoring, but not place too much emphasis on this.
The app shows a completion page once an activity is done. However, total feedback will only be visible in the physical installation
The final product presented in this graduation thesis is a product nearing completion. I strongly believe that the TRNKT system is a system that is very applicable for use in the IDE building and can contribute to a better, more educated, more social and healthier environment… But there are a number of steps that still have to be taken to make TRNKT a reality.