Concept of Interactivity
In “The Art of Interactive Design” by Chris Crawford, the author raises a thought-provoking question that resonates with my own observations: “Interactivity does not always seem interactive in the eyes of the interactor.” This statement challenges us to reexamine our perception of what constitutes interactivity, as many everyday interactions have become so ingrained that we often overlook their interactive nature. Consider the simple act of opening a refrigerator—when these appliances were first introduced, people marveled at the way they responded to their actions, such as the interior light turning on. However, as time passed, this interaction became commonplace, and we no longer perceive it as interactive as it was. That brings me to the degrees of interactivity discussed by the author.
This notion of degrees of interactivity is crucial because it underscores our ability to develop increasingly interactive technology, games, and ideas that facilitate connections among people and generate new ideas and thoughts. It prompts us to question what truly defines interactivity. Is it primarily about entertainment and stimulation, and should interactivity be measured by the extent to which it engages us? Moreover, it’s essential to recognize that the definition of interactivity evolves over generations, particularly in the ever-advancing realm of technology. What was once considered interactive—like early computers that followed programmed orders—has given way to more sophisticated forms of interactivity, such as AI and robots capable of continuous learning and response. In this context, the concept of interactivity continually evolves, reflecting the ever-changing landscape of technological innovation, aside from the other evolving fields that involve interactivity like ways of teaching and learning, working with data, etc.