Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T15:46:04.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interactive Sonification for Data Exploration: How listening modes and display purposes define design guidelines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2014

Florian Grond  and
Thomas Hermann
Florian Grond*
Affiliation:
CIRMMT – Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and Technology, McGill University, 527 Sherbrooke St, West Montreal, QC, Canada H3A 1E3 Ambient Intelligence Group, CITEC – Center of Excellence in Cognitive Interaction Technology, Bielefeld University, PO Box 100131 33501 Bielefeld, Germany
Thomas Hermann
Affiliation:
Ambient Intelligence Group, CITEC – Center of Excellence in Cognitive Interaction Technology, Bielefeld University, PO Box 100131 33501 Bielefeld, Germany
*
E-mails: fgrond@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de; thermann@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The desire to make data accessible through the sense of listening has led to ongoing research in the fields of sonification and auditory display since the early 1990s. Coming from the disciplines of computer sciences and human computer interface (HCI), the conceptualisation of sonification has been mostly driven by application areas and methods. On the other hand, the sonic arts, which have always participated in the auditory display community, have a genuine focus on sound. Despite these close interdisciplinary relationships between communities of sound practitioners, a rich and sound- or listening-centred concept of sonification is still missing for design guidelines. Complementary to the useful organisation by fields of application, a proper conceptual framework for sound needs to be abstracted from applications and also to some degree from tasks, as both are not directly related to sound. As an initial approach to recasting the thinking about sonification, we propose a conceptualisation of sonifications along two poles in which sound serves either a normative or a descriptive purpose. According to these two poles, design guidelines can be developed proper to display purposes and listening modes.

Type
Articles
Information
Organised Sound , Volume 19 , Special Issue 1: Sonification , April 2014 , pp. 41 - 51
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Augoyard, J.-F., Torgue, H. 2006. Sonic Experience: A Guide to Everyday Sounds. Montreal, QC, and Kingston, ON: McGill Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Barrass, S. 1997. Auditory Information Design. PhD thesis, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Barrass, S., Vickers, P. 2011. Sonification Design and Aesthetics. In T. Hermann, A. Hunt and J.G. Neuhoff (eds.) The Sonification Handbook. Berlin: Logos.Google Scholar
Chion, M. 1983. Guide to Sound Objects: Pierre Schaeffer and Musical Research, trans. John Dack and Christine North. Paris: Éditions Buchet/Chastel, 2009.Google Scholar
Chion, M. 1994. Audio-Vision: Sound on Screen. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Chion, M. 1998. Le son. Paris: Éditions Nathan.Google Scholar
deCampo, A. 2007. Toward a Data Sonification Design Space Map. In G.P. Scavone (ed.) Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Auditory Display. Montreal, QC, Schulich School of Music, McGill University, 342–7.Google Scholar
Duden. 2001. Herkunftswörterbuch Etymologie der deutschen Sprache. 3rd edn. Mannheim, Leipzig, Vienna and Zurich: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Ekman, I., Rinott, M. 2010. Using Vocal Sketching for Designing Sonic Interactions. Designing Interactive Systems archive, Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, Aarhus, Denmark, 123–31.Google Scholar
Fishwick, P.A. (ed.) 2006. Aesthetic Computing. Leonardo Book Series. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Frauenberger, C. 2009. Auditory Display Design: An Investigation of a Design Pattern Approach. PhD thesis, Queen Mary, University of London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaver, W.W. 1993. How Do We Hear in the World? Explorations in Ecological Acoustics. Ecological Psychology 5(4): 285–313.Google Scholar
Godøy, R.I. 2006. Gestural-Sonorous Objects: Embodied Extensions of Schaeffer's Conceptual Apparatus. Organised Sound 11(2): 149–157.Google Scholar
Grimaldi, D., Engel, M. 2007. Why Descriptive Science Still Matters. BioScience 57(8): 646–647.Google Scholar
Grond, F. 2013. Listening-Mode-Centered Sonification Design for Data Exploration. PhD thesis, Technische Fakultät der Universität Bielefeld.Google Scholar
Grond, F., Hermann, T. 2012. Aesthetic Strategies in Sonification. Artificial Intelligence and Society AI&S 27(2): 213–222.Google Scholar
Hermann, T. 2008. Taxonomy and Definitions for Sonification and Auditory Display. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Auditory Display, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Hermann, T., Ritter, H. 2005. Model-Based Sonification Revisited: Authors’ Comments on Hermann and Ritter, ICAD 2002. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception 2(4): 559–563.Google Scholar
Hug, D. 2009. Using a Systematic Design Process to Investigate Narrative Sound Design Strategies for Interactive Commodities. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Auditory Display, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
Hunt, A., Hermann, T. 2011. Interactive Sonification. In T. Hermann, A. Hunt and J. Neuhoff (eds.) The Sonification Handbook. Berlin: Logos.Google Scholar
Hunt, A., Wanderley, M.M. 2002. Mapping Performer Parameters to Synthesis Engines. Organised Sound 7(2): 97–108.Google Scholar
James, S. 2013. The Concept of the Aesthetic. In E.N. Zalta (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/aesthetic-concept.Google Scholar
Jekosch, U. 2005. Semiotics in the Context of Product-Sound Design. In J. Blauert (ed.), Communication Acoustics. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Kane, B. 2007. L'Objet Sonore Maintenant: Pierre Schaeffer, Sound Objects and the Phenomenological Reduction. Organised Sound 12(1): 15–24.Google Scholar
Kepler, J. 1967. Weltharmonik (Nachdruck). Munich: Max Caspar.Google Scholar
Kim, S.-J. 2010. A Critique on Pierre Schaeffer's Phenomenological Approaches: Based on the Acousmatic and Reduced Listening. In Pierre Schaeffer Conference: mediART, Rijeka, Croatia.Google Scholar
Kramer, G. 1994. An Introduction to Auditory Display. In G. Kramer (ed.) Auditory Display. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Lewis, J.W., Talkington, W.J., Tallaksen, K.C., Frum, C.A. 2012. Auditory Object Salience: Human Cortical Processing of Non-Biological Action Sounds and Their Acoustic Signal Attributes Frontiers. Systems Neuroscience 6(1): 27.Google Scholar
Mukařovský, J. 1989. Kunst, Poetik, Semiotik, trans. E. Annuss and W. Annuss. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, P. 1966. Traité des objets musicaux. Paris: Le Seuil.Google Scholar
Schoon, A. 2012. Unmerkliche Eindringlinge: Versuch über akustische Kontrolle. In A. Volmar and A. Schoon (eds.) Sound Studies: Kulturgeschichte der Sonifikation. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.Google Scholar
Shannon, C.E. 1948. A Mathematical Theory of Communication. Bell System Technical Journal 27: 379–423, 623–56.Google Scholar
Truax, B. 2001. Acoustic Communication. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar
Tuuri, K. 2011. Hearing Gestures: Vocalisations as Embodied Projections of Intentionality in Designing Non-Speech Sounds for Communicative Functions. PhD thesis, Jyväskylä Studies in Humanities.Google Scholar
Tuuri, K., Eerola, T. 2012. Formulating a Revised Taxonomy for Modes of Listening. Journal of New Music Research 41(2): 137–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuuri, K., Pirhonen, A., Hoggan, E. 2009. Some Severe Deficiencies of the Input-Output Hci-Paradigm and Their Influence on Practical Design. In L. Norros, H. Koskinen, L. Salo and P. Savioja (eds.) Designing Beyond the Product: Understanding Activity and User Experience in Ubiquitous Environments. Espoo: VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland.Google Scholar
Vickers, P. 2005. Ars Informatica–Ars Electronica: Improving Sonification Aesthetics. In HCI2005: Workshop on Understanding & Designing for Aesthetic Experience, Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
Vickers, P. 2011. Sonification for Process Monitoring. In T. Hermann, A. Hunt and J. Neuhoff (eds.) The Sonification Handbook. Berlin: Logos.Google Scholar
Vickers, P. 2012. Ways of Listening and Modes of Being: Electroacoustic Auditory Display. Journal of Sonic Studies 2(1).Google Scholar
Worrall, D. 2009 An Introduction to Data Sonification. The Oxford Handbook of Computer Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Worrall, D. 2010. Towards the Better Perception of Sonic Data Mappings. In Proceedings of the ACMA Conference, 24–25 June, Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar