Non-Instrumental Movement Inhibition: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m corrected a citation |
Added headings and clarified text |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Multiple issues|{{technical|date=November 2017}}}} |
{{Multiple issues|{{technical|date=November 2017}}}} |
||
Non-Instrumental Movement Inhibition (NIMI) is a psychological phenomenon; it is a form of [[Embodiment|embodied]] behavior, where the body reveals the thoughts and emotions in a person's mind. During NIMI visual engagement or [[attention]] leads subconsciously to lower levels of [[fidgeting]] (and other non-instrumental movements).<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Witchel|first=Harry|last2=Westling|first2=Carina|last3=Tee|first3=Julian|last4=Healy|first4=Aoife|last5=Needham|first5=Rob|last6=Chockalingam|first6=Nachiappan|date=2014|title=What does not happen: Quantifying embodied engagement using NIMI and self-adaptors|url=http://www.participations.org/Volume%2011/Issue%201/18.pdf|journal=Participations: Journal of Audience and Reception Studies|volume=11 (1)|pages=304-331|via=}}</ref> Non-Instrumental movements are bodily actions that are not related to the goal of the current task; these behaviors include fidgeting, scratching, postural micromovements, and certain emotional expressions. NIMI is important for recognizing boredom<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/12169894/Computers-can-detect-boredom-by-how-much-you-fidget.html|title=Computers can detect boredom by how much you fidget|last=Gurney-Read|first=Josie|date=2016-02-23|work=The Telegraph newspaper (London, UK)|access-date=2017-11-28|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|language=en-GB|issn=0307-1235}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3459970/Computers-soon-know-bored-change-shown-screen-boost.html|title=Computers could soon know when we're BORED|last=Volpicelli|first=Gian|date=2016-02-23|work=Mail Online|access-date=2017-11-28|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/computer-bored-body-language_us_56cf087ce4b03260bf75964f|title=Computers Can Now Read Our Body Language|last=Gregoire|first=Carolyn|date=2016-03-09|work=Huffington Post|access-date=2017-11-28|language=en-US}}</ref> during [[Human–robot interaction|human-robot interaction]], human-computer interaction, [[Educational technology|computer-aided learning]] |
Non-Instrumental Movement Inhibition (NIMI) is a psychological phenomenon; it is a form of [[Embodiment|embodied]] behavior, where the body reveals the thoughts and emotions in a person's mind. During NIMI, visual engagement or [[attention]] leads subconsciously to lower levels of [[fidgeting]] (and other non-instrumental movements).<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Witchel|first=Harry|last2=Westling|first2=Carina|last3=Tee|first3=Julian|last4=Healy|first4=Aoife|last5=Needham|first5=Rob|last6=Chockalingam|first6=Nachiappan|date=2014|title=What does not happen: Quantifying embodied engagement using NIMI and self-adaptors|url=http://www.participations.org/Volume%2011/Issue%201/18.pdf|journal=Participations: Journal of Audience and Reception Studies|volume=11 (1)|pages=304-331|via=}}</ref> Non-Instrumental movements are bodily actions that are not related to the goal of the current task; these behaviors include fidgeting, scratching, postural micromovements, and certain emotional expressions. NIMI is important for recognizing boredom<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/12169894/Computers-can-detect-boredom-by-how-much-you-fidget.html|title=Computers can detect boredom by how much you fidget|last=Gurney-Read|first=Josie|date=2016-02-23|work=The Telegraph newspaper (London, UK)|access-date=2017-11-28|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|language=en-GB|issn=0307-1235}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3459970/Computers-soon-know-bored-change-shown-screen-boost.html|title=Computers could soon know when we're BORED|last=Volpicelli|first=Gian|date=2016-02-23|work=Mail Online|access-date=2017-11-28|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/computer-bored-body-language_us_56cf087ce4b03260bf75964f|title=Computers Can Now Read Our Body Language|last=Gregoire|first=Carolyn|date=2016-03-09|work=Huffington Post|access-date=2017-11-28|language=en-US}}</ref> during [[Human–robot interaction|human-robot interaction]], human-computer interaction, [[Educational technology|computer-aided learning]] with automated tutoring systems, [[market research]], and [[experience design]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Nuwer|first=Rachel|date=2016|title=Now computers can tell when you are bored: That ability could lead to more engaging coursework and machines that better understand human emotions|url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/now-computers-can-tell-when-you-re-bored/|journal=Scientific American|language=en|volume=314|issue=5|pages=15–15|doi=10.1038/scientificamerican0516-15|via=}}</ref> |
||
== Historical Evidence == |
|||
| ⚫ | The original observation that, in a seated audience, interest is associated with diminished fidgeting, and that [[boredom]] doubles the amount of human movement, was made by [[Francis Galton]] in 1885.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Galton|first=Francis|date=1885-06-25|title=The Measure of Fidget|url=http://www.nature.com/articles/032174b0|journal=Nature|language=En|volume=32|issue=817|pages=174–175|doi=10.1038/032174b0|via=}}</ref> Modern experiments suggesting that movement inhibition (and NIMI) were quantifiable and related to [[Flow (psychology)|flow]] or interest were suggested by a series of papers regarding automated tutoring systems by Sidney D’Mello and colleagues.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=D'Mello|first=Sidney|last2=Chipman|first2=Patrick|last3=Grasesser|first3=Art|date=2007|title=Posture as a predictor of learner’s affective engagement|url=https://escholarship.org/content/qt7hs9v2hr/qt7hs9v2hr.pdf|journal=Proceedings Of The 29th Annual Cognitive Science Society|publisher=Cognitive Science Society|volume=|pages=905-910|via=}}</ref> Using a non-visual task, Paul Seli and collaborators showed that increased episodes of [[Mind-wandering|mind wandering]] led to an increase in fidgeting, presumably because attention requires comparative stillness (maintaining that stillness is described as “a secondary task”).<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Seli|first=Paul|last2=Carriere|first2=Jonathan S. A.|last3=Thomson|first3=David R.|last4=Cheyne|first4=James Allan|last5=Martens|first5=Kaylena A. Ehgoetz|last6=Smilek|first6=Daniel|title=Restless mind, restless body.|url=http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0035260|journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition|language=en|volume=40|issue=3|pages=660–668|doi=10.1037/a0035260}}</ref> Nadia Bianchi-Berthouze and colleagues demonstrated that engagement in games (and [[Human–computer interaction|human computer interaction]]) could lead to either increased movement or decreased movement, depending on the motivational nature of movement tasks involved with the accomplishment of the task.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Bianchi-Berthouze|first=Nadia|date=2013-01-01|title=Understanding the Role of Body Movement in Player Engagement|url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/citedby/10.1080/07370024.2012.688468|journal=Human–Computer Interaction|volume=28|issue=1|pages=40–75|doi=10.1080/07370024.2012.688468|issn=0737-0024}}</ref> Harry Witchel and colleagues named the inhibitory phenomenon as NIMI,<ref name=":1" /> and demonstrated that the [[Gaze|visual aspect]] of the human-computer interaction task was the most powerful contributor to the inhibitory effect on movement.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Witchel|first=Harry J.|last2=Santos|first2=Carlos P.|last3=Ackah|first3=James K.|last4=Westling|first4=Carina E. I.|last5=Chockalingam|first5=Nachiappan|date=2016|title=Non-Instrumental Movement Inhibition (NIMI) Differentially Suppresses Head and Thigh Movements during Screenic Engagement: Dependence on Interaction|url=http://journal.frontiersin.org/Article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00157/abstract|journal=Frontiers in Psychology|language=English|volume=7|doi=10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00157|issn=1664-1078}}</ref> They also demonstrated that, during individual human computer interaction in instrumentally identical reading comprehension tasks, interest itself was sufficient to diminish movement.<ref name=":0" /> This was reflected in experiments by Patrick Healy and colleagues in a seated audience at a dance performance.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Theodorou|first=Lida|last2=Healey|first2=Patrick|date=2017|title=What can Hand Movements Tell us about Audience Engagement?|url=https://mindmodeling.org/cogsci2017/papers/0624/paper0624.pdf|journal=Proceedings of Cognitive Sciences Society Annual Meeting, London 2017|volume=|pages=|via=}}</ref> |
||
== Controversy == |
|||
While it is known that [[frustration]]<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kapoor|first=Ashish|last2=Burleson|first2=Winslow|last3=Picard|first3=Rosalind W.|date=August 2007|title=Automatic Prediction of Frustration|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2007.02.003|journal=Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud.|volume=65|issue=8|pages=724–736|doi=10.1016/j.ijhcs.2007.02.003|issn=1071-5819}}</ref> and restlessness can lead to increased movement during human computer interaction, it remains controversial as to whether NIMI is actually an inhibition of a baseline amount of physiologically required movement. |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
==References== |
==References== |
||
{{reflist}} |
{{reflist}} |
||
Revision as of 19:40, 28 November 2017
 | This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
Non-Instrumental Movement Inhibition (NIMI) is a psychological phenomenon; it is a form of embodied behavior, where the body reveals the thoughts and emotions in a person's mind. During NIMI, visual engagement or attention leads subconsciously to lower levels of fidgeting (and other non-instrumental movements).[1] Non-Instrumental movements are bodily actions that are not related to the goal of the current task; these behaviors include fidgeting, scratching, postural micromovements, and certain emotional expressions. NIMI is important for recognizing boredom[2][3][4] during human-robot interaction, human-computer interaction, computer-aided learning with automated tutoring systems, market research, and experience design.[5]
Historical Evidence
The original observation that, in a seated audience, interest is associated with diminished fidgeting, and that boredom doubles the amount of human movement, was made by Francis Galton in 1885.[6] Modern experiments suggesting that movement inhibition (and NIMI) were quantifiable and related to flow or interest were suggested by a series of papers regarding automated tutoring systems by Sidney D’Mello and colleagues.[7] Using a non-visual task, Paul Seli and collaborators showed that increased episodes of mind wandering led to an increase in fidgeting, presumably because attention requires comparative stillness (maintaining that stillness is described as “a secondary task”).[8] Nadia Bianchi-Berthouze and colleagues demonstrated that engagement in games (and human computer interaction) could lead to either increased movement or decreased movement, depending on the motivational nature of movement tasks involved with the accomplishment of the task.[9] Harry Witchel and colleagues named the inhibitory phenomenon as NIMI,[1] and demonstrated that the visual aspect of the human-computer interaction task was the most powerful contributor to the inhibitory effect on movement.[10] They also demonstrated that, during individual human computer interaction in instrumentally identical reading comprehension tasks, interest itself was sufficient to diminish movement.[10] This was reflected in experiments by Patrick Healy and colleagues in a seated audience at a dance performance.[11]
Controversy
While it is known that frustration[12] and restlessness can lead to increased movement during human computer interaction, it remains controversial as to whether NIMI is actually an inhibition of a baseline amount of physiologically required movement.
References
- ^ a b Witchel, Harry; Westling, Carina; Tee, Julian; Healy, Aoife; Needham, Rob; Chockalingam, Nachiappan (2014). "What does not happen: Quantifying embodied engagement using NIMI and self-adaptors" (PDF). Participations: Journal of Audience and Reception Studies. 11 (1): 304–331.
- ^ Gurney-Read, Josie (2016-02-23). "Computers can detect boredom by how much you fidget". The Telegraph newspaper (London, UK). ISSN 0307-1235. Retrieved 2017-11-28.
{{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|dead-url=(help) - ^ Volpicelli, Gian (2016-02-23). "Computers could soon know when we're BORED". Mail Online. Retrieved 2017-11-28.
{{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|dead-url=(help) - ^ Gregoire, Carolyn (2016-03-09). "Computers Can Now Read Our Body Language". Huffington Post. Retrieved 2017-11-28.
- ^ Nuwer, Rachel (2016). "Now computers can tell when you are bored: That ability could lead to more engaging coursework and machines that better understand human emotions". Scientific American. 314 (5): 15–15. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0516-15.
- ^ Galton, Francis (1885-06-25). "The Measure of Fidget". Nature. 32 (817): 174–175. doi:10.1038/032174b0.
- ^ D'Mello, Sidney; Chipman, Patrick; Grasesser, Art (2007). "Posture as a predictor of learner's affective engagement" (PDF). Proceedings Of The 29th Annual Cognitive Science Society. Cognitive Science Society: 905–910.
- ^ Seli, Paul; Carriere, Jonathan S. A.; Thomson, David R.; Cheyne, James Allan; Martens, Kaylena A. Ehgoetz; Smilek, Daniel. "Restless mind, restless body". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 40 (3): 660–668. doi:10.1037/a0035260.
- ^ Bianchi-Berthouze, Nadia (2013-01-01). "Understanding the Role of Body Movement in Player Engagement". Human–Computer Interaction. 28 (1): 40–75. doi:10.1080/07370024.2012.688468. ISSN 0737-0024.
- ^ a b Witchel, Harry J.; Santos, Carlos P.; Ackah, James K.; Westling, Carina E. I.; Chockalingam, Nachiappan (2016). "Non-Instrumental Movement Inhibition (NIMI) Differentially Suppresses Head and Thigh Movements during Screenic Engagement: Dependence on Interaction". Frontiers in Psychology. 7. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00157. ISSN 1664-1078.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link) - ^ Theodorou, Lida; Healey, Patrick (2017). "What can Hand Movements Tell us about Audience Engagement?" (PDF). Proceedings of Cognitive Sciences Society Annual Meeting, London 2017.
- ^ Kapoor, Ashish; Burleson, Winslow; Picard, Rosalind W. (August 2007). "Automatic Prediction of Frustration". Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 65 (8): 724–736. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2007.02.003. ISSN 1071-5819.