skip to main content
10.1145/3290605.3300515acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Honorable Mention

Can Mobile Augmented Reality Stimulate a Honeypot Effect?: Observations from Santa's Lil Helper

Authors Info & Claims
Published:02 May 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

In HCI, the honeypot effect describes a form of audience engagement in which a person's interaction with a technology stimulates passers-by to observe, approach and engage in an interaction themselves. In this paper we explore the potential for honeypot effects to arise in the use of mobile augmented reality (AR) applications in urban spaces. We present an observational study of Santa's Lil Helper, a mobile AR game that created a Christmas-themed treasure hunt in a metropolitan area. Our study supports a consideration of three factors that may impede the honeypot effect: the presence of people in relation to the game and its interactive components; the visibility of gameplay in urban space; and the extent to which the game permits a shared experience. We consider how these factors can inform the design of future AR experiences that are capable of stimulating honeypot effects in public space.

References

  1. Paula Alavesa, Minna Pakanen, Hannu Kukka, Matti Pouke, and Timo Ojala.2017. Anarchy or Order on the Streets:Review Based Characterization of Location Based Mobile Games. In Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play (CHI PLAY '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 101--113. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Florian Alt, Stefan Schneegaß, Albrecht Schmidt, Jörg Müller, and Nemanja Memarovic. 2012. How to Evaluate Public Displays. In Proceedings of the 2012 International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 17, 6 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Tim Althof, Ryen W White, and Eric Horvitz. 2016. Infuence of Pokémon GO on physical activity: study and implications. Journal of medical Internet research 18, 12 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Ionut Andone, Konrad Blaszkiewicz, Matthias Böhmer, and Alexander Markowetz. 2017. Impact of Location-based Games on Phone Usage and Movement: A Case Study on PokéMon GO. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 102, 8 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Thomas Apperley. 2013. The body of the gamer: game art and gestural excess. Digital Creativity 24, 2 (2013), 145--156.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Jon Back, Caspar Heefer, Susan Paget, Andreas Rau, Eva-Lotta Sallnäs Pysander, and Annika Waern. 2016. Designing Children's Digital-Physical Play in Natural Outdoors Settings. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1359--1366. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Mara Balestrini, Paul Marshall, Raymundo Cornejo, Monica Tentori, Jon Bird, and Yvonne Rogers. 2016. Jokebox: Coordinating Shared Encounters in Public Spaces. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 38--49. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Mara Balestrini, Yvonne Rogers, Carolyn Hassan, Javi Creus, Martha King, and Paul Marshall. 2017. A City in Common: A Framework to Orchestrate Large-scale Citizen Engagement Around Urban Issues. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2282--2294. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Steve Benford, Andy Crabtree, Stuart Reeves, Jennifer Sheridan, Alan Dix, Martin Flintham, and Adam Drozd. 2006. Designing for the Opportunities and Risks of Staging Digital Experiences in Public Settings. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vol. 22. 427--436.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Gilbert Beyer, Vincent Binder, Nina Jäger, and Andreas Butz. 2014. The Puppeteer Display: Attracting and Actively Shaping the Audience with an Interactive Public Banner Display. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 935--944. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Mark Billinghurst and Hirokazu Kato. 2002. Collaborative Augmented Reality. Commun. ACM 45, 7 (July 2002), 64--70. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Harry Brignull and Yvonne Rogers. 2003. Enticing People to Interact with Large Public Displays in Public Spaces. In IFIP TC13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (Interact '03). IOS Press, Zurich, Switserland, 17--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Barry Brown, Stuart Reeves, and Scott Sherwood. 2011. Into the Wild: Challenges and Opportunities for Field Trial Methods. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1657--1666. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Andrew Carlin. 2014. Working the crowds: Street performances in public spaces. In City Imaging: Regeneration, Renewal and Decay, T. Brabazon (Ed.). Springer, 157--169.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Victor Cheung, Diane Watson, Jo Vermeulen, Mark Hancock, and Stacey Scott. 2014. Overcoming Interaction Barriers in Large Public Displays Using Personal Devices. In Proceedings of the Ninth ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces (ITS '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 375--380. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. City of Melbourne. 2018. Santa's Lil Helper. (2018). https:// santaslilhelper.com.au/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Ashley Colley, Jacob Thebault-Spieker, Allen Yilun Lin, Donald Degraen, Benjamin Fischman, Jonna Häkkilä, Kate Kuehl, Valentina Nisi, Nuno Jardim Nunes, Nina Wenig, Dirk Wenig, Brent Hecht, and Johannes Schöning. 2017. The Geography of Pokémon GO: Benefcial and Problematic Efects on Places and Movement. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1179--1192. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Céline Coutrix, Kai Kuikkaniemi, Esko Kurvinen, Giulio Jacucci, Ivan Avdouevski, and Riikka Mäkelä. 2011. FizzyVis: Designing for Playful Information Browsing on a Multitouch Public Display. In Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces (DPPI '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 27, 8 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Travis Cox, Marcus Carter, and Eduardo Velloso. 2016. Public DisPLAY: Social Games on Interactive Public Screens. In Proceedings of the 28th Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction (OzCHI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 371--380. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Norman K Denzin and Yvonna S Lincoln. 2011. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Paul Dourish. 2014. Reading and interpreting ethnography. In Ways of Knowing in HCI. Springer, 1--23.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Patrick Tobias Fischer and Eva Hornecker. 2012. Urban HCI: Spatial Aspects in the Design of Shared Encounters for Media Facades. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 307--316. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Juho Hamari, Aqdas Malik, Johannes Koski, and Aditya Johri. 2018. Uses and Gratifcations of Pokemon Go: Why do People Play Mobile Location-Based Augmented Reality Games? International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 0, 0 (2018), 1--16. arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1497115Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Luke Hespanhol and Martin Tomitsch. 2015. Strategies for Intuitive Interaction in Public Urban Spaces. Interacting with Computers 27, 1 (2015), 311--326.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Elizabeth Horton. 2016. Mayhem as rare Pokémon appears in Central Park. The Telegraph. (2016). https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/ 2016/07/16/mayhem-as-rare-pokmon-appears-in-central-park/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Junko Ichino, Kazuo Isoda, Tetsuya Ueda, and Reimi Satoh. 2016. Effects of the Display Angle on Social Behaviors of the People Around the Display: A Field Study at a Museum. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 26--37. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Tuomas Kari, Jonne Arjoranta, and Markus Salo.2017. Behavior Change Types with Pokémon GO. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (FDG '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 33, 10 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Pavel Karpashevich, Eva Hornecker, Nana Kesewaa Dankwa, Mohamed Hanafy, and Julian Fietkau. 2016. Blurring Boundaries Between Everyday Life and Pervasive Gaming: An Interview Study of Ingress. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (MUM '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 217--228. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Brian Koerber. 2016. Pokémon GO stampede reveals the future of gaming is terrifying. Mashable. (2016). https://mashable.com/2016/08/ 22/pokemon-go-stampede/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Pavan Ravikanth Kondamudi, Bradley Protano, and Hamed Alhoori. 2017. Pokémon GO: Impact on Yelp Restaurant Reviews. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Web Science Conference (WebSci '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 393--394. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Hannu Kukka, Heidi Oja, Vassilis Kostakos, Jorge Gonçalves, and Timo Ojala. 2013. What Makes You Click: Exploring Visual Signals to Entice Interaction on Public Displays. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1699--1708. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Tony Liao and Lee Humphreys. 2014. Layar-ed Places: Using Mobile Augmented Reality to Tactically Reengage, Reproduce, and Reappropriate Public Space. New Media & Society 17, 9 (March 2014), 1418--1435.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Christian Mai and Mohamed Khamis.2018. PublicHMDs: Modeling and Understanding User Behavior Around Public Head-Mounted Displays. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 21, 9 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Daniel Michelis and Jörg Müller. 2011. The audience funnel: Observations of gesture based interaction with multiple large displays in a city center. Intl. Journal of Human--Computer Interaction 27, 6 (2011), 562--579.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. David R. Millen. 2000. Rapid Ethnography: Time Deepening Strategies for HCI Field Research. In Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques (DIS '00). ACM, NewYork, NY, USA, 280--286. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Keith Mitchell and Nicholas JP Race. 2006. Oi: Capturing user attention within pervasive display environments. In Proceedings of Workshop on Pervasive Display Infrastructures, Interfaces and Applications at Pervasive.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Ann Morrison, Alessandro Mulloni, Saija Lemmelä, Antti Oulasvirta, Giulio Jacucci, Peter Peltonen, Dieter Schmalstieg, and Holger Regenbrecht. 2011. Collaborative use of mobile augmented reality with paper maps. Computers & Graphics 35, 4 (2011), 789--799. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Ann Morrison, Antti Oulasvirta, Peter Peltonen, Saija Lemmela, Giulio Jacucci, Gerhard Reitmayr, Jaana Näsänen, and Antti Juustila.2009. Like Bees Around the Hive: A Comparative Study of a Mobile Augmented Reality Map. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '09). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1889--1898. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Jörg Müller, Robert Walter, Gilles Bailly, Michael Nischt, and Florian Alt. 2012. Looking Glass: A Field Study on Noticing Interactivity of a Shop Window. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 297--306. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Tuduyen Annie Nguyen, David Kodinsky, William Skelton, Parminder Kaur, Yu Yin, Anijo Mathew, and Santosh Basapur. 2012. Interactive Philanthropy: An Interactive Public Installation to Explore the Use of Gaming for Charity. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 482--485. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Kenton O'Hara, Maxine Glancy, and Simon Robertshaw. 2008. Understanding Collective Play in an Urban Screen Game. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 67--76. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Susanna Paasovaara, Pradthana Jarusriboonchai, and Thomas Olsson. 2017. Understanding Collocated Social Interaction Between PokéMon GO Players. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (MUM '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 151-- 163. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Janne Paavilainen, Hannu Korhonen, Kati Alha, Jaakko Stenros, Elina Koskinen, and Frans Mayra. 2017. The Pokémon GO Experience: A Location-Based Augmented Reality Mobile Game Goes Mainstream. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2493--2498. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Konstantinos Papangelis, Melvin Metzger, Yiyeng Sheng, Hai-Ning Liang, Alan Chamberlain, and Ting Cao. 2017. Conquering the City: Understanding Perceptions of Mobility and Human Territoriality in Location-based Mobile Games. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 1, 3, Article 90 (Sept. 2017), 24 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Peter Peltonen, Esko Kurvinen, Antti Salovaara, Giulio Jacucci, Tommi Ilmonen, John Evans, Antti Oulasvirta, and Petri Saarikko. 2008. It's Mine, Don't Touch!: Interactions at a Large Multi-touch Display in a City Centre. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1285--1294. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Aung Pyae, Mika Luimula, and Jouni Smed. 2017. Investigating Players' Engagement, Immersion, and Experiences in Playing Pokémon GO. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition (C& C '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 247--251. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Aung Pyae, Luimula Mika, and Jouni Smed. 2017. Understanding Players' Experiences in Location-based Augmented Reality Mobile Games: A Case of Pokémon GO. In Extended Abstracts Publication of the Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play (CHI PLAY '17 Extended Abstracts). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 535--541. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Stuart Reeves, Steve Benford, Claire O'Malley, and Mike Fraser. 2005. Designing the Spectator Experience. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '05). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 741--750. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Stuart Reeves, Mike Fraser, Holger Schnadelbach, and Steve Benford. 2005. Engaging augmented reality in public places. In Adjunct Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '05). ACM, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Julie Rico, Giulio Jacucci, Stuart Reeves, Lone Koefoed Hansen, and Stephen Brewster. 2010. Designing for Performative Interactions in Public Spaces. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference Adjunct Papers on Ubiquitous Computing - Adjunct (UbiComp '10 Adjunct). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 519--522. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Hasibullah Sahibzada, Eva Hornecker, Florian Echtler, and Patrick Tobias Fischer. 2017. Designing Interactive Advertisements for Public Displays. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1518--1529. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Kiley Sobel, Arpita Bhattacharya, Alexis Hiniker, Jin Ha Lee, Julie A. Kientz, and Jason C. Yip. 2017. It Wasn't Really About the Pokémon: Parents' Perspectives on a Location-Based Mobile Game. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1483--1496. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Chris Stone. 2009. The British pop music festival phenomenon. In International Perspectives of Festivals and Events, Martin Robertson Adele Ladkin Jane Ali-Knight, Alan Fyall (Ed.). Elsevier London, 205-- 224.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Maurice Ten Koppel, Gilles Bailly, Jörg Müller, and Robert Walter. 2012. Chained Displays: Confgurations of Public Displays Can Be Used to Infuence Actor-, Audience-, and Passer-by Behavior. In Proceedings of theSIGCHIConferenceonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems(CHI'12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 317--326. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Six to Start. 2018. Zombies, Run! (2018). https://zombiesrungame.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Martin Tomitsch, Christopher Ackad, Oliver Dawson, Luke Hespanhol, and Judy Kay. 2014. Who Cares About the Content? An Analysis of Playful Behaviour at a Public Display. In Proceedings of The International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 160, 6 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Robert Walter. 2015. Whole Body Interaction with Public Displays. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 235--238. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Dmitri Williams, Nicolas Ducheneaut, Li Xiong, Yuanyuan Zhang, Nick Yee, and Eric Nickell. 2006. From tree house to barracks: The social life of guilds in world of warcraft. Games and Culture 1 (2006), 338--361.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Julie R. Williamson, Daniel Sundén, and Jay Bradley. 2015. GlobalFestival: Evaluating Real World Interaction on a Spherical Display. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1251--1261. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Niels Wouters, John Downs, Mitchell Harrop, Travis Cox, Eduardo Oliveira, Sarah Webber, Frank Vetere, and Andrew Vande Moere. 2016. Uncovering the Honeypot Efect: How Audiences Engage with Public Interactive Systems. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5--16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Yanxia Zhang, Jörg Müller, Ming Ki Chong, Andreas Bulling, and Hans Gellersen. 2014. GazeHorizon: Enabling Passers-by to Interact with Public Displays by Gaze. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 559--563. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Can Mobile Augmented Reality Stimulate a Honeypot Effect?: Observations from Santa's Lil Helper

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2019
      9077 pages
      ISBN:9781450359702
      DOI:10.1145/3290605

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 2 May 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '19 Paper Acceptance Rate703of2,958submissions,24%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      Upcoming Conference

      CHI '24
      CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 11 - 16, 2024
      Honolulu , HI , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format