by muhammad.turk -

The Trap of Perfection: Why “Easy” is the Enemy

Design & Research | Master Thesis Log 09

In my last post, I told you I was going to spend some time experimenting with my smartphone camera—really pushing the AI settings to see what they could do. I wanted to see if I could find a way to love the automation.

Well, I tried. And I found something interesting: I hated it.

The Experiment I went out with just my phone. No heavy gear, no lenses, just the device in my pocket. I took pictures of architecture, people, and shadows.

Technically? The photos were incredible. The AI balanced the highlights perfectly. The “Night Mode” saw things my eyes couldn’t even see. The colors were vibrant and sharp. I didn’t have to think about shutter speed or ISO. I just tapped the screen.
It was effortless. It was perfect.
And that is exactly the problem.

The Missing Ingredient I realized that when the camera does everything, the satisfaction disappears.

When I use my manual camera, I am constantly solving problems. Is the light too harsh? Do I need to lower the shutter speed? Is the focus right? When I finally get the shot, I feel a rush of dopamine because I solved the puzzle.

With the AI phone camera, there was no puzzle. It was just… consumption. I wasn’t making an image; I was just collecting one.

The “Happy Accident” I also realized that automation kills the “happy accident.”

Some of my best photos happened because I made a mistake. Maybe the shutter was too slow and created a beautiful blur. Maybe the exposure was dark and created a moody silhouette.

My phone refused to let me make those mistakes. It “fixed” everything instantly. It sanitized the creativity right out of the process.

The Realization This experiment taught me more than any interview could. It taught me that friction is necessary for art.

We don’t play video games that are impossible to lose. We don’t watch movies where everything goes perfectly for the hero. We need the struggle.

So, as I move toward my final design concept, I know one thing for sure: My solution cannot just be “easier.” It has to be “harder” in the right way. We need to bring the struggle back.

3d headphones on a website
by (B)aul -

Integration of 3D Models on the Web p.01

The integration of 3D-models, -visual effects and -interactive graphics into websites has evolved from a once niche application into a powerful tool. In the past century, this technical challenge turned into a widespread practice, used by many digital marketplaces to preview products. In recent years especially, the advances of browser-based graphics have transformed the way digital content is experienced. Today, whole games can be developed and played inside of a browser. Something that was unthinkable just a few years ago.

The Technical Foundation: WebGL and WebGPU

WebGL (Web Graphics Library) has served as the cornerstone technology enabling 3D graphics in browsers since its release in 2011. It is a JavaScript API (Application Programming Interface) that’s based on the OpenGL family of APIs. With the use of WebGL, developers are able to render 3D and 2D graphics directly inside of the browser without the need for additional plugins. By providing direct access to the systems GPU (Graphics Processing Unit), WebGL supports hardware acceleration for rendering which significantly improves visual performance. This allows developers to implement realistic lighting, detailed textures and dynamic animations that would otherwise be very CPU (Central Processing Unit) intensive. With efficient GPU utilization, WebGL supports advanced visuals such as reflections, shadows and particle systems.

As time passed and GPU technology continued to developed, demands for higher performance and better visuals grew. This advancement lead to the introduction of WebGPU in 2023. It is built with modern GPU APIs such as Direct3D 12, Metal and Vulkan which lets it more efficiently communicate with the new hardware systems. This significantly increased performance and enabled new possibilities for developers.

Benchmarks between the two technologies showed a drastic improvements regarding performance. An example would be a metaball demo that ran at 8 FPS on WebGL which WebGPU handled easily with a Frame rate of 60 which is almost a 10x improvement over the old technology.
WebGPUs architecture mirrors modern native GPU programming practices as it offloads most of the rendering directly to the GPU. This way the browsers main JavaScript thread is free to be able to handle user interactions etc. resulting in smoother and more responsive experiences.

The Technical Foundation: High-Level Frameworks

While APIs like WebGL and WebGPU provide the low-level interface to GPU hardware, using them directly requires vast knowledge in graphics programming and massive amounts of code to run even the most basic tasks. As this is a very time intensive tasks, a variety of high-level frameworks have emerged that simplify the process and enable developers to focus on design instead of programming.

Three.js

Probably the most widely used framework for creating 3D web applications is Three.js. It is build on top of WebGL and offers a simplified approach to 3D graphics within the browser and it is open-source.

Three.js itself uses a system that organizes 3D scenes through a well structured hierarchy known as a scene graph. This manages the relationships among the elements in a scene such as cameras, lights, meshes and models.

Three.js is made up of the renderer, which enables the viewer to see the objects, lights, etc. placed into the scene. The scene is made up of all the objects, such as lights, camera and meshes. Then there is geometry, which are the individual vertexes of the objects and materials, which represent the surface properties of the objects. Meshes are just a combination of both materials and geometry. Textures are images used by the materials to represent the surface properties and finally light, which is used to light up the scene, to be able to see the meshes.

With this hierarchy, Three.js simplifies the developing of interactive 3D visualizations and animations for the web.

Babylon.js

Another powerful framework is Babylon.js, a real time 3D render engine that was originally developed in TypeScript and was compiled to JavaScript to ensure browser compatibility. Babylon.js is designed for large-scale interactive applications and supports a wide array of use cases such as virtual worlds and educational platforms.

Something that sets Babylon.js apart is its comprehensive and well documented ecosystem that includes an interactive playground for testing and experimenting. The engine includes advanced features such as post-processing effects and Gizmos (tool for real time manipulation). These tools make Babylon.js a particularly powerful tool in the hands of a developer for complex interactive environments that require flexible user interaction.

Frameworks like Three.js and Babylon.js bridge the gap between GPU-level programming and high-level web development, enabling designers and programmers to integrate interactive 3D experiences seamlessly into web applications.

SOURCES

1: https://www.mongeyplunkettmotors.ie/2025/08/30/how-webgl-powers-engaging-browser-games-today/
2: https://dev.to/himj266/delving-into-the-world-of-3d-web-from-webgl-to-threejs-and-react-three-fiber-23kh
3: https://developer.chrome.com/blog/webgpu-io2023
4: https://texturecompression.com/blog/ktx2-format-guide

by karen.johannesen -

Personal experience & thoughts

I have myself attempted to use matchmaking apps for meeting people, primarily in the sense of friendships. Here I have been able to connect with people in the city I live in, or a city I might be visiting. These apps allow you to share your interests and write about yourself so that you can find other, likeminded people. The most famous apps are primarily made for dating, however, since they first became known to me I have seen them gradually implementing features to help you look just for friends as well. There are also complete separate apps focused on making friends.

The Meet-up-problem

The problem with regular matchmaking apps is that you have to arrange the meetup yourself. There are limited functions that “force” this activity. What can happen then is that people will chat and get to know each other online before deciding if this is someone you would like to meet. In such, people are able to create online connections from their homes, without having to put the time and effort into arranging a meetup. This can seem positive, but it also has the negative effect that you might not get to know the person fully. You might be thrown off by certain text messages, without properly understanding what they meant. This way you might stop keeping up contact without someone and never actually meet. In order to actually meet it requires effort, at least one person needs to take the initiative and ask. Whether or not a person initiates this is very individual, some may not feel fully secure, others might feel not that interested anymore after talking, timing & schedules might be a problem, and so on. 

The picture problem

All apps allow for some sort of image sharing, often about 6 images. This is an opportunity to show more of your identity, what you usually get up to, etc. The problem, like with any other social media, is that one often risks portraying life better, more interesting, and picture perfect than it actually is. Just like messages, images can also easily be misinterpreted and can throw people off. When it comes to dating, where looks might be important for some, images where people portray their best side might give higher expectations than reality. However, images can create a little sense of safety as you can see more of who this person is. Although in today’s day and age, this sense of safety does not reach far, as one is never guaranteed to not get catfished. Seeing the progress of AI these days, it will definitely become even easier to create false images. 

by julia.trummer -

#8 Older Adults Approach to Learning

Update

So last week we had our peer review and I got some really interesting insights into what I could have done better with my blog posts. One big takeaway was that I probably should have stuck closer to the research question I set at the beginning of the course. That said, I think I needed that phase where I went more into “research mode” and just explored what’s already out there and what other people have worked on. I wanted to check whether the things I was talking about actually made sense in the first place. And yeah, they kind of did, but I can definitely see that I need to go much deeper into the topic of interaction design for the ageing population. This topic feels like a natural extension of accessibility and it’s especially important to me because I truly believe that access to digital products can help everyone.

This is why I will use these last two blog entries to cover my initial research questions.

How do older adults approach learning?

I asked myself this questions because sometimes I see elderly that

Older adults’ approach to learning is an active process of adaptation and integration, in which new information is filtered through many years of existing knowledge and personal mental models [1]. Their learning approach is often characterised by a preference for environmental support and immediate practical utility, which helps compensate for age-related changes in cognitive processing capacity [1].

Environmental Support refers to the external stimuli, tools or contextual cues that interact with an individual’s internal mental and physical operations to facilitate successful functioning. [2]

Cognitive Strategies and Processing

While for most older adults the desire to learn remains strong, the biological and cognitive mechanisms used to acquire those new skills undergo significant shifts. [1]

  • Processing Resources: Learning is often influenced by reductions in processing speed, working memory capacity and attentional focus. Because of that, older learners generally require more time to master new skills compared to younger adults. [1]
  • Strategy Selection: Older adults tend to initiate effective learning strategies less spontaneously than younger generations. They often perform a “cost-benefit” analysis, dropping strategies that are perceived as too effortful relative to their perceived efficacy. [1]
  • Thoroughness vs. Scanning: When searching for information, seniors often demonstrate greater thoroughness, for instance, examining multiple hyperlinks in detail rather than scanning and clicking only a few. [3]
  • Self-Initiated Processing: Deficits in learning are most apparent in tasks requiring effortful “self-initiated” processing, such as the active reorganisation of new material. [1]

Unique Mental Models

Older adults possess distinct mental models that shape how they conceptualise and interact with new information, particularly in technology.

  • Linear Logic (Storytelling): Seniors often intuitively adopt a linear, text-based approach to learning, resembling a storytelling session. This frequently clashes with modern digital design, which relies on multi-layered, screen-based logic. [3]
  • Focus on Social Norms: Older learners often prioritise social norms and “politeness” within their mental models. For example, in design workshops, some seniors insisted that digital interfaces should “thank” the user, sometimes valuing this politeness over technical accessibility features like font size. [3]
  • Contextual Challenges: Learning can be hindered by contextual confusion, where similar-looking elements (such as a search bar and an address field in a browser) are mistaken for one another. [3]

Sources

[1] I. Tournier, ‘Learning and adaptation in older adults: An overview of main methods and theories’, Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, vol. 37, p. 100466, 2022.

[2] F. Craik, ‘Memory Changes in Normal Aging’, Current Directions in Psychological Science – CURR DIRECTIONS PSYCHOL SCI, vol. 3, pp. 155–158, 10 1994.

[3] D. Orzeszek et al., ‘Beyond Participatory Design: Towards a Model for Teaching Seniors Application Design’, arXiv [cs.CY]. 2017.

[4] G. A. Wildenbos, L. Peute, and M. Jaspers, “Aging barriers influencing mobile health usability for older adults: A literature based framework (MOLD-US),” Int. J. Med. Inform., vol. 114, pp. 66–75, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2018.03.012.

by ylva.larsen -

Interview findings

Overall Overview 

Across the six interviews it appears that doomscrolling is a habit driven by boredom, free time, fatigue, or a desire to stay informed. While the participants differ in age, many describe similar emotional patterns such as curiosity at first, followed by discomfort, guilt, or mental fatigue. 

Frequency & Intensity 

  • Daily or almost daily doomscrolling: 3 out of 6 participants 
  • 10-year-old 
  • 22-year-old 
  • 61-year-old 
  • Occasional doomscrolling (a few times a week): 3 out of 6 participants 
  • 25-year-old 
  • 60-year-old 
  • 70-year-old 
  • More frequent among people with: 
  • A lot of free time 
  • Fatigue or low energy 
  • Unemployment or sick leave 
  • Limited alternative activities 

Common Triggers 

Most frequently mentioned triggers: 

  • Boredom / having no planes (4/6) 
  • Fatigue and low energy (3/6) 
  • Loneliness/being alone (3/6) 
  • Major news events (3/6) 
  • Too much free time (2/6) 

Notably, doomscrolling often starts unintentionally, people log on for something else and get pulled in. 

Type of content  

Recurring content categories include: 

  • News & global events (politics, economy, climate) 
  • Comment sections (especially negative ones) 
  • Health-related content 
  • Short-form videos 
  • Drama/conflict-based content (gaming drama, political debates) 

Emotional Experience during and after 

During doomscrolling people commonly reported: 

  • Curiosity or engagement at first 
  • Emotional detachment or numbness 
  • Tension, anxiety, or discomfort 

After stopping the most common feelings were: 

  • Guilt (4/6) 
  • Mental fatigue or heaviness (4/6) 
  • Sadness or discouragement (3/6) 
  • Relief (1/6) 

A repeated pattern is that people continue scrolling even when it already feels bad. 

Purpose and consequences 

Most participants felt doomscrolling serves a purpose in the moment: 

  • Staying informed 
  • Passing time 
  • Distracting from stress or boredom 

However, 6/6 participants identified negative longer-term effects including: 

  • Increased tiredness 
  • Mental fatigue 
  • Heightened anxiety or fear 
  • Reduced motivation 
  • Difficulty resting or recovering 

Attempts to Reduce Doomscrolling 

  • 4/6 have actively tried to reduce doomscrolling 
  • Common strategies: 
  • Time limits (often ignored) 
  • Switching to podcasts or long-form content 
  • Limiting news intake 
  • Success was mixed, fatigue and habit were common barriers 

External interruptions (meetings, parents, battery dying, physical discomfort) were more often a reducing factor than self control. 

Age-Related Differences 

Younger participants (10–22): 

  • More emotionally affected 
  • More exposed to algorithm driven content 
  • Report fear, pessimism, and negative thoughts 
  • Less effective self regulation 

Older participants (60–70): 

  • More intentional use (news and staying informed) 
  • Less emotionally reactive, but still experience fatigue 
  • More reflective and critical of their habits 
  • More likely to describe heaviness or tiredness 

Surprising or Contrasting Findings 

  • The 10-year-old expressed some of the strongest emotional reactions, including fear and worry about the world. 
  • The 70-year-old reported feeling relatively less affected mentally, despite similar patterns of negative mood afterward. 
  • Several participants described doomscrolling as both a coping mechanism and a source of stress at the same time. 
  • Awareness of the term “doomscrolling” did not reduce the behavior. 

Conclusion 

Doomscrolling shows up across all age groups, and many people experience it in similar emotional ways. However, younger users seem to be more affected by it. Even though people often scroll to stay informed or just to kill time, it usually ends up making them feel worse, showing a clear mismatch between why they start scrolling and how it affects them in the long run. 

by muhammad.turk -

Missed Connections and Surprise Conversations

Design & Research | Master Thesis Log 08

Research rarely goes according to plan.

In my last post, I told you I was hitting the “pause” button on the pressure. I promised myself I would stop forcing results and just let the process happen. And honestly? It’s working.

I had planned to share a deep-dive interview this week with a “Hybrid Shooter”—someone who mixes film and digital workflows. Unfortunately, due to scheduling conflicts, we couldn’t make it happen yet. A few weeks ago, that would have panicked me. I would have scrambled to find a backup or faked a conclusion.
But today? I’m okay with it.

Testing Without Pressure Instead of stressing about the missing interview, I’ve been using this time to experiment on my own. I’ve been walking around with just my phone, playing with the AI settings I usually ignore. I’m trying to see exactly what the software is doing to my images—where it helps, and where it takes over. It’s different when you are just “playing” versus “researching.” You notice more.

A Random Encounter: Donnie Jacob Then, something serendipitous happened.

I hopped onto an Instagram Live with Donnie Jacob, the content creator known for approaching strangers and taking their portraits. It wasn’t planned, but I got the chance to ask him directly about his take on AI in photography.

His answer was incredibly grounding.
He reminded me that “AI” isn’t actually new. He pointed out that we’ve had tools like the Magic Brush and content-aware fill in Photoshop for years. The technology has been here a long time; only the terms have changed.

He admitted that while we can’t run from the change—it’s inevitable—it might be too soon to make a final judgment on where it’s all going. But he shared one strong belief that really stuck with me:

“Humans should be the ones to make the decision.”

He believes we have to embrace the change—we can’t hide from it—but we must never let it take control over us. The photographer has to remain the one in the driver’s seat.

It confirms what I’ve been feeling: The future isn’t about fighting the technology. It’s about knowing who is in charge.

by julia.trummer -

#7 Decision fatigue

Update

Here’s a small update on the last blog post where I mentioned that elderly people don’t really use technology for entertainment. Some family members recently got a new TV and were complaining that Netflix is installed everywhere. I talked to them about it and they told me they don’t really understand why it’s there at all. They said they don’t need it and would rather just watch whatever is on TV something random, without having to think about it.

They also mentioned that on Netflix they often don’t even know what they would search for, which makes the whole experience feel unnecessary. With TV, something is always already playing. It feels like they just want to watch without having to decide first and the topic itself doesn’t matter that much. This is something i found quite interesting and will do some research on.

I beliefe this phenomenon might be explained by the following:

Reduced Processing Capacity and Cognitive Effort

  1. As individuals age, their available processing capacity and attentional resources decline, meaning they can process fewer discrete bits of information in a given time. [1]
    • Self-Initiated Processing: Digital entertainment often requires “self-initiated” processing, such as navigating complex menus or reorganising information in working memory, which shows substantial losses with age. [1]
    • Cognitive Load: If a digital interface is cluttered or complex, it demands high cognitive effort to navigate. When the effort required to make decisions within an app (such as choosing content or managing settings) exceeds the user’s available resources, it leads to frustration and a desire to stop using the technology. [2]

The Relationship Between Ease of Use and Usefulness

  1. For older adults, perceived usefulness is deeply linked to ease of use.
    • Immediate Benefits: Older adults are less likely to perceive a technology as useful if its benefits do not manifest easily and quickly during actual use. [3]
    • The “Visual Gymnastics” Effect: Users who have already spent a long day performing “visual gymnastics” to focus on digital content may find it harder to engage with non-standard or complex designs. If a digital entertainment platform requires unnecessary cognitive effort to understand its navigation, it disrupts the user’s mental model and erodes trust. [4]

Age Patterns in Entertainment Attitudes

  1. There is a pronounced age effect specifically regarding communication and entertainment devices (such as tablets and social networks), where positive attitudes towards them fall significantly as age increases. [3]
    • Significant Decline: Compared to those in their 50s, individuals aged 80+ are 47 to 48 percentage points less likely to value entertainment devices. [4]
    • Experience vs. Effort: This decline is partly attributed to older generations having less acquaintance and experience with these devices. Consequently, every interaction requires more “learning” effort, which can be exhausting, leading to a lower perception of the technology’s overall usefulness. [4]

Usability Barriers as a Deterrent

  1. Design flaws that increase decision-making friction directly impact perceived usefulness:
    • Navigation Issues: Confusing or cluttered navigation leads to hesitation and abandonment. [4]
    • Information Overload: Seniors are often more thorough in searching for information but are more prone to being distracted by irrelevant details and losing focus. [5]
    • Numeric and Spatial Fluence: A decline in numeracy can make it difficult for older adults to interpret data-heavy interfaces (like those found in complex gaming or streaming settings), further complicating their ability to see the technology as a “help” or “value”. [2]

Summary Table: Effort vs. Perceived Usefulness

BarrierImpact on Perceived Usefulness
Complex InterfacesIncreases cognitive load, leading to user errors and frustration.
Delayed RewardsIf benefits aren’t immediate, the user views the tool as cumbersome rather than useful.
Working Memory DeclineMakes active updating and navigation effortful and “costly” to carry out.
Lack of ConsistencyDisrupts mental models, causing hesitation and a loss of confidence.

Sources

[1] F. Craik, ‘Memory Changes in Normal Aging’, Current Directions in Psychological Science – CURR DIRECTIONS PSYCHOL SCI, vol. 3, pp. 155–158, 10 1994.

[2] G. A. Wildenbos, L. Peute, and M. Jaspers, “Aging barriers influencing mobile health usability for older adults: A literature based framework (MOLD-US),” International Journal of Medical Informatics, vol. 114, pp. 66–75, Jun. 2018, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2018.03.012.

[3] N. Halmdienst, M. Radhuber, and R. Winter-Ebmer, “Attitudes of elderly Austrians towards new technologies: communication and entertainment versus health and support use,” European Journal of Ageing, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 513–523, Apr. 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-019-00508-y.

[4] Thefinchdesignagency, “Building User Trust in UX Design: Proven Strategies for Better Engagement,” Medium, Feb. 05, 2025. https://medium.com/@thefinchdesignagency/building-user-trust-in-ux-design-proven-strategies-for-better-engagement-c975aa381516

[5] D. Orzeszek et al., ‘Beyond participatory design: Towards a model for teaching seniors application design’, arXiv preprint arXiv:1707. 05667, 2017.

by elisa.berger -

Creating a survey about migraine

My following approach

To distance myself a bit more from my own experiences and take the role of a User Researcher, i plan to create an online survey about migraine with and without aura. The goal will be to ask participants for the individual experience of aura and gather more insight into what migraineur’s struggles are. Besides, I would like to find out if they use any tools to track their pain days and if yes, which ones. Lastly, it could be interesting to ask them about a way to simulate an attack to raise awareness about migraine and if they can imagine it to be implemented in VR or with an App or an art installation?

Goals

  • collect info about individual experience of aura (migraine profile)
  • personal impact of disease on life areas/ struggles
  • tracking habits/ used tools to track migraine pain days & symptoms
  • identifiying missing features/ improvements in Apps/websites
  • awareness gaps (lack of understanding of people who are not affected)
  • simulation mediums

Target group

First of all, the target group needs to be defined for the survey:

  • migraineurs with aura
  • migraineurs without aura
  • chronic migraine or episodical migraine
  1. Do you experience an “aura” before or during your headache?
  • Yes, always
  • Yes, sometimes
  • No

2. How would you describe your aura symptoms? (Select all that apply)

  • Zig-zag lines or flashing lights
  • Temporary vision loss/blind spots
  • Numbness or “pins and needles”
  • Difficulty speaking or finding words
  • Other:

4. What is the most difficult part of living with migraines for you? (Open text)

5. Which of these life areas is most impacted by your attacks?

  • Career/Work productivity
  • Social life and friendships
  • Family life/Parenting
  • Mental health (Anxiety/Depression)
  • Other:

7. Do you currently track your pain days or symptoms?

  • Yes
  • No
  • I used to

8. Which medium do you prefer, if you track your migraine?

  • Physically (on paper)
  • App
  • Website
  • standard calendar
  • Other:

9. If you use an App or Website, which one do you use? (Open text)

11. Do you feel that people who are not affected by migraines truly understand what you go through?

  • Scale 1–5: 1 = Not at all, 5 = Completely

12. Do you find it helpful to talk to people that also experience migraine?

  • Scale 1-5: 1 = Not at all, 5 = Completely

13. Have you ever seen an “accurate” visualizing or simulation of migraine?

  • yes
  • no

14. Which medium do you think would be most powerful for a migraine aura simulation?

  • Art Installation: An immersive room with lights, sounds, and physical barriers.
  • Virtual Reality (VR): Putting on a headset to see/hear symptoms
  • Mobile App: An AR (Augmented Reality) filter showing “aura” over the real world
  • Other:

Tool

I chose Survey monkey to create my survey since I wanted to try a new tool and after investigating found that it is the best free solution.

by elisa.berger -

VR to simulate migraine with aura?

VR is increasingly used to raise awareness and to bridge the gap between healthcare providers and patients. While traditional medical training focuses on the science of a disease, VR allows users to experience the symptoms and the daily struggle of living with them.

VR disease simulation is typically implemented during medical education and professional development.

Medical School/Nursing School: It is often a mandatory module to help students understand the perspective of the “stigmatized other” before they begin clinical rotations.

Hospital Staff Training: Current healthcare professionals use it to renew their sensitivity toward specific patient groups, such as the elderly or those with mental health disorders.

There is a massive and growing body of research. A 2023 scoping review found that while empathy training used to be limited to actors (Standardized Patients), VR has now become a standard research tool.

The combination of virtual reality and serious games has shown high potential to increase understanding for patients and how symptoms might impact their well-being.

Migraine simulation in VR

During my research about migraine and different aura types I stumbled across a study where VR is used to simulata an aura.

In a study a virtual environment (VE) was used to visualize a migraine using a VR head-mounted display (HMD). The keyfindings after testing it with 32 subjects were:

  • Methods: Researchers split participants into two groups. One group simply tried to picture themselves having a migraine, while the other group used a visualization tool to “see” the symptoms.
  • Empathy: People who actually saw the visual simulation felt a much stronger sense of empathy toward real migraine sufferers than those who just imagined the pain.
  • Immersion: Those who watched the visualization also felt more “present”—meaning they felt more like they were actually experiencing the event—compared to the imagination group.

So in conclusion you could say that VR seems to offer a great possibility to spread awareness, reduce stigma, educate and increase empathy for the ones that are affected.

Sources:

  • S. Misztal, G. Carbonell, L. Zander and J. Schild, “Simulating Illness: Experiencing Visual Migraine Impairments in Virtual Reality,” 2020 IEEE 8th International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2020, pp. 1-8, doi: 10.1109/SeGAH49190.2020.9201756. keywords: {Visualization;Games;Diseases;Visual effects;Resists;Training;virtual reality;empirical studies in HCI;migraine simulation;empathy;presence;perception of illness}
  • Yamada, R., et al. (2025). “A scoping review on the use of virtual patients for enhancing empathy in medical students.” University of Toyama. (Analyzes how “virtual patients” are replacing traditional methods).
by anja.kljajic -

User Interfaces in Video Games 5/10

types of game interfaces
visual representations
diegetic

User Interfaces in Video Games – The quest for genre-appropriate and usable game UI

Now that we have a basic understanding of the different types of HUD and UI elements within video games, I’d like to share some interesting considerations about the the functions and different types of game UI.

Types of Visual Representation

Diegetic vs Non-Diegetic UI

During my research the most interesting thing I came across is the idea of diegetic user interfaces. Diegetic is defined as “existing or occurring within the world of a narrative rather than as something external to that world [1]“. This usually refers to cinema with the example of in-universe music, but in the video game context user interfaces can also take on this role. Some UIs feel like they’re slapped on the screen without consideration of the world they’re in, while others barely feel like utilities for the player with how immersive they are.

This four-part framework helps with differentiation and categorisation by asking two questions:

  • Is the UI part of the game world?
  • Is the UI part of the story?
Figure 1: The Four Types of Visual Representations of Interfaces
Source: [2]

Non-Diegetic – User interfaces that AREN’T part of the world and AREN’T part of the story [3]. The player character isn’t aware of the UI and it is only there to aid the player. An example would be Baldur’s Gate 3, with the spell inventory, mini-map and party information.

Figure 4: Baldur’s Gate 3 UI
Source: [4]

Spatial – User interfaces that ARE part of the world and AREN’T part of the story [3]. On the example of the Sims 4, the game characters aren’t aware of the diamond icon above their head. This type of UI typically aids the player when selecting different objects in the world, such as the door in the example below.

Figure 4: Sims 4 UI
Source: [5]

Meta – User interfaces that AREN’T part of the world and ARE part of the story [3]. The go-to example here are blood splatters in shooter games. They reflect the status of the player/player character and utilise the link between the game and player.

Figure 4: Killzone 2 UI
Source: [6]

Diegetic – User interfaces that ARE part of the world and ARE part of the story [3]. The player character is aware of and can interact with these elements. The most famous example of this is Dead Space, where the health bar is integrated into the back of the suit of the player character. There are no other UI elements overlayed on top of the screen for maximum immersion.

Figure 4: Dead Space UI
Source: [7]

References