Experiment 3 Hide and Seek

11-08-08 Ryerson Quad Gould st

Prior to learning the lessons from the previous experiment about play structure being rigid I had planned an examination of the favored childhood pass time hide and seek. Ten players met on Saturday night for 1.5 hours of Manhunt, a variation on hide and seek where once found the players help the seeker find the remaining players. Rules were set as 15 minutes per game or the seeker having found everyone else. I realized 35 minutes in while hiding in a ball closet that upon sober reflection there was not a great deal I was learning from the experiment. It did not illustrate the interaction of people very well as it is generally solitary and quiet (much like a pre Playspace gallery) and it while it forces people into an interesting situation it is not the situation that I would like them to be in. One interesting piece of knowledge that did come from the activity was observing how people interact with their surroundings before and after they are given a reason to do so. For example while waiting for all the participants to show up nary a cursory glance was wasted on observing the contents of the quad, only after the game had begun did people seem to clue in to what was directly around them and then to interact with it. Overall while the project was enjoyable and engaged people easily with its familiarity I need to eliciting more stimulus response reactions from my subjects. When playing hide and seek the subjects already know how to react nothing is surprising, I need a way to keep them off guard in an unfamiliar setting where play will flow more naturally and not from nostalgia and competition.

Nostalgia is useful for engagement but must be strictly controlled for the sake of innovative play.

Attention can be directed through the use of stimulus IE: You must hide= observe surroundings