The Semiotics of Embodied Interaction… Ready-to-hand and Present-at-hand Modes

O’Neill, S. (2008) Interactive Media: The Semiotics of Embodied Interaction. London: Springer-Verlag.

“Interacting with the media of all kinds then falls between these two modes of being. On one hand we perceive and encounter our media-rich environment directly, we manipulate it and transform it through our-ready-to-hand mode of being. On the other hand, we are constantly viewing, reading and interpreting mediated information through the reflective mode of encountering it as present-at-hand. At the same time we move between these two modes of being as we inscribe, interpret, transcribe and transform our mediated environment. In a very clear sense we are deeply entwined physically with the media in our environment and in another we are constantly making, and making sense of, the inscriptions that the media environment affords us.” (p140)

Annotation

An experience fluctuates between a ready-to-hand mode of being and a present-at-hand mode. The former involves the perception, interpretation, action and physically embodied manipulation using what is at hand in the experience of interacting within the present environment the person finds themselves in. The latter a more reflexive interpreting state of scanning what is available, making sense of the semiotic messages inscribed within the present environment the person finds themselves in.

The Semiotics of Embodied Interaction… From Concealed Potential to Visual Targets of our Conscious Use

O’Neill, S. (2008) Interactive Media: The Semiotics of Embodied Interaction. London: Springer-Verlag.

“As Michael Wheeler points out, most expertly, there are not just simply two ways of interacting with the world that surrounds us. These two poles provided by Heidegger, represent the extreme ends of a spectrum of interaction opportunities that blend into one another (…) where we are often shifting quickly from one mode to the other in a very inexpert ‘unready to hand’ way. What is perhaps most important about this approach to understanding our relationship to things in the world and interactive technologies in particular is that, while it does not deny that we might have some form of representational knowledge about the world, it focuses on our connection to the world through our bodies in the first instance, promoting the idea that we are so connected to our surroundings that we need not build mental models of the world around us in order to act, but that we might simply act through a ‘direct’ relationship to them. This is very different from the original cognitive approach to HCI” (p36)

Annotation
Ready-to-hand and present–at-hand interactive opportunities are opposite ends of ways of interacting within the world. They present an interesting directness to interaction, as they suggest that our relationship to the objects we use changes from concealed potential to visual targets of our conscious use. How this is approached can bypass tacit knowledge leading to an embodied response. As understanding is not always articulated through language it can be an embodiment leading to direct action. This direct action can be articulated and expressed through an interpreted meaning being derived from the calls to action that prompted the interaction.

The Semiotics of Embodied Interaction… Ready-to-Hand and Present–at-Hand

O’Neill, S. (2008) Interactive Media: The Semiotics of Embodied Interaction. London: Springer-Verlag.

“Heidegger essentially posits two different ways of being-in-the-world in relation to stuff or equipment, to use Heidegger’s term, that one finds there (physical entities, such as tools and technologies that for our purposes, we shall identify as media); these are ready-to-hand and present–at-hand. (…) Heidegger claims that our everyday encounters with the phenomena of our world are the ‘first’ way in which we come to understand them. (…) Through this process of interaction we develop skilful use of the material of the world and we in turn develop tacit, embodied knowledge or ‘know-how’ that allows us to cope smoothly with the world around us, enabling our immediate survival. (…) Present-at-hand is an essentially different ‘disclosure’ of being, whereby we are no longer engaged in using the equipment of the world, but we instead are thinking about it. Our activities are internal and mental rather physical and active. This type of being-in-the-world provides us with a second kind of knowledge, ‘know-that’ rather than ‘know-how’.” (p35)

Annotation
When discussing Heideggerian phenomenology in the context of interaction design then there are two ways to frame how we approach an interactive artefact: it may be either ready-to-hand or present–at-hand. The former is focused more on a physically active state of imminent use, but in the latter our activities are internal and cognitive, thinking about when to engage in active use. In both conditions we are aware of the interactive artefact without actually using it, but once we are ready we can begin interacting from these polar positions.