Had a great meeting with Sarah yesterday, of course, I got lots of feedback and advice.
Firstly, my thesis’s central question needed to be reconsidered because the question such as “Can a person’s implicit emotional state be reasonably inferred from that person’s facial expression? Furthermore, does facial emotion recognition prepare for the vast cultural and social distinctions in how people show emotion or personality, and even assessments of their dependability, conscientiousness, emotional intelligence and cognitive ability?” these are like foregone conclusions that people maybe just can say yes or no without and other critical thinking.
As for the audience part, I couldn’t only focus on what topics people are interested in, should be more specific(agree/disagree/middle?). If the audience is people who agree with the use of FER – my verb should be “disprove, or challenge”, but if the audience is people who disagree with its use – my verb is to deepen the understanding, or create solidarity around an idea.
Sarah also told me should put more focus on the research and building process, as the final output maybe totally different from what I plan to create.
Next step:
- Do sketches and storyboards right away so I can understand experientially what impact my project has on a user.
- Rethink the central question – “something that acknowledges the complication and leaves you open to discovery during your process!”
- Analyze the project’s audience, verbs, and think about whether success in enacting that verb or not.(links below)
https://www.lozano-hemmer.com/level_of_confidence.php
https://kcimc.medium.com/working-with-faces-e63a86391a93
https://www.eyebeam.org/kyle-mcdonald-against-fa/
https://www.engadget.com/2017-11-09-untrained-eyes-engadget-experience.html
https://adam.harvey.studio/cvdazzle/
Attach my mind map miro board below:
