Daniel Johnson & Janet Wiles (2003) Effective affective user interface design in games, Ergonomics, 46:13-14, 1332-1345, DOI: 10.1080/00140130310001610865

Building on the concept of Flow (Csikszentmihalyi 1992), Johnson and Wiles (2003) explored the connection between Flow and the interface design of video games. Drawing on Csikszentmihalyi’s (1992) studies on how workers were able to achieve euphoric states when task difficulty was matched with their skill level, they link how games, with their repetitive tasks, fit this same model of difficulty-to-skill proportionality. Johnson and Wiles (2003) note the explicit relationship of the “concept of flow as an explanation for the positive affect games generate in a user” (p. 1334).

In an attempt to bridge both “leisure applications” (games) and other software programs, Johnson and Wiles (2003) suggest developing a heuristic to evaluate how games affect players toward Flow states and how it might be applied in other settings (p. 1335). Translating Nielsen and Molich 1990 and Nielsen 1994 works for video games, they suggest the categories of

visibility of system status, match between the system and the real world, user control and freedom, consistency and standards, error prevention, recognition rather than recall, flexibility and efficiency of use, aesthetic and minimalist design, the need to help users recognise, diagnose and recover from errors, and the need to include help and documentation. (p. 1335)

Positioning human computer interfaces as interfering with progression with Flow state, Johnson and Wiles (2003) argue “focus on, and lack of distraction from, the major task [in a game] contributes to the facilitation of flow. Immersion in the game is promoted when all distractions are removed” (p. 1336). Through reducing the number of interface elements on the screen, the probability of achieving a Flow likelihood can be increased, they conclude.

Many commons elements of game design like loading screens and movies increase the likelihood of players becoming distracted or making errors, Johnson and Wiles (2003) suggest. Any time the player is pulled away from their immersion through accidental actions or unexpected in-game triggers, they note, the HCI breaks down, leaving the player in an unanticipated state. This is also true of a greater increase in the amount of expected input and the differences between cross-system controller schemes.