About

An Issue in Current Virtual Pets

Unlike real-life pets, current virtual pets encounter the issue of having a one-sided care dynamic with their users, where they do not reciprocate the care users provide to them.

This may be why virtual pets are unable to sustain long-term user engagement.

A Potential Solution

The following diagram proposes how virtual pets, when equipped with assistive features that support users’ daily routines to showcase reciprocity, establishes emotional connection with their users, who in turn become more receptive of this care.

As this cyclical relationship continues, the strengthening emotional connection further enhances the effective of implicit interactions, thereby sustaining long-term engagement that may surpass that of conventional interfaces.

MiniKin's Role

MiniKin explores this cyclical relationship by revising this one-sided dynamic into a reciprocal one by implicitly showing care through assisting users in their day-to-day lives.

In doing so, MiniKin forms an emotional connection with users, thereby sustaining engagement with its them.

Unlike conventional interfaces, MiniKin delivers its assistive features implicitly. This means, like real-life pets, it conveys its features non-verbally through behavioral cues.

MiniKin would be happy to tell you more about them! Just click on him and ask away.

MiniKin's features are based on real time. Shown below are snippets of how MiniKin will behave at certain times of the day.

I conducted individual design research interviews with 6 participants to assess their reaction to MiniKin and whether their interpretations of its behavior align with the intended feature.

During the interview, participants observe MiniKin while I asked them questions on what they can infer from MiniKin's behavioral cues.

Key Insights

While majority recognized what feature MiniKin was trying to convey, there was a level of confusion across all features.

For example, participants recognized that MiniKin wearing a raincoat meant it was raining, but they were unsure what type of rain it was. They prefer MiniKin to wear the gear they themselves would wear to help them infer the type of rain more accurately. These opinions were varied, with no clear universal behavioral cue.

This suggests that if a virtual pet’s behavioral cue is associated with a habit that is absent from the user’s routine or performed in a way that differs from their usual pattern. The user would not be able to interpret it accurately.

All participants reacted positively to MiniKin, displaying a level of fondness for MiniKin, referred to MiniKin as “he” instead of “it”. One participant empathized with MiniKin, saying he looked “uncomfortable” sleeping with his raincoat on, even when there was no change in his expression. She also saw petting MiniKin as a way to feel “more connected” to him.

This suggests that emotional connection may increase users’ receptiveness to a virtual pet’s behavioral cues enabling them to carry out their assistive features more effectively.

I conducted individual design research interviews with 6 participants to assess their reaction to MiniKin and whether their interpretations of its behavior align with the intended feature.

During the interview, participants observe MiniKin while I asked them questions on what they can infer from MiniKin's behavioral cues.