A Comprehensive Study of Emotional Responses in AI-Enhanced Interactive Installation Art

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Some of my suggestions as a result of the model review,

- Comparison of the performance of artificial intelligence and emotion recognition literature studies can be given with a general table.

- Researched artificial intelligence emotion recognition models should be given in detail, deep learning, recurrent neural networks, etc.

- The discussion section should be added and the emotion recognition performance performances in the literature should be compared.

 

Enjoy your work.

Author Response

For research article: sustainability-2548106

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
1. Summary
Thank you very much for taking the time to review my manuscript. I make the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.
3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Comments 1: Comparison of the performance of artificial intelligence and emotion recognition literature studies can be given with a general table.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. Therefore, I add the content of 2.3.1 emotion recognition technology(P8), Comparison of the performance of artificial intelligence and emotion recognition literature.
Comments 2: - Researched artificial intelligence emotion recognition models should be given in detail, deep learning, recurrent neural networks, etc.
Response 2: Agree. I have, accordingly, add emotion recognition models(P10) to emphasize this point. It is as a basis for the following steps to design the experiment. Comments 3: - The discussion section should be added and the emotion recognition performance performances in the literature should be compared. Response 2: Agree. I have; accordingly, I add discussion about find out the research gap of the literature review and proposed my opinion. About the opinion “the emotion recognition performance performances in the literature should be compared”, I think it is necessary ,I add it include in the 2.3.1 emotion recognition technology(P8)

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

It looks like, this is borrowed material from the thesis as No discussion is generated to draw the conclusion.

 

Title:

Avoid word breaking >> Paragraph >> Line and Page Break >> Don’t Hyphenate

The title does not give the impression that it is and review article. It should as does the abstract.

Abstract and other text:

Avoid hyphenation

The last sentence should look like the application of the work. It, however, shows the aim / objective of the research.

Introduction:

Is this citation style acceptable by MDPI journals now?

Figure 1.1 vs Figure 1 (Is this a borrowed text from thesis?)

Figure 1 is not acceptable in its current form. The data is shown and can be drawn in MS Excel.

Table 1.1 vs Table 1 (Is this a borrowed text from thesis?)

Table 1 lacks symmetry in the format of the presentation.

Line 156-157: (Cappelen et al., A. P.,2018)???

Line 296: figure3 vs Figure 2

Line 299: (emotion(Ma,2018)

Line 337: design(Richey & Klein (2007)).

Author Response

For review article: sustainability-2548106

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
1. Summary
Thank you very much for taking the time to review my manuscript. I make the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.   2. Review report form   Yes Can be improved Must be improved Not applicable Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) Are all the cited references relevant to the research? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) For empirical research, are the results clearly presented? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Is the article adequately referenced? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) Response and Revisions Yes, I agree the form, some parts must be improved. I revised my Interdiction in the present theoretical background. And revise some reference. And I revised my hypothesis, make it more fit. I revised the discussion to more coherent and compelling.
3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Comments 1: It looks like, this is borrowed material from the thesis as No discussion is generated to draw the conclusion.
Response 1: thank you for your opinion, I add 2.4 discussion(P12) to draw my conclusion.
Comments 2: Title: Avoid word breaking >> Paragraph >> Line and Page Break >> Don’t Hyphenate The title does not give the impression that it is and review article. It should as does the abstract. Abstract and other text: Avoid hyphenation The last sentence should look like the application of the work. It, however, shows the aim / objective of the research.
Response 2: Agree. After careful consideration, I gave a more suitable topic. I have revised all hyphenation in the text. And revise the last sentence in abstract.
4. Comments 3: Introduction: Is this citation style acceptable by MDPI journals now? Figure 1.1 vs Figure 1 (Is this a borrowed text from thesis?) Figure 1 is not acceptable in its current form. The data is shown and can be drawn in MS Excel. Table 1.1 vs Table 1 (Is this a borrowed text from thesis?) Table 1 lacks symmetry in the format of the presentation. Line 156-157: (Cappelen et al., A. P.,2018)??? Line 296: figure3 vs Figure 2 Line 299: (emotion(Ma,2018) Line 337: design(Richey & Klein (2007)). Response 2: Thank you for you careful. Tables from my destination of PHD, I was so careless that I forgot to change the numbers on the charts and figures. I have revised my table drawn in excel. I have revised some reference intext.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Review of the paper "Exploring Emotional Responses in Interactive Installation Art: A Convergence of Affective Computing and Artificial Intelligence"

This study addresses the important topic of the convergence of affective computing and artificial intelligence in the context of interactive installation art. The paper provides a comprehensive literature review exploring the understanding and measurement of emotional reactions in interactive installations using AI.

The study emphasizes three key aspects: sensory stimulation, multidimensional interactions, and engagement, which are considered important factors contributing to deep emotional reactions in interactive installation art. The authors propose a new approach based on analyzing emotional reactions to interactive installation art to develop a conceptual foundation for studying variables that influence emotional reactions.

The research methodology, based on the ASSURE model and experimental design, provides a systematic and comprehensive approach to the study. The significance of this project lies in deepening the understanding of emotional experiences in AI-driven interactive installation art and identifying the underlying mechanisms that shape these experiences.

The contribution of this study includes filling gaps in existing research, refining theoretical foundations, and developing more impressive and emotionally resonant interactive art pieces. It also contributes to the advancement of the human-computer interaction field, as well as immersive and emotionally captivating interactive installations.

Overall, the introduction presents the key aspects of the research, including the importance of interactive installations, the integration of artificial intelligence, and participants' emotional reactions.

 Recommendations.

However, there are a few areas that could be improved:

Research context: The introduction does not establish a broader context for the research in the field of interactive installations, artificial intelligence, and emotional reactions. It would be useful to provide a brief overview of existing research to help readers better understand how your study fits into the bigger picture.

Research objective: The introduction does not clearly articulate the research objective. A clearer definition of the objective will help readers understand the specific questions being investigated and the expected contribution of this research.

Literature review: The introduction mentions a few studies but does not provide a comprehensive literature review on the convergence of affective computing and artificial intelligence in interactive installations. Expanding the literature review will help establish context and reflect a wide range of research and opinions.

Structure of the study: The introduction does not present the structure of the study. A well-structured introduction will help readers navigate the paper and better understand what to expect from each section.

Improving these aspects will strengthen the introduction and create a clearer understanding of the research context and objectives.

The conclusions are presented in a persuasive and structured form, indicating the key aspects of the research, its methodology, and future directions. However, some aspects, such as the practical significance of the results and their impact on the field of art and design, could have been further elaborated. Nevertheless, the conclusions reflect the importance and prospects for further research in the area of emotional reactions to interactive installations, as well as provide a methodological foundation for their study.

Also, it is necessary to add a Discussion section, which should discuss the practical implications of the findings and how they can contribute to the field of art and design. For example, one might consider using this research to create more emotionally appealing and engaging installations, or to develop new methods for measuring emotion in the context of interactive art.

Limitations of the study: It is important to discuss the limitations encountered during the research. For instance, possible limitations may include a limited sample of participants, restricted resources, or methodological constraints. Discussing these limitations will help readers better understand the generalizability of the findings and the measures taken to mitigate potential issues.

Comparison with previous research: In the Discussion section, we can also compare the obtained results with previous studies in the field. This will help identify the novel contributions of the research and determine which aspects are similar to or different from previous works. It can also assist researchers and practitioners in identifying aspects to consider in future studies.

Exploration of possible directions for future research: In the Discussion section, we can propose some possible directions for future research in this area. For example, one might discuss the need for further research into emotional responses to more complex or specific types of installations, the development of new methods for measuring emotions, or research into the influence of context on emotional responses.

 

The Discussion section should help readers better understand the significance of the research, its limitations, and potential directions for future studies in this field.

 

 

Author Response

For review article: sustainability-2548106

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments
1. Summary
Thank you very much for taking the time to review my manuscript. I make the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.   2. Review report form Yes Can be improved Must be improved Not applicable   Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic? ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) Are all the cited references relevant to the research? (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated? ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling? ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) For empirical research, are the results clearly presented? ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) Is the article adequately referenced? (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature? ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) Response and Revisions Yes, I agree the form, some parts must be improved. I revised my Interdiction in the present theoretical background. And I revised my hypothesis, make it more fit. I revised the discussion to more coherent and compelling. And revise some reference.
3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Comments 1: Research context: The introduction does not establish a broader context for the research in the field of interactive installations, artificial intelligence, and emotional reactions. It would be useful to provide a brief overview of existing research to help readers better understand how your study fits into the bigger picture. Research objective: The introduction does not clearly articulate the research objective. A clearer definition of the objective will help readers understand the specific questions being investigated and the expected contribution of this research. Literature review: The introduction mentions a few studies but does not provide a comprehensive literature review on the convergence of affective computing and artificial intelligence in interactive installations. Expanding the literature review will help establish context and reflect a wide range of research and opinions. Structure of the study: The introduction does not present the structure of the study. A well-structured introduction will help readers navigate the paper and better understand what to expect from each section.
Response 1: thank you for your opinion, through you’re the above suggestions, I revised my introduction about research background, objective, and structure of the study. In literature review, I add a comprehensive literature review on the convergence of affective computing and artificial intelligence in interactive installations(p8), add the part of 2.3 emotion measure.
Comments 2: The conclusions are presented in a persuasive and structured form, indicating the key aspects of the research, its methodology, and future directions. However, some aspects, such as the practical significance of the results and their impact on the field of art and design, could have been further elaborated. Nevertheless, the conclusions reflect the importance and prospects for further research in the area of emotional reactions to interactive installations, as well as provide a methodological foundation for their study.
Response 2: Agree. So, I revised my conclusion, add practical significance of the results and their impact on the field of art and design.
4. Comments 3: Also, it is necessary to add a Discussion section, which should discuss the practical implications of the findings and how they can contribute to the field of art and design. For example, one might consider using this research to create more emotionally appealing and engaging installations, or to develop new methods for measuring emotion in the context of interactive art. Response 2: Thank you for you opinion. I add discussion part(P12) to I add discussion about find out the research gap of the literature review and proposed my opinion to develop new methods for measuring emotion in the context of interactive art. .

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf