recap on interaction

Brief summery on interactivity so far..

Interaction can be said to be a dialogue, and for our purposes between man and machine or computer, although the term can apply to an exchange between two or more of anything.
Chris Crawford describes good interaction like a conversation, requiring 3 steps if it is to function correctly -
1 - 'A' speaks while 'B' listens
2 - 'B' considers what was said
3 - 'B' offers a response to 'A'
Interaction breaks down if one or more of these steps is omitted or performed incorrectly. If at step two 'B' doesn't listen properly to 'A', his answer will have less value and the conversation would be unsatisfactory. If at step one, 'A' fails to communicate articulately, then 'B' will have a hard time understanding him. Applying this to interaction in a multimedia environment, if the interface design is difficult to understand, then the user will have problems conveying his needs, or if the method or delivering a response is flawed, the user experience will be poor.
Crawford also states, specifically as regard to games, that the higher the level of interaction the better- games with a low level of interactivity are less successful than those with higher level and better quality interactivity.
The user is also important, -are they asking the right questions, or is their goal within the boundaries of what the programme can respond to? The user becomes the author, following his own path through the possibilities of the programme, albeit in a controlled manner, as all the options have been the creation of the programmers and designers. This relates to Monivich's Myth of Interactivity and Barthes Death of the Author.