Environmental interfaces are introduced: designed environmental conditions that shape human-AI relationships through ambient, holistic, and evaluative pathways rather than explicit functional interaction, pointing to a broader transition from designing interfaces for operating intelligent systems to designing environments for inhabiting them.
Abstract
As AI increasingly assumes operational control, human-computer interaction is shifting from operating systems through explicit interfaces to inhabiting intelligent environments. This raises a fundamental question: when users no longer directly manipulate a system, what mediates their relationship with intelligent technologies? We introduce environmental interfaces: designed environmental conditions that shape human-AI relationships through ambient, holistic, and evaluative pathways rather than explicit functional interaction. Using autonomous vehicle cabins as a revealing context, we conducted a within-subject experiment with 24 participants (216 observations), manipulating lighting and scent in a simulated autonomous driving environment. Three findings emerged. First, perceived atmosphere accounted for 66.5% of the variance in overall journey experience, showing that environmental conditions can function as an interface rather than merely a supporting design element. Second, multisensory processing followed a hierarchical architecture: individual sensory appraisals were initially independent, while cross-modal integration emerged during higher-order environmental evaluation. Third, olfactory stimuli influenced affective responses and experience evaluation more strongly than visual stimuli, challenging the visual dominance of automotive interaction design. Environmental quality and sensory congruency also predicted trust in the autonomous system, suggesting that passengers may use environmental cues as proxy signals when direct assessment of AI competence is difficult. These findings establish environmental interfaces as a distinct interaction modality and point to a broader transition from designing interfaces for operating intelligent systems to designing environments for inhabiting them.
This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.
P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al.· arXiv.org· 727 citations· ⚡54
The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.
M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al.· Empirical Software Engineeri...· 401 citations· ⚡48
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The perception of the impact of agile methods is predominantly positive, and several challenge areas were discovered, but based on this study, agile methods are here to stay.
M. Laanti, O. Salo, P. Abrahamsson· Information and Software Tec...· 260 citations· ⚡20
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduSep 30, 2026
Able to defeat top-ranked human players and more efficient than other models, the new system could help decision-makers in military maneuvers or business negotiations.
Computer scientist, entrepreneur, and philanthropist will collaborate with the MIT Schwarzman College of Computing to advance AI and scientific discovery.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.