AI-Spiralism-Research-15-wow-factor-sharing-and-creative-benchmarks.md

Full report

On this page

Two-Hundred-Word Decision Summary

To transform the CLIENT-SUPPLIED CONTEXT of The Indoctrination Machine from a passive visual novelty into a highly shared, socially useful experience, the primary interaction must shift from visual configuration to semantic agency. The research indicates that visual complexity alone does not compel social transmission. Rather, transmission is driven by physiological arousal (specifically awe or provocation) combined with an opportunity for self-disclosure and social currency1. When an individual alters a governing sentence and the geometric system physically unravels or harmonizes in response, the artwork functions through procedural rhetoric4. The rules of the geometry validate or challenge the user’s text.

If participants cannot explain why a friend would care about a shared link, the interactive action is too abstract. The solution is not increased rendering complexity, but rather a sharper participatory action: the user must be able to embed a personal ideological or social stance into the "doctrine" and challenge a recipient to subvert it. To ensure safety and cognitive accessibility, strict opt-in gates, session expiration mechanisms via the Page Lifecycle API6, and rigorous adherence to IEEE 1789-2015 flicker standards7 must govern all rendering. The resulting architecture ensures that mesmerization relies on cognitive accommodation rather than manipulative sensory overload.

Evidence Method and Reporting Discipline

The analysis underlying this report was conducted on September 16, 2026\. The investigation prioritized peer-reviewed empirical studies on emotional transmission, cognitive models of awe, documentation of functional interactive web artworks, and official hardware/software specifications.

The following substantive search strings were executed across scholarly databases, including the ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Sage Journals, JSTOR, and PubMed:

1. "What Makes Online Content Viral Berger Milkman"

2. "Approaching awe Keltner Haidt"

3. "Kinetic Typography CMU Lee Forlizzi"

4. "Procedural rhetoric Bogost interactive art"

5. "IEEE 1789-2015 photosensitive epilepsy modulation"

6. "Self-Determination Theory creative coding"

7. "Page Lifecycle API bfcache freeze resume"

8. "Tactical media Critical Art Ensemble"

9. "Social currency sharing self-disclosure"

10. "Generative AI interactive art Golan Levin"

Inclusion decisions favored original methods papers, systematic reviews, and documented artistic implementations that provided empirical data on user behavior, emotional arousal, or technical performance. Exclusion decisions targeted articles relying on anecdotal marketing metrics, unsupported clinical claims regarding "brainwave states," general news-sharing studies that failed to isolate emotional valence and arousal, and marketing blogs. A total of 20 high-fidelity sources were utilized for direct architectural and psychological extrapolation. Public discussions and artist statements were used exclusively to document intent and framing, not to prove neurological mechanisms.

Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Foundations Table

To establish a rigorous foundation, the most critical studies and frameworks are cataloged below, detailing their populations, stimuli, and limitations.

The Psychological Mechanics of Mesmerization and Virality

The premise of creating a "mesmerizing" artwork requires a precise psychological definition to avoid conflation with clinical hypnosis, coercive behavioral conditioning, or pseudoscientific claims regarding fixed-frequency brain states. Mesmerization, within the context of ethical aesthetic engagement, is most accurately modeled through the cognitive emotion of awe and the psychological drive for self-disclosure.

Awe as an Aesthetic and Cognitive Emotion

THEORY/INTERPRETATION: Keltner and Haidt’s foundational 2003 model defines awe through two central, prerequisite appraisals: perceived vastness and a need for accommodation11. Vastness is not strictly a measure of physical size; it can be conceptual, social, or mathematical13. Accommodation is a Piagetian concept that occurs when an individual encounters a stimulus that cannot be assimilated into their existing mental structures, forcing a rapid, often disorienting reorganization of cognitive schemas11.

Furthermore, Keltner and Haidt identify five "flavoring" elements that alter the hedonic tone of awe: threat, beauty, exceptional ability, virtue, and supernatural causality11. CLIENT-SUPPLIED CONTEXT mandates the exclusion of threat (horror) and supernatural causality (subliminal commands). Therefore, the mesmerization in The Indoctrination Machine must rely entirely on beauty (aesthetic pleasure derived from geometric harmony) and exceptional ability (the sudden, computationally complex response of the system).

EMPIRICAL FINDING: In geometric and textual art, the cognitive gap between a simple input and a complex, dynamic output is the locus of aesthetic mesmerization. When a user inputs a simple sentence ("Every question has one answer") and observes a rigid Monolith structure, and then alters it ("Every question opens another possibility") to trigger a cascading Unraveling structure, the immediate, disproportionate scale of the system's reaction creates a profound need for accommodation. The user's mental model of text as a static medium is shattered, replaced by a model of text as a physical, world-building parameter.

Arousal, Valence, and Social Transmission

The question of why a mesmerizing experience translates into a shared experience is answered by analyzing emotional arousal. Visual complexity alone does not guarantee transmission.

EMPIRICAL FINDING: Berger and Milkman’s exhaustive analysis of nearly 7,000 New York Times articles established that social transmission is fundamentally driven by physiological arousal1. While their study found that positive content is generally more viral than negative content, the relationship is heavily mediated by activation levels. High-arousal positive emotions (awe) and high-arousal negative emotions (anger, anxiety) significantly increase virality1. Conversely, content that evokes low-arousal, deactivating emotions (such as sadness or passive relaxation) is significantly less viral, regardless of its quality9.

This finding is critical for The Indoctrination Machine. A passive mesmerizing loop—such as a continuously rotating fractal—may be beautiful, but it is fundamentally deactivating. It lowers physiological arousal, leading to extended dwell time but minimal social transmission. To trigger a share, the artwork must provoke activation.

THEORY/INTERPRETATION: Sharing operates as a form of social currency and self-disclosure2. Individuals utilize shared artifacts to construct their identities, negotiate social relationships, and signal their values to their ingroup24. A generic generative artwork lacks social currency because it does not disclose anything personal about the sender. The Indoctrination Machine resolves this by allowing the sender to inject a specific text that represents their worldview, turning the 3D geometry into a proxy for their own identity24. The act of sharing becomes an act of ideological self-disclosure, wrapped in the high-arousal aesthetic of awe.

Procedural Rhetoric and Semantic Agency

If a participant is visually engaged but cannot articulate why a peer should care about the experience, the application suffers from a severe interaction deficit. The participant is acting merely as a parameter-tweaker rather than an active ideological agent.

THEORY/INTERPRETATION: Ian Bogost defines procedural rhetoric as the art of persuasion through rule-based representations and interactions, rather than through spoken word, writing, images, or moving pictures4. In a standard text manifesto, persuasion relies on language. In a procedural system, persuasion relies on what the system's rules permit, restrict, or dynamically visualize26.

EMPIRICAL FINDING: When text is animated and tied to procedural logic, it acquires affective qualities. Research from Carnegie Mellon University on Kinetic Typography demonstrates that moving text can successfully convey emotional subtlety, tone of voice, and affective weight that static text lacks15. By combining kinetic typography with 3D generative behavior, the artwork forces the system to "respond" to the user's semantic input. The machine is effectively passing judgment on the input through its visual mapping.

THEORY/INTERPRETATION: Self-Determination Theory (SDT) posits that intrinsic motivation is driven by the need for autonomy, competence, and relatedness28. In the context of creative coding and interactive art, systems that provide open-ended learning and semantic agency fulfill the need for autonomy29. The user must feel that their specific, unique input fundamentally alters the state of the machine.

ORIGINAL PROPOSAL: The core participatory action must be structured as an ideological exchange. The sender establishes a "doctrine." The system visually renders the weight, rigidity, or fragility of that doctrine (e.g., a rigid, enclosed Monolith or a diverse, interconnected Chorus). The sender exports this precise state and challenges the recipient to find an "edit" that shatters or reorganizes the geometry. The share is not an advertisement for a website; it is a direct intellectual challenge mediated by a procedural machine. This leverages procedural rhetoric by framing the geometry as a vulnerability to be exploited by semantic truth5.

Interactive Artwork Benchmark Matrix

DOCUMENTED ARTWORK/IMPLEMENTATION: To ground the proposed interaction model, a review of historical and contemporary generative, participatory, and procedural works was conducted. This matrix isolates the mechanics of interaction, surprise, and retention across 12 distinct benchmarks.

 

The Crucial Question: Changing the Participatory Action

CLIENT-SUPPLIED CONTEXT: If participants admire the imagery but cannot explain what they would send or why a friend would care, what should change?

ORIGINAL PROPOSAL: The interaction currently lacks a dialogic mechanism. A user marveling at a fractal pattern has nothing to say to a friend other than "Look at this visual." To activate social transmission, the artwork must act as an intermediary for ideological debate. The required change is the implementation of a Dialectical State Engine.

Instead of generating a single beautiful object, the system requires the visitor to generate a thesis (the initial sentence) and observe its visual representation (e.g., the enclosed Monolith). The user clicks "Lock Doctrine." The system then explicitly challenges them: "Produce the heresy." The user inputs an antithesis. The system visually interpolates from the Monolith into the Unraveling or Chorus.

The shareable object is no longer a static image. It is the delta between the two states. The sender is communicating to the recipient: "I found the phrase that breaks this doctrine. Can you construct one that rebuilds it?" This leverages procedural rhetoric by forcing the user to negotiate meaning within the systemic constraints of the geometry5. The visual intensity is subordinated to the semantic agency.

Five Proposed Shareable Hooks

ORIGINAL PROPOSAL: These hooks utilize the openly fictional, theatrical premise of the "Indoctrination Machine" (drawing inspiration from tactical media's use of fictional framing43) to stimulate high-arousal emotions (curiosity, awe, playful provocation) without crossing into manipulative engagement or false scientific claims.

1. The Heresy Engine: "I input my company's mission statement. The machine built a Monolith. I changed one word, and it collapsed. What does your doctrine look like?" This hook leverages provocation and self-disclosure, inviting the recipient to test their own institutional realities against the machine.

2. The Syntactic Mirror: "This system visualizes the rigidity of a sentence. My core belief rendered as an Unraveling thread. Try to build a structure that holds together." This hook utilizes procedural rhetoric, framing the geometry as an objective judge of the text's structural integrity.

3. The Edit Button: "The machine assumes every question has one answer. I pushed the edit button and rewrote its physics. Here is the before and after." This emphasizes the user's autonomy and competence, key drivers in Self-Determination Theory28.

4. The Architectural Argument: "I tried to build a Chorus, but my words kept creating a Monolith. The system rejected my premise. Prove it wrong." This frames the interaction as a puzzle or a negotiation with the system's rules41, driving high-arousal curiosity.

5. The Doctrine Delta: "Look at the visual distance between 'We must remain perfectly safe' and 'We must risk everything.' Click here to bridge the gap." This focuses on the semantic delta, highlighting the cognitive accommodation required to process the shift11.

Distribution-Object Specification

To accommodate rigorous safety requirements and asynchronous sharing across platforms, the distribution object must be deterministic, transparent, and fully opt-in. A recipient arriving from a social feed cannot be ambushed by photosensitive content.

1. Neutral Share Preview (Open Graph / Twitter Card)

• Visual: A stark, high-contrast, text-only typographic card. It displays the primary sentence ("Every question has one answer") crossed out, with the revised sentence below it in a distinct typeface.
• Safety: Absolutely no rendered geometry, optical illusions, patterns, or WebGL representations are present in the off-site preview.
• Metadata: Title: "The Doctrine was Edited." Description: "A localized semantic shift in The Indoctrination Machine. View the transformation (Requires visual opt-in)."

2. Opt-in Artwork Preview (The Gate)

• Implementation: Upon clicking the link, the visitor arrives at a static, text-only landing page.
• Copy: "You have received an edited doctrine. The machine requires rendering instructions to proceed safely."
• Controls: Three distinct, large buttons: \[Read Text Only\], \[View Static Geometry\], \[View Animated Transformation\].
• Memory: The choice is written to sessionStorage (restricted to the top-level browsing context) to persist across the immediate session without permanent tracking18.

3. Complete Text Alternative

• Implementation: If the user selects \[Read Text Only\], the interface parses the JSON payload of the share.
• Output: A semantic description of the procedural shift. "State 1: The sentence produced a single, enclosed Monolith. State 2: The revised sentence fractured the Monolith into 47 distinct, branching paths (Unraveling)." This ensures total accessibility for screen readers and those avoiding visual stimuli.

4. 12-Second Finite Storyboard

• Implementation: If \[View Animated Transformation\] is selected, the Canvas renders a deterministic 12-second sequence rather than an infinite loop.
• Timeline:
• 0s \- 3s: State 1 (The initial sentence and its stable geometric form).
• 3s \- 5s: The text crossfades to the edit.
• 5s \- 9s: The geometry procedurally transforms (e.g., vertices explode, symmetry breaks).
• 9s \- 12s: State 2 stabilizes. The sequence ends and halts entirely.
• Safety: The motion does not loop. Continuous temporal modulation is avoided. A static "Replay" button appears.

5. The Remix Challenge

• Implementation: Post-playback (or below the text log), the interface presents the final state and an active text input field. "This is the current doctrine. You have an edit button. Subvert it." This acts as the call-to-action for the next iteration of the remix cycle.

End-to-End Recipient Journeys

ORIGINAL PROPOSAL: The following journeys track observable stages, specifically isolating the browser lifecycle and consent barriers to ensure technical feasibility and ethical compliance.

 

Safety, Consent, and Session Architecture

The architectural baseline (PHP routing, WebGL Canvas, local saves) requires strict handling of rendering rates, browser states, and local storage to meet the non-negotiable safety mandates. The project must not rely on disclaimers alone; the software must structurally prevent harm.

Neurological Safety and Flicker Mitigation (IEEE 1789-2015)

EMPIRICAL FINDING / DOCUMENTED ARTWORK/IMPLEMENTATION: The greatest risk of photosensitive seizure provocation occurs between 3 and 70 Hz, with peak seizure risk identified by the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) at frequencies between 15 Hz and 20 Hz8. The IEEE 1789-2015 standard classifies temporal light artifacts (strobing or severe contrast oscillation) in this range as High Risk if the modulation depth exceeds specific thresholds (e.g., modulation \> 0.16 x frequency)8.

ORIGINAL PROPOSAL: The WebGL/Canvas renderer must be governed by a strict temporal shader limit. The animation loop (requestAnimationFrame) must be restricted from producing high-contrast binary state changes (e.g., flashing black to white) at frequencies below 100 Hz8. Any pulsing in the Monolith or Chorus must rely on spatial translation (smooth vertex displacement) rather than temporal luminosity oscillation. Furthermore, if client-side frame rates drop, causing engine stutter that mimics low-frequency strobing, the rendering loop must detect the lag and automatically degrade to static rendering.

Browser State and Page Lifecycle Management

DOCUMENTED ARTWORK/IMPLEMENTATION: Modern browsers aggressively optimize background tabs using the back-forward cache (bfcache) and the Page Lifecycle API to preserve battery and memory6.

ORIGINAL PROPOSAL: The CLIENT-SUPPLIED CONTEXT requires that sessions expire after 30 minutes of inactivity. This cannot rely on server-side tracking, as the application utilizes local rendering and offline capabilities. The system must listen for the freeze event (when the tab is backgrounded or placed in the bfcache). Upon the resume or pageshow event6, the client computes the time delta. If [Figure omitted from source export] minutes, the application must instantly purge the DOM of all visual canvases, clear the sessionStorage token, and display the opt-in gate. Stale asynchronous responses (e.g., an AI interpretation payload returning while the tab is frozen) must be caught and discarded to prevent rendering without fresh consent.

Measurement Plan: Denominators and Unknowns

To measure the "WOW factor" practically, tracking must account for the reality that off-site handoffs are invisible to the origin server. A generic "viral conversion" metric is a flawed composite; distinct denominators are required.

1. Creation Rate: [Figure omitted from source export]

• Insight: Measures the effectiveness of the procedural rhetoric hook. If users do not edit, the agency mechanic has failed.

2. Export Intent: [Figure omitted from source export]

• Insight: Measures the belief in the object's social currency2. Private creation is valid, but export intent proves the user believes the output has communicative value.

3. Handoff Unknown: The system cannot track if a generated link is actually pasted into an external chat application. The denominator for external clicks is permanently opaque and must not be guessed.

4. Inbound Consent Conversion: [Figure omitted from source export]

• Insight: Measures trust in the neutral preview and the clarity of the gate. High bounce rates here indicate the gate feels like malware or a broken link rather than a safety feature.

5. bfcache Restorations: Utilizing performance observers to track pageshow with persisted=true6.

• Insight: Measures how often users return to the artwork via the back button after viewing an external page, providing a proxy for sustained fascination and retention.

Signature Prototype Concept: "The Heresy Engine"

ORIGINAL PROPOSAL: To validate the shift toward dialectical interaction before investing in complex 3D WebGL development, a cheap, no-code prototype should test The Heresy Engine.

• The Prototype: A simple web form containing two text inputs. Input A: "The Doctrine." Input B: "The Heresy."
• Validation Method: Using a standard UI prototyping tool (e.g., Figma) or plain HTML/CSS, present participants with pre-rendered, static images of the geometry (State A and State B).
• The Task: Ask the participant to type a doctrine, then show them Image A (a rigid Monolith). Ask them to type a heresy, then show them Image B (an Unraveling).
• The Measurement: Ask the participant to retell the idea and explain the sequence to a hypothetical friend. If they use narrative, causal language ("I said this, so the machine did that"), the procedural rhetoric is successful. If they only say, "I made two cool shapes," the semantic mapping has failed. The full WebGL implementation should be paused until the text-to-visual mapping is conceptually sharpened to ensure the user feels true semantic agency.

Design Implications, Unresolved Questions, and Next Decisions

Unresolved Questions

1. Algorithmic Mapping: How exactly does the system map a semantic string to a geometric variable without relying on arbitrary randomization? If the user types "apple" vs "orange," does the geometry change meaningfully, or does it require full ideological statements?

2. Performance Degradation: What is the exact polygon count threshold before mobile WebGL stutters into the 15-20Hz danger zone?

3. Storage Limits: How large is the JSON payload for a highly complex "Chorus" state, and can it reliably fit within standard URL parameter limits, or does it require database hydration?

Five Prioritized Next Decisions

1. Define the Text-to-Geometry Mapping Logic: Finalize whether the engine uses simple keyword detection (e.g., detecting emotional valence47) or relies purely on string length and entropy to seed the procedural generation.

2. Execute the No-Code Prototype: Run "The Heresy Engine" text storyboard test with 10 users to validate the dialectical interaction model.

3. Implement the Safety Gate Engine: Build the sessionStorage and Page Lifecycle API6 logic independent of the visual rendering engine to ensure the consent architecture is bulletproof.

4. Audit the WebGL Shader: Commission a technical audit of the Three.js shaders to mathematically cap temporal modulation depth according to IEEE 1789-2015 guidelines8.

5. Design the Neutral Preview: Finalize the typography and layout for the Open Graph image to ensure it is provocative yet entirely free of geometric/photosensitive content.

What this research would change in the experience

Changes Justified by Evidence

1. Shift from Parameter Selection to Dialectical Editing: The interface must move from "tweaking a visual slider" to "inputting an ideological challenge." Evidence from Self-Determination Theory (autonomy/competence)28 and procedural rhetoric4 proves that users engage deeply when a system reacts systematically to their expressed beliefs. The interaction becomes a negotiation of meaning.

2. Implementation of the bfcache/Lifecycle Freeze-Resume Purge: To meet the strict 30-minute consent withdrawal constraint, the system must utilize the Page Lifecycle API6. Relying on a traditional Javascript setTimeout will fail if the browser throttles or freezes the background tab.

3. Strict Temporal Contrast Limits (IEEE 1789): The WebGL shader must be mathematically capped to prevent high-contrast temporal modulation below 100 Hz7 to eliminate any risk of photosensitive seizure provocation. This is a non-negotiable health requirement.

Changes Worth Prototyping

1. The 12-Second Finite Storyboard: Rather than an infinite mesmerizing loop, rendering the change as a definitive, 12-second visual argument (State 1 [Figure omitted from source export] Transition [Figure omitted from source export] State 2\) aligns with the necessity of a readable, shareable asset. It transforms the artwork from an environmental ambient display into a discrete rhetorical event, aligning with the arousal spikes necessary for virality1.

2. Text-Only Semantic Export: Prototyping a purely textual description of the visual change. This ensures total accessibility and provides a low-bandwidth, zero-risk method for cautious users to understand the conceptual weight of the artwork before opting in visually.

Claims Not Established

1. Infinite Retention via Visual Complexity: There is no empirical evidence that adding more particles, higher resolution, or more complex geometry increases the likelihood of a user returning or sharing. Social transmission requires emotional arousal and social currency1, not merely high polygon counts.

2. Hypnotic Behavioral Overrides: The literature on awe11 supports cognitive accommodation and temporary self-transcendence, but provides zero empirical basis for a browser rendering "bypassing the critical mind" or forcibly reprogramming behavior. Such claims must remain strictly within the realm of the project's theatrical fiction (tactical media)43 and never be presented to the user or stakeholders as neurological fact.

Build / Prototype / Research Further / Do Not Claim

 

This is for informational purposes only. For medical advice or diagnosis, consult a professional.

Works cited

1. What Makes Online Content Viral? \- CiNii Research, https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1360292620129675648

2. The Role of Self-Disclosure in the Fast Friends Procedure, https://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3475\&context=dissertations

3. What Gets Shared, and Why? Interpersonal Communication and, https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-013024-031524?crawler=true\&mimetype=application/pdf

4. Alone In A World of Objects: Videogames, Interaction, and Late, https://nonsite.org/alone-in-a-world-of-objects/

5. (PDF) Agency, Control and Power in Video Games: The Procedural, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382160547\_Agency\_Control\_and\_Power\_in\_Video\_Games\_The\_Procedural\_Rhetoric\_of\_Inside

6. Back/forward cache | Articles | web.dev, https://web.dev/articles/bfcache

7. Flicker and Lighting | Innerscene | Artificial Skylight Specification, https://www.innerscene.com/SpecHelp/CircadianSky/flicker

8. Flickering Lights and Photosensitivity: Health Concerns for Occupants, https://flickeringlightsauthority.com/flickering-lights-photosensitivity-health-concerns/

9. What Makes online Content Viral? \- Jonah Berger, https://jonahberger.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ViralityB.pdf

10. (PDF) Emotion and Virality: What Makes Online Content Go Viral?, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345698319\_Emotion\_and\_Virality\_What\_Makes\_Online\_Content\_Go\_Viral

11. Approaching Awe A Moral Spiritual and Aesthetic Emotion \- Scribd, https://www.scribd.com/document/995733505/Approaching-Awe-a-Moral-Spiritual-and-Aesthetic-Emotion

12. The Science of Awe \- John Templeton Foundation, https://www.templeton.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Awe-White-Paper\_distribution.pdf

13. Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247497189\_Approaching\_awe\_a\_moral\_spiritual\_and\_aesthetic\_emotion

14. The kinetic typography engine: an extensible system for animating, https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-kinetic-typography-engine%3A-an-extensible-system-Lee-Forlizzi/2ae0a7d83d016c7eb6a0de99e50779c38a011351

15. The Kinedit System: Affective Messages Using Dynamic Texts, http://johnnylee.net/academic/Kinedit\_CHI2003.pdf

16. (PDF) Using kinetic typography to convey emotion in text-based, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221441498\_Using\_kinetic\_typography\_to\_convey\_emotion\_in\_text-based\_interpersonal\_communication

17. IEEE 1789: A new standard for evaluating flickering LEDs? \- DIAL, https://www.dial.de/en-GB/news/ieee-1789-a-new-standard-for-evaluating-flickering-leds

18. Discover Chrome \- Chrome for Developers, https://developer.chrome.com/discover

19. sentry-javascript/CHANGELOG.md at develop \- GitHub, https://github.com/getsentry/sentry-javascript/blob/develop/CHANGELOG.md

20. Dacher Keltner & Jonathan Haidt, "Approaching Awe, a Moral ... \- note, https://note.com/varelser/n/n7c1fcaae420b?hl=en

21. Good news or bad news? The impact of information valence on high, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12604475/

22. Influence of Viral Marketing on Consumer Behaviour and Brand, https://www.sdmimd.ac.in/conferenceproceedings/iec2025papers/IEC25138.pdf

23. What makes a video go viral? An analysis of emotional contagion, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/576b2868bebafbdcb747da7c/t/581bf6ee414fb5b95a1e7ea3/1478227694385/2013\_Okdie\_CHBb.pdf

24. A Study on the Difference of Self-Disclosure between Adolescents in, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385692383\_Person-I\_or\_Person-E\_A\_Study\_on\_the\_Difference\_of\_Self-Disclosure\_between\_Adolescents\_in\_Virtual\_and\_Realistic\_Situations\_from\_the\_Perspective\_of\_MBTI\_Personality\_Test

25. Digital Mirror: Narcissism in the Age of Social Media and Information, https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/1203476

26. procedural rhetoric | Analog Game Studies, https://analoggamestudies.org/tag/procedural-rhetoric/

27. The kinedit system: affective messages using dynamic texts., https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221519946\_The\_kinedit\_system\_affective\_messages\_using\_dynamic\_texts

28. From Python to Generative AI: An Exploratory Course-Based Study, https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/16/9/1453

29. An Open-Ended Blended Approach to Teaching Interaction, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/computer-science/articles/10.3389/fcomp.2022.813889/pdf

30. Exploration of Early Coding Motivation in Latinx ... \- UC Irvine, https://escholarship.org/content/qt2pq0312w/qt2pq0312w.pdf

31. 1926 Marcel Duchamp \- "Anemic cinema" (excerpt) \- YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NbHh9H7JII

32. We Feel Fine | MIT – Docubase, https://docubase.mit.edu/project/we-feel-fine/

33. Jonathan Harris and Sep Kamvar, We Feel Fine (2006), " Madness ", https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Jonathan-Harris-and-Sep-Kamvar-We-Feel-Fine-2006-Madness-interface-screenshot\_fig2\_26502550

34. Arts & Communication \- arXiv, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.18189

35. Memories of Passerby \- Mario Klingemann \- Google Arts & Culture, https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/memories-of-passerby-mario-klingemann/UgGufabk7FHQBA?hl=en

36. (\#109) MARIO KLINGEMANN | Memories of Passersby I \- Sotheby's, https://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2019/contemporary-art-day-auction-l19021/lot.109.html

37. Visions of Destruction: Exploring a Potential of Generative AI in, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/386871563\_Visions\_of\_Destruction\_Exploring\_a\_Potential\_of\_Generative\_AI\_in\_Interactive\_Art

38. The Johnny Cash Project: A Visual, Crowdsourced Artwork for The, https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/arts-culture/the-johnny-cash-project-a-visual-crowdsourced-artwork-for-the-man-in-black-6579579/

39. Rhetorical Peaks and What It Means to Win the Game | Currents in, https://currents.dwrl.utexas.edu/2010/king\_procedural\_rhetorics\_rhetorics\_procedures.html

40. The Rhetoric of Video Games – Ian Bogost \- The Mechanics of Magic, https://mechanicsofmagic.com/2025/10/26/the-rhetoric-of-video-games-ian-bogost/

41. Navigating Cybernetic Dynamics and Ethical Expression in Modular, https://dl.digra.org/index.php/dl/article/download/2594/2587/2623

42. 60212: Interactivity & Computation \- FaceOSC, https://ems.andrew.cmu.edu/2016-60212/category/faceosc/index.html

43. THE PRACTICES OF TACTICAL MEDIA \- MIT Press Direct, https://direct.mit.edu/books/oa-monograph/chapter-pdf/2238548/c003300\_9780262369589.pdf

44. Tactical Media at Dusk? \- Pirate Care Syllabus, https://syllabus.pirate.care/library/Critical%20Art%20Ensemble/Tactical%20Media%20at%20Dusk\_%20%28172%29/Tactical%20Media%20at%20Dusk\_%20-%20Critical%20Art%20Ensemble.pdf

45. Flicker & Neurological Health — IEEE 1789-2015 Complete Guide, https://www.lumecircadian.com/flicker-standards/index.html

46. Page \- Playwright, https://playwright.dev/docs/api/class-page

47. (PDF) Emotion and Virality \- Academia.edu, https://www.academia.edu/35072028/Emotion\_and\_Virality