Case Study: Learning Through Collaboration with a Choreographer - Reflections on Cross-Disciplinary Work in Movement Research

Abstract

Biomechanical research tools produce rich data and are increasingly applied beyond classical movement analysis, including in artistic contexts. Usually, researchers treat visualization and knowledge transfer as a final-stage output (Sandbakk, 2018). But what happens when this translational work shapes data collection and analysis as they unfold? An ongoing project connected a choreographer and a clinical research laboratory (specializing in cerebellar ataxia) in Turkey with a data analyst in Austria. From the position of the project's data analyst — a doctoral researcher in biomechanics on a side-engagement — this case study reflects on gains for each stakeholder and on the journey from sensor data to audience-facing output. Methods The first author (data analyst, personal dance background) identified and categorized stakeholder gains through continuous observation over four months of close collaboration. Reflections were verified via discussion with co-authors representing each stakeholder role. An iterative process of familiarization, data collection, analysis, and negotiation among stakeholders shaped the final setup: 16 IMUs, 15 EMG channels and a pressure plate. The choreographer developed movement sequences while the data analyst translated artistic ideas and language (e.g. "radical softness", "repetition without repetition") into forms designed for artistic use: sonification of EMG (Matsubara et al., 2012) informing the piece's music composition, and a polygon visualization pre-produced for on-stage display. The project will close with a performance piece joining choreography and on-stage visualization in autumn 2026. Results Stakeholder gains spanned five dimensions. 1) Methodological: Working with atypical analytical questions (e.g. framing improvisation, characterizing changes across repetitions of complex movement phrases) revealed the limits of conventional biomechanical methods. 2) Translational: Translating artistic questions into forms perceivable by non-biomechanists, while preserving the legitimacy of embodied knowledge (e.g. shifting "this cannot be measured" to "this could be an alternative way to explore your idea"). Figure 1 shows one output. 3) Infrastructural: The collaboration built durable connections (e.g. graphic designers, illustrators, public-facing infrastructure); the host clinical laboratory is exploring how these could raise awareness of their patient group. The duality of professional dance and ataxic movement disorders (opposite ends of coordination) supports rare-disease advocacy and clinical translation. 4) Artistic-conceptual: Biosignal material shapes artistic development — the EMG sonification informs music being composed for the piece, and the polygon offers a way to visualize movement onstage without producing a body-like representation (skeleton, silhouette, or animated figure) alongside the dancer. 5) Educational: Doctoral side-engagements risk diverting thesis focus but cultivate skills in interdisciplinary collaboration and managing competing priorities. Discussion Key conditions enabling these gains included a willingness to adapt standard practice and an explicit translating role between disciplines. While the present analysis is reflective rather than empirical (Borgdorff, 2012), it was verified across stakeholder roles; a questionnaire and interviews at project closing will deepen these observations. Conclusion Collaborations connecting sports science and clinical movement analysis with artistic practice and public audiences can yield diverse and meaningful gains across all participants.