design for families or homes n.
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Design for families (or homes)

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 21

Design for families (or homes) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Design for families (or homes). Rikard Harr. Outline. What make homes interesting for HCI What make homes difficult to study? 3 ways of studying domestic use of IT Participatory design and the papers Between the dazzle LINC, Inkable Digital Family Calendar

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Design for families (or homes)' - jaclyn

Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
  • What make homes interesting for HCI
  • What make homes difficult to study?
    • 3 ways of studying domestic use of IT
  • Participatory design and the papers
    • Between the dazzle
    • LINC, Inkable Digital Family Calendar
  • Concluding remarks/Student comments
what make homes interesting for hci
What make homes interesting for HCI

four different industries which are now viewing the home as the next site for technological development: telecommunications industry, information industry, computer industry and entertainment - many of these working in close collaboration. (Venkatesh 1995)

  • The home is becoming increasingly computerized
    • E.g. Cell Phones, PCs, wireless networks, Smart TVs, Media Centers, interconnected platforms, devices and services
  • A large part of all computer use takes place in homes
  • Different reasons for technology use than at work
  • More diverse user groups
  • Users expect true ubiquity
  • New challenge for researchers
and what makes it difficult to study
And what makes it difficult to study
  • A challenge just to get access
    • Even the briefest ethnographic study of organisational life - perhaps best characterised by Hughes et al.’s quick and dirty ethnography [13] - tends to involve several days of continuous fieldworker presence within the workplace, a degree of intrusion likely to be considered at best undesirable and at worst wholly unacceptable if replicated within a domestic environment. (O’Brian and Rodden 1997, p. 252)
  • Sensitivity for intrusion
    • Importance of privacy
  • Three approaches
    • Ethnographic studies
    • Lab houses
    • Participatory approaches
1 ethnographic studies in homes
1. Ethnographic studies in homes
  • Relatively few examples
  • Lull (1991), research assistants lodged in the host households
  • O’Brian and Rodden (1997) focus on interactive system designs for domestic environments
  • Rouncefield et al. (2000) wanted to create general design principles and writes:
    • The explicit aim of the studies was to develop an understanding of the detailed everyday activities in the home with the emphasis placed upon the provision of a 'thick description' of daily life within the home
  • Often light versions of ethnography (e.g. O’Brian and Rodden 1997)
    • Our intention in the studies undertaken for this project was, of course, to remain as faithful as possible to the fundamental principles of ethnographic research… (p. 252)
    • A fieldworker conducted series of three evening visits a week to ten families
1 ethnographic studies in homes1
1. Ethnographic studies in homes
  • Blythe and Monk (2002) studied domestic technology
  • Focus on gender division of domestic labor and gendered product design
  • Studied three households
  • In-depth interviews with seven family members
  • Used the Technology Biography for generating critical and creative responses to questions of home technology development
  • TB included:
    • a technology tour of participants homes
    • last times questions about participants latest technology usage
    • a personal history interview of participants technologies and routines
    • a guided speculation on possible future technologies, and
    • three wishes for products that participants would like to see.
2 lab houses awarehome gatech edu
2. Lab houses (
  • The Aware Home Research Initiative (AHRI)
  • Focus on:
    • Health and Well-being
    • Digital Media and Entertainment
    • Sustainability
  • Ambition: investigating how new technologies can impact the lives of people at home
  • Two identical floors, featuring: a kitchen, dining room, living room, 3 bedrooms, 2 full bathrooms, and a laundry room
lab houses continued
Lab houses, continued
  • The lab house serves the needs of the researchers in many ways, such as:
    • for research projects where elements of the home are not easily recreated in the lab
    • as a place for testing out installation of research projects in a home setting prior to deploying to research participant homes
    • as a controlled home environment for studies, where technology is not yet ready for installation in participants homes and a home environment would make the difference.
    • to educate students and provide an interesting environment for their class project ideas
    • as a single location to share our multi-disciplinary research with others
    • as an informal location for gathering with a group.
3 participatory approaches
3. Participatory approaches
  • Involves the user in the process, outside their homes
  • PD includes all stakeholders in the design process
  • Captures the cultural, emotional, spiritual and practical needs of users
  • Interaction techniques developed through user-participation enable household members – rather than designers – to configure and reconfigure interactive devices and services to meet local needs (Rodden et al. 2004, p. 71)
  • Origin in Scandinavia (1970)
  • Political dimension, user empowerment and democratisation
  • Degree of participation varies, the US and European school
the two papers
The two papers
  • Between the dazzle… (Rodden et al. 2004)
    • Want to helpusers to manage the introduction and arrangement of new interactive services and devices in the home
  • LINC-ing the Family… (Neustaedter and Brush, 2006)
    • Want to helpfamilies in coordinatingeveryday life
    • Focus on technological support for familycoordination
  • Both are influenced by participatory design
  • Bothtargets the domesticuse of IT
the procedure between the dazzle
The procedure: Between the Dazzle
  • Consulting previous ethnographic studies
  • People continuously exploit and reconfigure Space-plan and Stuff
  • Ecological character of domestic technology use
  • Placement, technology is situated at functional sites
  • Assembly, technologies are interlinked
the procedure between the dazzle1
The procedure: Between the Dazzle
  • The Component model:
  • A physical jigsaw editor
  • Devices can be combined in different ways by users
  • Familiar, easy, not loaded with existing interpretations
  • Construction of arrangements
  • Hard to design upon
the procedure between the dazzle2
The procedure: Between the Dazzle
  • Aims: evaluate the jigsaw-approach, capturewhatdevicesmightfitintohomes and how
    • 6 Paper-basedmock-upevaluations with 8 participants
    • Severaljigsawpiecesmadeavailable and combined
    • Video recording and analysis
  • Reflections
  • Userstake an active part in the design
    • Userswant to interleaveold and new technology
    • Homes are interleaved with outeractivities
  • The importance of usinglow-fidelityprototypes
  • The benefits of groundingcurrent research in previous
linc inkable digital family calendar
LINC, Inkable Digital Family Calendar
  • Focus on familycoordination
  • Develop the LINC calender
  • Background:
    • Family life involves myriads of activities
    • Activitiesextendsbeyond the home
    • Activities must be coordinated, or else…
  • Shortcomings of existingcalendars:
    • Paper calendarsaren’tavailableoutside of home and are not easilysynchronized
    • Existing digital calendersexcludesfamilycoordination
  • Design a calender that match existingdomesticroutines
  • Unite the flexibility of papercalenders with the ability to make it digital in a later step
development of linc
Development of LINC
  • Outline design principlesbased on previous work, a familycalender:
    • Should be designed as a simple awarenessappliance
    • Must be flexible in order to support a variety of domesticroutines
    • Should provide tools for coordination
    • Should support contextuallocations
participatory design process
Participatory design process
  • Selection of respondents
    • Searched for a diverse group
    • Age 31-45 (11), 46-60 (9) etc.
    • No secondaryuserswereinvolved
  • Low-fidelityprototyping design sessions
    • Interviews on currentcalenderuse with 10 users
    • Performing a series of coordination and awareness tasks
    • A researcher acted as computer
    • Video recording and notetaking
    • Concluded by discussion and recommendedchanges
    • Refining the design
  • Medium-fidelityprototyping design sessions
    • Same procedure as above, but different prototype
key findings of current use
Key findings of current use
  • Variouscalendertypeswereused, often in combination
  • Calenders are placed in high trafficlocations
  • Calendersonlyleavetheirlocation in case of substantialplanning
  • People check theircalendersonce or twice a day
  • Participantswere possessive of ”their” calenders
  • What is scheduleddiffer, recurrent posts, start and endtimes, location, names or initials, colouruse
  • Events sometimes come in throughemail, requiring ”copy and paste”
  • Separate sheets of paper, stickynotes
concluding remarks
Concluding remarks
  • It is important to studydomesticuse of IT
    • Increasinglyimportant
  • It is howeverdifficult
    • People might not wantusthere
  • Three approaches for studying IT at home
    • Ethnography
    • Labhouses
    • Participatoryapproaches
  • The papers and participatory design
  • Questions? Comments?