ChapterPDF Available

Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction

Chapter

Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction

Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction
Paul Dourish
MIT Press, December 2001, ISBN 0-262-04196-0.
Most textbooks in HCI and CSCW do not offer a coherent and over–arching understanding of social and technological
issues. They present a variety of techniques and technologies, and outline a little history, but offer little in terms of
theory that addresses the complexity of collaborative systems’ structure and use. The majority of practitioners and
researchers do not see theory as one of the things that they do. Immersed in their craft, focusing on technological
innovation or ethnomethodological detail, they do not engage in theoretical abstraction. Technologists contentedly
explore new tools and devices, with little heed to older disciplines or deeper discussion about the limits and
assumptions inherent in their craft. The area of sociology most influential in CSCW, ethnomethodology, deliberately
keeps theorising and generalisation at a distance, seeing abstraction as brutish and creativity as foreign. In our field,
theory is like the public library. If asked, most of us would say that we are glad that it is around—but few of us actually
go there. Most see it as a haven for the old, the unemployed and the eccentric. Paul Dourish is a card–carrying member,
however. He reads avidly and widely, but is also a skilful system designer and developer. The result is a book that is
deep, accessible and useful, which is a rare thing nowadays.
In the introduction, Dourish lays out the structure of the book. He describes and reflects on two current trends in system
design: tangible and social computing. By looking at the usually hidden assumptions in system design, he makes his
later theoretical discussion more relevant and accessible to a computer science audience. He does not develop new
philosophy or social theory, but draws upon established 20th century philosophy of language and phenomenology.
Much of this material is likely to be unfamiliar to ‘the average programmer’ and, although Dourish presents it well, it
may still be challenging to the reader. However, its use is one of the book’s main contributions. He uses it to ground a
conceptual framework and a corresponding set of principles for system design practice. He aims to do justice to the
sociality and heterogeneity of interactive media, and to avoid putting theory above practice—or vice versa. His ideal is
balance: “the ability to develop systemsthat resonate with, rather than restrict (or, worse, refute), the social organization
of action”.
The term ‘tangible computing’ is used very broadly in this book. The chapter on this theme covers the designs of
Hiroshi Ishii’s group at MIT’s Media Lab, but also ubiquitous computing work such as the badges, tabs and
LiveBoards of Xerox PARC, and augmented reality systems such as Pierre Wellner’s DigitalDesk. Although
‘UbiComp’ is more fashionable nowadays, Dourish chooses a term that helps him focus more on our perception and
“the ways we experience the everyday world” than on computation and technology. Much of this discussion centres on
exemplary systems, and the way that an increasing number and variety of computational devices and sensors are
distributed in our environment. This contrasts with older systems that used very few media and which were
encapsulated in the beige box of the traditional PC.
The following chapter is on social computing: “the application of sociological understanding to the design of
interactive systems”. This stands in contrast to the more traditional tendency for designers to treat people as isolated
system users, with little account taken of organisational and social context. Dourish draws upon some influential
studies of existing technology such as that of an air traffic control room by Hughes et al., and the ethnography of a print
shop by Bowers, Button and Sharrock. Compared to the previous chapter, exemplary systems are scarce. There are
none of the previous chapter’s attractive images of exotic displays and devices, so beloved in undergraduate lectures
and conference presentations, as this chapter addresses systems’ internal structure rather than external interaction.
Dourish has developed more systems in the ‘social’ category than the ‘tangible’, and here he offers as examples
Mansfield et al.’s Orbit and some of his own work: using a system design technique, computational reflection, to offer
users an account of deep system structure. In describing this particular technique, Dourish touches on the essence of the
entire book:
What is radical is the relationship it proposes between technical design and social understandings. It argues that
the most fruitful place to forge these relationships is at a foundational level, one that attempts to take
sociological insights into the heart of the process and fabric of design. (p. 87)
What he proposes is not only conceptual but also architectural. Raising HCI’s awareness of sociological concepts and
issues, and using them in requirements capture, is not enough in itself. Similarly, UbiComp and tangible computing can
only take us so far. They extend the set of external media used by computers, to better match the media and senses used
in human activity. However, even if there is a sensor in every paving stone and a display in each kitchen utensil,
systems’ behaviour will remain reductionist and unaccountable unless we change the design principles for internal
representations, especially with regard to categorisation and adaptation.
Having discussed the design issues raised by tangible and social computing, Dourish sets these issues within more
general discourse on representation, interpretation and design. In recounting the major conceptual shift in 20th century
philosophy, Dourish carves out the touchstones of his framework and design principles. What tangible and social
computing share is their move towards a better fit with everyday human activity, understanding and interaction. One of
the most significant lessons that we are re–learning is the practically engaged and non–rationalising way that everyday
activity takes place, which again stands in contrast to the planned and rational abstraction assumed by much of the
older work in HCI. As Dourish points out, this characterisation of everyday activity is rarely used in HCI but familiar to
academic communities with wider reading habits as the ‘readiness –to–hand’ of Heidegger. A tool such as a hammer is
ready–to–hand when, after using it for some time, one is familiar enough with its use to stop having to maintain
conscious awareness of how one is using it while one uses it. Instead, one becomes engaged in the practical activity of
hammering. Similarly, when speaking in a normal, everyday way, one doesn’t have to rationally plan and control each
word while saying it. The same is true for the other utterances, gestures and symbols–in–use that collectively constitute
everyday activity. Dourish also draws on Schutz’ elucidation of the social or intersubjective element of everyday
perception and activity, and Merleau–Ponty’s discussion of the way that the body, through the interwoven senses, plays
a vital role in everyday perception. He briefly touches on Wittgenstein’s philosophy of language. He makes one of the
finest index entries of recent years —Wittgenstein, Ludwig; and Elvis Presley, 122—and quotes the famous line that
encapsulates so much of Dourish’s approach: The meaning of a word is its use in the language.
Everyday human interaction is embodied in that it is non—rationalising, intersubjective and bodily activity.
Philosophers, sociologists and other writers have long discussed the way that much of our activity has these
characteristics, but Dourish’s point is that traditional approaches to HCI design do not take full account of embodiment,
i.e. they are not in accord with the activity they aim to support. More generally, the everyday practice of HCI is as
non–rationalised and uncritical as those whose activity it aims to support. Most designers ‘just do it’, without much
thought as to the implicit theoretical assumptions underlying their approach to design, and the strengths and limitations
of those assumptions. Computer science is repeating the ‘learning experience’ that philosophy, linguistics, sociology,
architecture and many other fields went through in the first half of the last century. We need the same conceptual shift
in computing, and our young field has to learn from old masters, in particular Heidegger and Wittgenstein.
Dourish focuses on raising our awareness of embodied interaction, or interpretation of a system by a user as
ready–to–hand. He presents traditional HCI design as being based on its opposite, i.e. rationalising, objectifying and
abstracting activity, or interpretation by the user as present–at–hand. He later discusses the shift between these two
modes of interpretation as varying the degree of coupling between the interpreter and the system. As he puts it on p.
139, the existence of both modes is critical to the effective use of technologies. However, Dourish’s approach swings
from one extreme to the other, neglecting presence–at–hand and focusing almost entirely on embodied or
ready–to–hand interaction. He doesn’t address the relationship between the two modes, and how we move between
them. If there is an overall weakness in the book, this is it. Dourish is justified in his work to establish that embodied
interaction is underemphasised and under–supported in system design, and this work is a significant contribution, but
some interaction is not embodied and it is important that it is not.
Heidegger, and his successors such as Gadamer and Ricoeur, held that situations where a system, tool or symbol
becomes present–at–hand may be crucial to the individual’s learning and to the differences between individuals. The
ongoing ‘feedback loop’ of interpretation and understanding integrates these two modes, and affords variation in
people’s understanding as well as consistency in their behaviour. For example, creativity can be considered as the
variation of an individual’s subjective understanding from his or her prior understanding and from others’. The
individual may then be very conscious of his or her own activity, rationalising it and very aware of it, i.e. the system,
tool or symbol is present–at–hand. With experience of its use, however, it may become understood and familiar, i.e.
more ready–to–hand and embodied. Similarly, as two people perceive one another’s use, with each interpreting and
reacting to each other, they can achieve intersubjective consistency of behaviour. A use or activity that is new and
present–at–hand for one of them can thus become learned and ready–to–hand for both. The circular process of
interpretation, whereby perception and activity are influenced by understanding, but also feeding onto and changing
understanding, thus relies on the interplay between ready–to–hand and present–at–hand interpretation. Embodied
interaction, as Dourish’s book aims to make clear, is an aspect of human activity that is underemphasised in HCI.
Nevertheless, ready–to–hand embodied interaction and present–at–hand objectification are interdependent—and the
book does not address this.
This imbalance or incompleteness in his approach makes itself felt through his consistent opposition of ‘computational’
and ‘digital’ with ‘real’ and ‘physical’. New technologies are usually treated as ‘unreal’ as they don’t operate in ways
that are familiar and embodied—yet. When the interaction involving them is unfamiliar, cutting across distance and
people in ways not yet integrated into the everyday patterns of social activity, insufficient acceptance of the way that
what is present–at–hand changes to be ready–to–hand leads to this awkward or contradictory terminology.
Dourish suggests that we can use the idea of embodied interaction in two ways. The first is in better understanding
human interpretation, in particular the way that people’s interaction with systems is a fundamentally embodied
phenomenon (p. 145). The second use of embodied interaction is as a critical stance to take in discussing the design of
existing technologies. In a way that echoes the theoretical imbalance mentioned in the previous two paragraphs, the
book emphasises approaches to computing that are in accord with embodied interaction or readiness–to–hand, such as
tangible and social computing. Dourish does not go so far as to address the way that systems exemplifying more
reductionist and objectifying approaches to interpretation and meaning, such as web search engines and organisational
workflow systems, are also part of the everyday use of computers. Their use is tightly bound in with the use of tools
whose foundations are more in the style of embodied interaction. An open challenge for system design, and for CSCW
in general, is to address the interdependence and integration of the many subtle shades from objectification to
subjective and contextual interaction.
While writing the book, Dourish was designing and building a system that might have served him well here: Placeless.
He has said that he might not have had the distance from Placeless that would have let him write about it, but this
document system took an important step forward. It used fine–grained and flat models that could be dynamically and
contextually re–interpreted to mimic or reconstruct multiple ‘objective’ modelling schemes, such as a hierarchical file
systems, taxonomies of document content and organisational workflow models. Rather as Huxley suggested that God
had an inordinate fondness for beetles, computing has an inordinate fondness for hierarchies. Placeless makes no one of
them primary, but supports and interrelates many of them. It also treats such hierarchies in the same way as more
obviously subjective models such as personal annotations on documents. It tailors its re–interpretation to suit the
identity of the user, his or her individual view of documents, role in the workflow and choice of document tools, and
the more objective categorisation schemes those tools depend on. To some extent, it lets people use separate tools in a
way that integrates them, and supports their interdependence.
A third possible use of embodied interaction, which Dourish does not suggest, is as a means to directly create new
designs for deep system structure, especially when implementable features not present in current designs are seen in
humans’ embodied interaction. In the later parts of the book, there is a tendency to step away from the topic of deep
structure. An example of this is in his discussion of ontology and intersubjectivity. He points out that the term
‘ontology’ has some currency in software engineering, although not quite in a philosophical sense. One recent paper,
written by researchers well–respected in their area of computing, suggests that “an ontology is a conceptualisation of a
domain into a machine readable format”. This is clearly far from the notion of ontology that Heidegger put forward,
and which Dourish echoes, that treats ontology as a dynamic phenomenon emergent from participative practice (p.
130). However, this is only one ontological approach. ‘Designing an ontology’ only seems odd until one remembers the
means by which a computer system represents and participates in the world, and the way that the computer succeeds or
fails in establishing any kind of ‘intersubjectivity’ with regard to an accord between its activity and user activity.
Dourish discusses the intersubjectivity between designer and user, and that between users, but not that between user
and computer. As a description of human interpretation, the notion of ontology used in software engineering is clearly
weak, static and positivist. Dourish makes it clear that much of HCI’s traditional approach to human activity has such
an inaccurate but methodologically convenient notion at its heart. Unsurprisingly, however, this notion is quite accurate
as a description of the weak, static and positivist representations and interpretive processes of current software designs.
Another famous phrase of Wittgenstein comes to mind: “The limits of my language are the limits of my world.” This is
true for the computer, too, and the origin of what Dourish and Button called the ‘paradox of technomethodology’ is the
difference between these two approaches to ontology. Until we develop new, open and adaptive forms of deep structure
that are methodologically convenient for designers as well as dynamically emergent from participative practice, and
thus part of the open adaptive system of human activity, the computer’s ontology will stay much as it is: a closed and
rather static system, as it was designed to be.
Near the end of the book, Dourish moves towards design by offering six design principles. To some extent these are
used to summarise earlier points, and non–designers may treat this section as a walk through the main points made
earlier. However, this section is primarily intended to change design practice. The first principle is computation is a
medium, which reflects the way that it is not just the external devices for input and output devices that affect a person’s
use and interpretation of a computer system. The internal digital representations of programs, databases, workflow
graphs, files, operating systems and so forth are designed to support some activities and interpretations while inhibiting
others. As Dourish emphasises throughout the book, many of the assumptions as to what should be supported and what
should be inhibited are hidden or implicit in the craft of system design, and so this principle exhorts designers to be
more aware of the communicative significance of their systems—including those not explicitly designed to be tools for
collaboration or group work. The second principle points out that this signification occurs in more objective or
individual ways, but also as part of intersubjective social practice: meaning arises on multiple levels. Here he asks us to
design for both of them, as use of a system involves acting on it but also interacting with other people through it. These
first two principles should be unproblematic for most readers of this journal, although they suggest a new and broader
attitude for most software engineers.
The next two principles may reaffirm to software engineers their unavoidably limited influence on systems’ use and
interpretation: users, not designers, create and communicate meaning and users, not designers, manage coupling. The
latter refers to the referential coupling between a system’s internal representations and the context of use. Given the
earlier chapters, these points should be easily absorbed by the reader. With regard to computational media, Dourish
does point towards some techniques that go a little way towards supporting these principles, such as macro and visual
programming, but he makes clear that there is a long way to go before users can radically adapt and appropriate system
structure.
The last two principles are, again, intended to instil a broader design attitude. The fifth principle, embodied
technologies participate in the world they represent, is phrased in a rather obtuse way, but expresses a point familiar to
CSCW: computer systems’ representational structures are amongst the artifacts that we work and act with, rather than
being outside of work and activity, and merely descriptions of the artifacts of work. To echo a perennial phrase of
sociologists in CSCW, we work ‘in and through’ computational media, and design should take more account of this.
The sixth and last principle goes slightly further in defining how embodied technologies participate in the world they
represent: embodied interaction turns action into meaning. Systems, tools and symbols in computational media are
among the utterances, gestures and artifacts–in–use that collectively constitute our activity. Computation is a medium
like any other, and a computational representation is like any symbol in that it gains meaning from its combination in
use with each other and with symbols in other more traditional media such as speech, gesture, writing, architecture and
so forth. Just like the meaning of the word, the meaning of the system is its use in the language.
Before setting out these principles, Dourish says why he chose this form of influence upon his readers. “Rules would
lay down a method for design; guidelines would suggest to a designer what to do. However, given the variety of
settings in which the embodied interaction approach is applied, it would be inappropriate to give rules or guidelines
here.” I expect that some designers reading the book will feel slightly disappointed with this, as they will be looking for
some practical suggestion as to what to do. While it may be true that rules and guidelines can be followed blindly, with
little regard to the underlying theories or motivations, a reader who has got this far through the book, and understood
Dourish’s arguments, would be unlikely to take such a narrow view. The chapter outlining these principles does offer a
number of brief references to systems, but on the whole Dourish holds to the view he states in the concluding chapter:
Embodied interaction is not a technology or a set of rules. It is a perspective on the relationship between people
and systems. The questions of how it should be developed, explored and instantiated remain open research
problems. (p. 192)
The key or the barrier to these open research problems can be seen near the end of the concluding chapter. Dourish
suggests that he has “embraced a nonrepresentationaliststance toward interaction and cognition”. This is true when it is
assumed that the representations in question are based on the positivist views of ontology, epistemology and
computation, but invites the question of what representations and structures we can say are involved in the brain and in
language. We should look forward to borrowing design ideas from neurophysiology and evolutionary linguistics—the
latter field being quite distinct from and more useful than evolutionary psychology—as well as from designers in HCI
and CSCW who use theory to drive and critique systems design.
Looking back over the book, it is clear that it has both style and substance. Dourish does write well, and offers a rich
tapestry of argument, example and reference. The book differs from most other texts in building an over–arching
understanding of the most important issues facing HCI and CSCW. By bridging between system design and theory, he
helps make the more philosophical material accessible to practitioners and also helps make the design issues accessible
to readers more familiar with philosophical issues. It should serve as a text for more mature undergraduates, and it
should be compulsory for postgraduates in HCI. Most of the common undergraduate HCI textbooks may be more
obviously practically–focused, but also appear to be rather ragged patchworks held together by weak conceptual
threads. Hopefully, it will be read by many of the designers and developers whose critical awareness Dourish hopes to
raise. One would hope that reading it will make them aware of their own practice, making their own work more
present–at–hand to them and making explicit many of their normally implicit theoretical assumptions. It does leave
open some challenging research questions, especially with regard to the design of deep system structure to support
embodied interaction and the interdependence of embodied and non–embodied interaction, but it is a very significant
contribution to the literature of HCI and CSCW. Where the Action Is is the best book in HCI for years, and everyone
who reads this journal should read it. I hope it sells in truckloads.
... Drawing on embodied cognition theory, HCI research employs the body-mind association to advance the usability of mobile interactions (Dourish 2004, Kirsh 2013. For example, because the swiping gesture is associated mainly with disposal activities in everyday life, app designers often adopt it for users to perform deletion or removal (Mauney et al. 2010). ...
... In (Brasel and Gips 2014), creating new ways to interact with screen content. In the past, embodied cognition has informed a stream of research on embodied interaction, that is, drawing on natural body movements and body-mind associations to design mobile, wearable, and other body-controlled user interfaces (Dourish 2004, Marshall et al. 2013). However, these prior studies focus exclusively on using body-mind associations to improve usability. ...
Article
Mobile health interventions are widely used to facilitate individuals’ management of their health behavior. A notable issue is that health interventions with obvious persuasive intent may cause negligence and reactance. In this study, we propose a subtle but powerful way to bolster self-regulation in maintaining healthy behavior by leveraging embodied interaction design. Our study shows that bodily actions in interacting with digital devices can trigger thoughts about prior associated experiences and, thus, be strategically designed to affect individuals’ judgments, decisions, and behavior. Specifically, in three experiments, we find that firmly pressing a touchscreen during mobile interaction (as compared with gently tapping a touchscreen) can activate users’ approach motivation and, thus, induce their preference for a healthy over a tasty beverage, lead to more challenging exercise goals and more exercise, and reduce personal hygiene lapses after receiving hygiene education. Hence, designers of digital health products may consider designing interaction with pressing gestures to facilitate users’ self-regulation and attainment of health-related goals. Policymakers can also encourage the adoption of relevant app designs to improve citizens’ health wellbeing.
... In the next stage, the referents were classified into three categories depending on the consequential action each referent produced. To this end, actions were classified into simplified categories, differentiating them according to their effect and the user's mental model of the action itself [20]. ...
Article
For an improved user experience in smart homes, there is a need to enhance the current interaction methods by embedding control interfaces in everyday household objects. Embedded interfaces will allow smart home inhabitants to control their surroundings using more familiar interaction concepts and techniques than those imposed by appliance manufacturers and vendors. However, to achieve this state, technology designers need to understand the behaviours and attitudes of end users when they interact with different elements of a smart home using everyday objects as control media. We present a set of exploratory investigations focused on understanding the behaviours and attitudes of end-users as they control elements of a fictional smart home. Accordingly, we investigate how two highly different locations and form factors -- a table surface and a couch pillow -- impact user expectations about gestures used to control various smart home features. To this end, we conducted explorative elicitation with 14 participants. Our results highlight that an object's physicality significantly impacts the types of gestures users perceive as intuitive and that deforming an interface has the potential to bring playfulness to interaction. Following our observations, we formulated four design implications for conceiving interaction modalities with deformable interfaces for domestic environments.
... Morville generally states the importance of an embodied point of view for IA (2013), and Marcia Bates (2018) has contextualized embodiment as important for information science as a whole, while noting the variations. Embodiment from the perspective of phenomenology was situated for interaction design by Dourish (2001) and for information architecture by . It has been then expanded by Wendt (2014) and more recently by Resmini and Lindenfalk (2021). ...
Article
In the field of information architecture, practice keeps pace as the domains and supporting technologies for digital design expand, leading to occasional updates of theory to account for change. Pervasive information architecture expanded tenets of clarity and findability from classical information architecture to account for placemaking as information began shape-shifting across devices and situations. This article suggests that, building on classical and pervasive information architecture, the field is ready to expand to ecological information architecture. This time, in addition to situational changes (new technologies and domains), the discovery of more facets in information as the raw material of design, and information behavior, drawn from adjacent fields, play major roles. Even as ecological information architecture is introduced, glimmers of what the next reframing must address are already surfacing. As information architects, we welcome this ongoing discovery as we look to situate designs coherently within our actors’ shifting surroundings, and engage them with information in ways that feel deeply human.
... There is also the need to study the home environment outside of controlled conditions, i.e., in a laboratory [39], which may lead to the need to make use of ethnography and nondisruptive instruments. Ethnography is a form of qualitative research [12], originating from cultural and social anthropology studies [40], where it is seen as both a method, a theory, and a style of writing [41] that seeks to study societies and cultures through examination of the complexity of human, interpersonal, social, and cultural aspects [42,43]. When using an ethnographic participant-observation approach to study a household, informal conversations, interviews (in-person or remote), focus groups, surveys, cultural probes, and artefact analysis, are all used to collect data [39,40]. ...
Article
Full-text available
This paper presents the state of the art regarding the use of tangible user interfaces for internet of artefacts (IoA) targeting health applications, with a focus on speech and language therapy and related areas, targeting home-based interventions, including data security and privacy issues. Results from a systematic literature review, focus group, and a nationwide questionnaire have been used to determine the system requirements for an artefact prototype to be developed. The aim of this study was to understand what is the usual practice of clinicians and to contribute to a better intervention or post-intervention approach for children with Speech Sound Disorders (SSD). The literature review revealed that some studies proposed technological solutions while others used a social approach and/or gamified activities. We could conclude that more research is needed and that a unified method or framework to address SSD intervention or post-intervention tools is lacking. Clinicians need more and better tools to be able to quantify and qualitatively assess the activities developed at home.
Article
We review HCI history from both the perspective of its 1980s split with human factors and its nature as a discipline. We then revisit human augmentation as an alternative to user friendliness that seems particularly relevant in the areas of inclusive design and artificial intelligence. Viewing human-AI interaction as a kind of human augmentation raises issues such as how to promote trust and situation awareness. We also pose the question: Can HCI and human factors engineering work together to solve the increasingly urgent challenges of human-AI technology? In an initial look at this question, we contrast the different approaches of HCI and human factors on emerging AI research. This paper concludes by considering other potentially promising paths for HCI. We propose more collaboration between HCI and human factors, or related disciplines, in the future to address the massive challenges posed by the rapid growth in data science and artificial intelligence.
Article
Field of Leaves is an interactive installation that depicts public contracts held in Portugal and their distribution over its five regions and two autonomous regions. The installation presents information about the public contracts available at the online portal of public procurements called Portal Basegov. The installation attempts to advocate the importance and advantages of aesthetics in first-time audience engagement, and how user interaction and hedonic qualities can heighten the user's curiosity and promote more lasting explorations with a visualization.
Book
Full-text available
Artificial intelligence is more-or-less covertly entering our lives and houses, embedded into products and services that are acquiring novel roles and agency on users. Products such as virtual assistants represent the first wave of materializa- tion of artificial intelligence in the domestic realm and beyond. They are new interlocutors in an emerging redefined relationship between humans and computers. They are agents, with miscommunicated or unclear proper- ties, performing actions to reach human-set goals. They embed capabilities that industrial products never had. They can learn users’ preferences and accordingly adapt their responses, but they are also powerful means to shape people’s behavior and build new practices and habits. Nevertheless, the way these products are used is not fully exploiting their potential, and frequently they entail poor user experiences, relegating their role to gadgets or toys. Furthermore, AI-infused products need vast amounts of personal data to work accurately, and the gathering and processing of this data are often obscure to end-users. As well, how, whether, and when it is preferable to implement AI in products and services is still an open debate. This condition raises critical ethical issues about their usage and may dramatically impact users’ trust and, ultimately, the quality of user experience. The design discipline and the Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) field are just beginning to explore the wicked relationship between Design and AI, looking for a definition of its borders, still blurred and ever-changing. The book approaches this issue from a human-centered standpoint, proposing designerly reflections on AI-infused products. It addresses one main guiding question: what are the design implications of embedding intelligence into everyday objects?
Chapter
Full-text available
The current panorama of AI-infused devices portrays a significant dominance of first-party smart speakers, which appear to be the first massive embodiment of AI in the domestic landscape. These devices are nothing more than discreet ornaments, looking at their simple physical appearance. Although, the simple appearance betrays a complexity determined by numerous features that make such products challenging to analyze from a UX point of view. The main evident characteristic is that they are not just “simple products” but ecosystems consisting of several interfaces and touchpoints. Most of them integrate multiple interfaces – namely physical, digital, conversational – sometimes overlapping. The second element of complexity resides in their technological core, based on learning algorithms. Therefore, the same device can provide different outputs at the same input over time, a condition that can affect the user experience. To increase the complexity of these devices, at least from a UX standpoint, there is the fact that their real potential is rarely exploited by most users, which mainly uses routine actions such as reading news, weather forecasting, and controlling simple home appliances. Accordingly, the chapter frames the wicked relationship between user experience and AI-infused products. Moving from the three identified elements of the complexity of AI-infused products, it advances reflection on how it could be possible to analyze these products from a UX standpoint.
Article
Namibia, a southern African country with an Ubuntu culture that emphasizes interrelations, generally displays a low reading culture. In this study, we explored a social approach to reading to engage Namibian primary learners. Inspired by promising reading approaches, such as shared group reading enhanced by embodied actions, we created Spin Da Bottle—a multiplayer reading‐action game to draw Namibian learners into reading while keeping them captivated in action. The game was co‐designed with 36 learners and then evaluated by 32 learners with an adapted immersion questionnaire, post‐experience survey and individual interviews. 50 learners were then observed while playing at a public event. Our findings confirm that learners are engaged and enjoy the collective embodied reading experience. We observed different group behaviours scaffolding individual readers. We contribute to the field of reading technologies a digital tool that creates a collective and embodied reading experience, and an adapted immersion instrument. Practitioner notes What is already known about this topic It has been recognized that shared reading increases learners engagement and participation. Dialogic reading experience is enhanced through embodied actions. What this paper adds Through a design‐based research approach, a digital multiplayer reading‐action game was developed to explore whether a social, embodied, group game could increase interest and engagement of children in reading. The game was co‐designed and the immersion validated with primary school learners in Namibia. An adapted immersion instrument was derived for reading games. Implications for practice and/or policy Collective reading games offer weak readers support from their peers. A Namibian inclusive education for all, considering an Ubuntu pedagogy, can be supported with appropriate technologies. Teachers can integrate this game in the classroom by authoring their content in order to engage learners. What is already known about this topic It has been recognized that shared reading increases learners engagement and participation. Dialogic reading experience is enhanced through embodied actions. What this paper adds Through a design‐based research approach, a digital multiplayer reading‐action game was developed to explore whether a social, embodied, group game could increase interest and engagement of children in reading. The game was co‐designed and the immersion validated with primary school learners in Namibia. An adapted immersion instrument was derived for reading games. Implications for practice and/or policy Collective reading games offer weak readers support from their peers. A Namibian inclusive education for all, considering an Ubuntu pedagogy, can be supported with appropriate technologies. Teachers can integrate this game in the classroom by authoring their content in order to engage learners.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
We report on the design process of a personal information management system, Raton Laveur, and how it was influenced by an intimate relationship between iterative fieldwork and design thinking. Initially, the system was conceived as a paper-based UI to calendar, contacts, to-dos and notes. As the fieldwork progressed, our understanding of peoples practices and the constraints of their office infrastructures radically shifted our design goals away from paper-based interaction to embedded interaction with our system. By this we mean embedding information management functionality in an existing application such as email.
Article
Critical studies of science reject the programmatic separation between technical and social aspects of science. By analyzing the social history of controversies, the rhetoric of scientific discourse, and informal aspects of laboratory work, recent studies have attempted to demonstrate that the objective products of scientific research are fraught with social contingency. The present paper agrees that the products of scientific activity are inextricable from the social contexts of their production, but raises the further question of how the relevance of any of the potentially endless varieties of social contingency is to be established in concrete instances of scientific work. Commonly, social studies of science specify such contingent relationships by relying on the established methods of the social science disciplines, while ignoring the fact that the natural scientific disciplines studied themselves include inquiries which specify such relationships as a necessary part of their ordinary practice. The alternative recommended here is to take an ethnomethodological approach. The distinguishing feature of the latter approach is that it recognizes the analytic primacy of context-specifying activities which occur at the sites of natural scientific inquiries. A transcript of conversation in a neuroscience lab is analyzed to show how `critical inquiry' operates as a practical feature of natural science research rather than being a privilege of professional social scientists.