No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Metaphor Cards: A How-to-Guide for Making and Using a Generative Metaphorical Design Toolkit
Abstract
Generative metaphorical design while rich is possibility, is not easy to do. In response, we have developed Metaphor Cards, a toolkit for supporting metaphorical design thinking. In this pictorial, we introduce Metaphor Cards and provide a how-to-guide for design researchers to make and use their own sets. To demonstrate this process, we provide a case study documenting our development of a set of Metaphor Cards for designing information systems for international justice. We conclude with reflections on the benefits and limitations of the Metaphor Card toolkit and suggestions for how to adapt Metaphor Cards to other domains and technologies.
... Combining features of two different metaphors is another way to be creative, as is deliberately trying to violate a metaphor to see what ensues [49]. The growing interest in metaphors has led to the design of metaphor-based applications [45,51] and tools to generate potentially helpful metaphors [10,62,63,95,96]. By playing around with multiple metaphors (particularly with respect to VUIs), we may be able to think about novel uses and functionality to address challenging problems. ...
... We can even play with ideas of metaphors of metaphor use [34]: what are some insightful or generative metaphors to help us think about our use of metaphors in HCI? Metaphors developed for end-users may be seen as training wheels [27] facilitating progressive incremental learning of subskills before being discarded. Metaphors used by designers to help come up with novel functionality may be like the use of idea cards to inspire creative thinking [96]. Metaphors used by analysts may be viewed as mnemonic label tags to be attached to examples or as shelves used to group and organize a large set of example cases into more manageable categories. ...
We explore a range of different metaphors used for Voice User Interfaces (VUIs) by designers, end-users, manufacturers, and researchers using a novel framework derived from semi-structured interviews and a literature review. We focus less on the well-established idea of metaphors as a way for interface designers to help novice users learn how to interact with novel technology, and more on other ways metaphors can be used. We find that metaphors people use are contextually fluid, can change with the mode of conversation, and can reveal differences in how people perceive VUIs compared to other devices. Not all metaphors are helpful, and some may be offensive. Analyzing this broader class of metaphors can help understand, perhaps even predict problems. Metaphor analysis can be a low-cost tool to inspire design creativity and facilitate complex discussions about sociotechnical issues, enabling us to spot potential opportunities and problems in the situated use of technologies.
... Combining features of two different metaphors is another way to be creative, as is deliberately trying to violate a metaphor to see what ensues [45]. The growing interest in metaphors has led to the design of metaphor-based applications [41,47] and tools to generate potentially helpful metaphors [8,58,59,90,91]. By playing around with multiple metaphors (particularly with respect to VUIs), we may be able to think about novel uses and functionality to address challenging problems. ...
... We can even play with ideas of metaphors of metaphor use: what are some insightful or generative metaphors to help us think about our use of metaphors in HCI? Metaphors developed for end-users may be seen as training wheels [24] facilitating progressive incremental learning of subskills before being discarded. Metaphors used by designers to help come up with novel functionality may be like the use of idea cards to inspire creative thinking [91]. Metaphors used by analysts may be viewed as mnemonic label tags to be attached to examples or as shelves used to group and organize a large set of example cases into more manageable categories. ...
We explore a range of different metaphors used for Voice User Interfaces (VUIs) by designers, end-users, manufacturers, and researchers using a novel framework derived from semi-structured interviews and a literature review. We focus less on the well-established idea of metaphors as a way for interface designers to help novice users learn how to interact with novel technology and more on other ways metaphors can be used. We find that metaphors people use are contextually fluid, can change with the mode of conversation, and can reveal differences in how people perceive VUIs compared to other devices. Not all metaphors are helpful, and some may be offensive. Analyzing this broader class of metaphors can help understand, perhaps even predict problems. Metaphor analysis can be a low-cost tool to inspire design creativity and facilitate complex discussions about sociotechnical issues, enabling us to spot potential opportunities and problems in the situated use of technologies.
... • Scenario/Context->Creating->Concepts: This interaction pattern is seen in methods which results in design concepts created within a defined, assumed or fictional scenario/context. Methods using this pattern include: Value Sketch [146], Metaphor Cards [103], and Make It Critical [132]. ...
... For methods coded as Phase 2, the focus was primarily on identifying design implications which aided the user in framing the problem space in more ethical ways; in contrast, methods coded as Phase 4 encouraged the user to build upon a generated design concept in more ethically-centered ways. As examples of Phase 2-focused methods, card decks were used in Adversary Personas [111] to list potential adversaries in a particular design Phase 2 (exploration, synthesis, and design implications) [3, 7, 13, 18, 22, 39, 45, 47, 53, 59, 60, 65, 67, 70, 72, 98, 102, 103, 109-112, 115-117, 127, 132, 144, 148, 150, 152-154, 156, 157, 159, 160, 163] Phase 3 (concept generation and early prototype iteration) [3,13,14,33,36,47,54,55,60,70,88,98,102,103,109,110,131,132,146,148,149,153,154,[156][157][158] Phase 4 (evaluation, refinement, and production) [10, 11, 13, 16, 18-20, 24, 33, 36, 45, 53-55, 71, 72, 102, 110, 112, 115, 116, 121, 127, 144, 148, 149, 153, 156-158, 160-162] Phase 5 (launching and monitoring) [36,53,127,148,156,157,162] situation, while Envisioning Cards [60] were used to expand potential issues in the "immediate context of use," with the goal of envisioning the potential long-term impact of technology. The actions supported through these methods are likely to occur before concept generation, with the goal of framing the problem space by providing new ways of viewing the context. ...
Over the past decade, HCI researchers, design researchers, and practitioners have increasingly addressed ethics-focused issues through a range of theoretical, methodological and pragmatic contributions to the field. While many forms of design knowledge have been proposed and described, we focus explicitly on knowledge that has been codified as "methods," which we define as any supports for everyday work practices of designers. In this paper, we identify, analyze, and map a collection of 63 existing ethics-focused methods intentionally designed for ethical impact. We present a content analysis, providing a descriptive record of how they operationalize ethics, their intended audience or context of use, their "core" or "script," and the means by which these methods are formulated, articulated, and languaged. Building on these results, we provide an initial definition of ethics-focused methods, identifying potential opportunities for the development of future methods to support design practice and research.
... towards. Design researchers have explored a variety of approaches where imagination is a desired outcome, such as speculative design [8], embodied imagination [12] and the use of metaphor [1,18]. ...
... When following the embodied imagination method, participants engage non-functional objects in their everyday lives and are prompted to 'speak from their bodies', making them performers in their own lives [12]. Other methods employ metaphor, for example as a generative tool to imagine future technologies and ways of being [18], or as the bridge between our embodied experience and imaginative capacities, resulting in the use of embodied metaphors in design for reasoned imagination [1]. ...
We follow up on a prominent line of work in which principles of embodied cognition are employed to not only account for skilled coping but also for more intellectual activities such as remembering and imagination. Imagination then, is not a reflective activity an individual does by herself, but a shared and embodied activity scaffolded by tangible design. We present a case study in which we designed a toolkit to facilitate imagining the Netherlands in 2050. We wrote speculative stories of people living in 2050 and designed an assortment of objects. We held several workshops to use the toolkit for shared imagination for our client, Rijkswaterstaat. We analyze how, in the context of the workshops, the stories and objects provided affordances for shared imagination. We thereby hope to have demonstrated that it is possible to design for more intellectual activities in a tangible and embodied way.
... Design cards have been created and evaluated in various contexts. To name a few, cards have been suggested to facilitate the conceptualization of Internetof-Things applications [Mora et al., 2017], to raise awareness of emergent data protection regulations [Luger et al., 2015], to support the design of information systems for international justice [Logler et al., 2018] and to design interactive artifacts for ageing populations [Nicenboim et al., 2018]. Others targeted more abstract human qualities such as values [Friedman and Hendry, 2012], resourcefulness [Nicenboim et al., 2018], playfulness [Lucero and Arrasvuori, 2010], and creativity [Lucero et al., 2016] as part of the design process. ...
... Prior work also outlined techniques aimed at better supporting designers and researchers to create their own design cards [Halskov and Dalsgård, 2006] and supporting materials such as design worksheets [Logler et al., 2018] and canvases [Mora et al., 2017] to guide cards' use. Drawing on these efforts, we developed a corresponding design methodology to facilitate design cards use in a collaborative setting. ...
Online social networks have made sharing personal experiences with others – mostly in the form of photos and comments – a common activity. The convergence of social, mobile, cloud and wearable computing has expanded the scope of user-generated and shared content on the net from personal media to individual preferences to physiological details (e.g., in the form of daily workouts) to information about real-world possessions (e.g., apartments, cars). Once everyday things become increasingly networked (i.e., the Internet of Things), future online services and connected devices will only expand the set of “things” to share. Given that a new generation of sharing services is about to emerge, it is of crucial importance to provide service designers with the right insights to adequately support novel sharing practices. This work explores these practices within two emergent sharing domains: (1) personal activity tracking and (2) “sharing economy” services. The goal of this dissertation is to understand current practices of sharing personal digital and physical possessions, and to uncover corresponding end-user needs and concerns across novel sharing practices, in order to map the design space to support emergent and future sharing needs. We address this goal by adopting two research strategies, one using a bottom-up approach, the other following a top-down approach. In the bottom-up approach, we examine in-depth novel sharing practices within two emergent sharing domains through a set of empirical qualitative studies. We offer a rich and descriptive account of peoples’ sharing routines and characterize the specific role of interactive technologies that support or inhibit sharing in those domains. We then design, develop, and deploy several technology prototypes that afford digital and physical sharing with the view to informing the design of future sharing services and tools within two domains, personal activity tracking and sharing economy services. In the top-down approach, drawing on scholarship in human-computer interaction (HCI) and interaction design, we systematically examine prior work on current technology-mediated sharing practices and identify a set of commonalities and differences among sharing digital and physical artifacts. Based upon these findings, we further argue that many challenges and issues that are present in digital online sharing are also highly relevant for the physical sharing in the context of the sharing economy, especially when the shared physical objects have digital representations and are mediated by an online platform. To account for these particularities, we develop and field-test an action-driven toolkit for design practitioners to both support the creation of future sharing economy platforms and services, as well as to improve the user experience of existing services. This dissertation should be of particular interest to HCI and interaction design researchers who are critically exploring technology-mediated sharing practices through fieldwork studies, as well to design practitioners who are building and evaluating sharing economy services.
... Design cards have been created and evaluated in various contexts. To name a few, cards have been suggested to facilitate the conceptualization of Internetof-Things applications [Mora et al., 2017], to raise awareness of emergent data protection regulations [Luger et al., 2015], to support the design of information systems for international justice [Logler et al., 2018] and to design interactive artifacts for ageing populations [Nicenboim et al., 2018]. Others targeted more abstract human qualities such as values [Friedman and Hendry, 2012], resourcefulness [Nicenboim et al., 2018], playfulness [Lucero and Arrasvuori, 2010], and creativity [Lucero et al., 2016] as part of the design process. ...
... Prior work also outlined techniques aimed at better supporting designers and researchers to create their own design cards [Halskov and Dalsgård, 2006] and supporting materials such as design worksheets [Logler et al., 2018] and canvases [Mora et al., 2017] to guide cards' use. Drawing on these efforts, we developed a corresponding design methodology to facilitate design cards use in a collaborative setting. ...
Online social networks have made sharing personal experiences with others mostly in form of photos and comments a common activity. The convergenceof social, mobile, cloud and wearable computing expanded the scope of usergeneratedand shared content on the net from personal media to individual preferencesto physiological details (e.g., in the form of daily workouts) to informationabout real-world possessions (e.g., apartments, cars). Once everydaythings become increasingly networked (i.e., the Internet of Things), future onlineservices and connected devices will only expand the set of things to share. Given that a new generation of sharing services is about to emerge, it is of crucialimportance to provide service designers with the right insights to adequatelysupport novel sharing practices. This work explores these practices within twoemergent sharing domains: (1) personal activity tracking and (2) sharing economyservices. The goal of this dissertation is to understand current practices ofsharing personal digital and physical possessions, and to uncover correspondingend-user needs and concerns across novel sharing practices, in order to map thedesign space to support emergent and future sharing needs. We address this goalby adopting two research strategies, one using a bottom-up approach, the otherfollowing a top-down approach.In the bottom-up approach, we examine in-depth novel sharing practices within two emergent sharing domains through a set of empirical qualitative studies.We offer a rich and descriptive account of peoples sharing routines and characterizethe specific role of interactive technologies that support or inhibit sharingin those domains. We then design, develop, and deploy several technology prototypesthat afford digital and physical sharing with the view to informing the design of future sharing services and tools within two domains, personal activitytracking and sharing economy services.In the top-down approach, drawing on scholarship in human-computer interaction (HCI) and interaction design, we systematically examine prior workon current technology-mediated sharing practices and identify a set of commonalitiesand differences among sharing digital and physical artifacts. Based uponthese findings, we further argue that many challenges and issues that are presentin digital online sharing are also highly relevant for the physical sharing in thecontext of the sharing economy, especially when the shared physical objects havedigital representations and are mediated by an online platform. To account forthese particularities, we develop and field-test an action-driven toolkit for designpractitioners to both support the creation of future sharing economy platformsand services, as well as to improve the user experience of existing services.This dissertation should be of particular interest to HCI and interaction designresearchers who are critically exploring technology-mediated sharing practicesthrough fieldwork studies, as well to design practitioners who are building and evaluating sharing economy services.
... Design cards have been created and evaluated in various contexts. To name a few, cards have been suggested to facilitate the conceptualization of Internet-of-Things applications [35], to raise awareness of emergent data protection regulations [34], to support the design of information systems for international justice [30] and to design interactive artifacts for ageing populations [36]. Others have targeted more abstract human qualities such as values [13], resourcefulness [36], playfulness [31], and creativity [32] as part of the design process. ...
... Prior work has also outlined techniques aimed at better supporting designers and researchers to create their own design cards [16] and supporting materials such as design worksheets [30] and canvases [35] to guide cards' use. Drawing on these efforts we have developed a corresponding design methodology to facilitate design cards use in a collaborative setting. ...
Sharing economy services have become increasingly popular. In addition to various well-known for-profit activities in this space (e.g., ride and apartment sharing), many community groups and non-profit organizations offer collections of shared things (e.g., books, tools) that explicitly aim to benefit local communities. We expect that both non-profit and for-profit approaches will see an increased use in the future. To support designers in devising new sharing economy services, we developed the Sharing Economy Design Cards, a design toolkit in the form of a card deck. We present two deployments of the cards: (1) in individual interviews with 16 designers and sharing economy domain experts; and (2) in two workshops with 5 participants each. Our findings show that the use of the cards not only facilitates the creation of future sharing platforms and services in a collaborative setting, but also helps to evaluate existing sharing economy services as an individual activity.
... It envisions new futures including both the technical aspects and the social and political outcomes of a world with that technology [20]. To support these approaches in practice, recent toolkits have been developed for designers [6], such as the Envisioning Cards [11], Metaphor Cards [22], and Design Fiction Memos [39]. ...
Our society has been increasingly witnessing a number of negative, unintended consequences of digital technologies. While post-hoc policy regulation is crucial in addressing these issues, reasonably anticipating the consequences before deploying technology can help mitigate potential harm to society in the first place. Yet, the quest to anticipate potential harms can be difficult without seeing digital technologies deployed in the real world. In this position paper, we argue that anticipating unintended consequences of technology can be facilitated through creativity-enhancing interventions, such as by building on existing knowledge and insights from diverse stakeholders. Using lessons learned from prior work on creativity-support tools, the HCI community is uniquely equipped to design novel systems that aid in anticipating negative unintended consequences of technology on society.
... Such lens taking can be supplemented with existing methods and tools for ethical mediation. For example, value levers [68], can aid discussion with stakeholders, while speculative methodology [63] can be used to forecast possible ethical tensions [45,81] or help designers reflect on ethical consequences [2,4,52]. However, a consistent uptake and acceptance of academically developed tools remains a challenge in the industry [62]. ...
User Experience (UX) practitioners are increasingly playing the role of ethicists, where they must make responsible design decisions and envisage the consequences of their design. This requires practitioners to act with intent and align their decision-making with ethical implications while navigating professional, organisational and business objectives. How can we support UX practitioners to deal with ethical tensions in this complex and uncertain space that encompasses many inter-personal, social and temporal dimensions? To explore this issue, we follow an iterative participatory design approach with 13 UX practitioners. Our findings revealed ethical tensions are experienced at different levels of micro (self, other design teams), meso (management or organisation as a whole) and macro (society) pertaining to varied practitioners attitudes towards ethical tensions (investigating, suppressing and mediating). The communities that UX practitioners relate to were found to be vital sites of care and safety that enable members to surface and mediate ethical tensions. We propose new directions for resources to support practitioners in dealing with multi-faceted ethical tensions.
... Or the project, Microcosms, led by Jeffrey Yoon Warren, that prompts participants to "use microscopes not as scientific tools, but as a means of listening, knowing, and "tuning into"" the Asian-American experience by recording microscopic videos that capture memories, family and stories (Yoon Warren, 2021). Within design research, cards have been put to similar use with a large focus on reflection on design values and generating spaces for a wide range of possible outcomes: from the analysis of values in a design process , speculative scenarios for the future (Raven & Barnathan, 2018), or new metaphors to scaffold a design process (Logler et al., 2018). The allure of a deck, then, is the ability to structure attention and play with the themes presented in the deck. ...
... According to [17], design activity of products, systems, or services is essentially about user experience, which may be revealed not only by what people say (e.g., via interview methods), or do (e.g., via observation or self-reporting methods), but also by what people make in productive co-design activities that have been planned and prepared by professional designers. Co-design is often carried out with co-design toolkits [18], i.e., a set of paper-based or tangible artifacts that are used, modified, or articulated by participants and may be studied at a later stage by the design team to reveal aspects of the UX. Co-design toolkits are common in some cases of co-design (for example with/for children [19]), but they are not common in cultural heritage projects where more participatory methods are employed, such as co-design workshops. ...
The design of location-based games (LBGs) for cultural heritage should ensure the active participation and contribution of local communities and heritage professionals to achieve contextual relevance, importance, and content validity. This paper presents an approach and methods of the participatory and co-design of LBGs that promote awareness and learning about the intangible cultural heritage of craftsmanship and artisanal technology throughout a long-term project from sensitization to implementation. Following the design thinking process, we outline the participatory methods (and reflect on results and lessons learnt) of involving cultural heritage professionals, local communities, and visitors (users) of museums and cultural settlements, mainly: field visits, design workshops, field playtesting, and field studies. We discuss issues of participatory design that we experienced throughout the project such as participant centrality and representativeness, producing tangible output from meetings, co-creation of content via playtesting, and implications from the pandemic. This work contributes a case of participatory and co-design of LBGs for cultural heritage that is characterized by longevity and engagement throughout the design process for three LBGs of a museum network in different cultural sites.
... These actions may yield useful outcomes in their ability to prompt refection and can ofer greater options within situations which are challenging in their complexity or lack of satisfying outcomes. Here, we might see an opportunity for HCI methods to aid refection through, for example, the use of card-decks or prompts that ask one to consider a wide range of scenarios or situations with an open playfulness which could otherwise become constrained at later stages of a design process [48,49,63]. Furthermore, within a collaboration that split across design and the production of artistic artifacts which predominantly sit outside of our feld, we saw promise in future translational work between HCI and other disciplines. ...
Given the ongoing environmental crisis and recent calls within HCI
to engage with its cascading efects on the more-than-human world,
this paper introduces the concept of the eco-technical interface as
a critical zone at which designers can surface and subvert issues of
multispecies relations such as nonhuman instrumentalization. The
eco-technical interface represents the sites at which human, nonhuman, and technological interfaces overlap, ranging from remote
sensing for conservation to smart devices for precision agriculture
to community science platforms for species identifcation. Here,
we highlight the pervasiveness of the eco-technical interface as a
set of sites for further HCI inquiry, engage with the politics and
instrumentalizing tendencies at three particular sites, and demonstrate tactics for cultivating attunement to, refexively accounting
for, and subverting instrumentalization in multispecies encounter.
... Firstly, the research team understands the problem domain and the specific design scenario for which the DS needs to be designed. Then, the research team focuses on a specific aspect of the design process for which they wish to develop it (e.g. an ideation tool (Logler et al. 2018), a tool to uncover specific behaviour (Hoolohan et al. 2018), for facilitating a particular type of solution generation (Clatworthy 2011b). The process of understanding the requirement and the specific problem domain for which DS is needed can be done by identifying requirements for it through a study of the state of the art (Brown 2021) or be a by-product of experience obtained through practice (Clatworthy 2011b) or a combination (Reubens 2016). ...
Designing for the (economic) top of the pyramid and the bottom is different. In the latter case, designing products must be looked at in conjunction with poverty alleviation and business (livelihood) development. The sustainable livelihoods approach, centred around the development of people by building their strengths and bringing in relevant aspects of their lives and livelihoods into the development process, can be a potentially strong lens for designers to get inspired. In conjunction with design for sustainability approaches, the sustainable livelihoods approach can be used to develop design supports to aid designers in designing. In this paper, we discuss our experience of developing, evaluating, and validating design supports for three different problem typologies: (1) ‘design for sustainable livelihoods’ wherein the community’s economic activities are deeply rooted in their social and cultural ways of living, (2) ‘design for marginal contexts’ (sustainable agricultural mechanization of small farms of developing countries) and (3) ‘frugal design’ for the lower-income strata to improve their livelihoods’. The critical insights from the support building process is that: (1) the ‘designerly ways’ help us to navigate through real-world, ill-defined problems, approach them through a solution-focused lens, think constructively and translate abstract requirements into concrete solutions; (2) design thinking involves adopting systems approach wherein designing the interplay between abstract parameters and their relationships can result into social innovations; (3) a designer is trained in effectively bringing together a plethora of stakeholders and helping them in performing participatory design for social innovation, (4) designing for social innovations is the key to creating sustainable livelihoods; (5) the sustainable livelihoods framework helps to map the vulnerability context, livelihoods assets, policies–institutions–processes, livelihoods strategies and livelihoods outcomes; (6) it helps to map the system as a function of human, natural, financial, physical and social capital, and (7) a designer can bring together the two worlds creatively and facilitate the system stakeholders to collaboratively design for sustainable livelihoods.
... Firstly, the research team understands the problem domain and the specific design scenario for which the DS needs to be designed. Then, the research team focuses on a specific aspect of the design process for which they wish to develop it (e.g. an ideation tool (Logler et al. 2018), a tool to uncover specific behaviour (Hoolohan et al. 2018), for facilitating a particular type of solution generation (Clatworthy 2011b). The process of understanding the requirement and the specific problem domain for which DS is needed can be done by identifying requirements for it through a study of the state of the art (Brown 2021) or be a by-product of experience obtained through practice (Clatworthy 2011b) or a combination (Reubens 2016). ...
Designing for the (economic) top of the pyramid and the bottom are different. In the latter case, designing products must be looked at in conjunction with poverty alleviation and business (livelihood) development. The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach, centered around the development of people by building their strengths and bringing in relevant aspects of their lives and livelihoods into the development process, can be a potentially strong lens for designers to get inspired. In conjunction with Design for Sustainability approaches, the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach can be used to develop Design supports to aid designers in designing. In this paper, we discuss our experience of developing, evaluating, and validating Design supports for three different problem typologies: (1) ‘design for sustainable livelihoods’ wherein the community’s economic activities are deeply rooted in their social and cultural ways of living, (2) ‘design for marginal contexts’ (sustainable agricultural mechanization of small farms of developing countries), and (3) ‘frugal design’ for the lower-income strata to improve their livelihoods.’ The critical insights from the support building process is that: (1) the ‘designerly ways’ help us to navigate through real-world, ill-defined problems, approach them through a solution-focused lens, think constructively, and translate abstract requirements into concrete solutions; (2) design thinking involves adopting systems approach wherein designing the interplay between abstract parameters and their relationships can result into social innovations; (3) a designer is trained in effectively bringing together a plethora of stakeholders and helping them in performing participatory design for social innovation, (4) designing for social innovations is the key to creating sustainable livelihoods; (5) the sustainable livelihoods framework helps to map the vulnerability context, livelihoods assets, policies-institutions-processes, livelihoods strategies and livelihoods outcomes; and, (6) it helps to map the system as a function of human, natural, financial, physical, and social capital, (7) a designer can bring together the two worlds creatively and facilitate the system stakeholders to collaboratively design for sustainable livelihoods.
... As hybrid materialities and forms of artifacts influence how 'interaction' is perceived (Jung, et al. 2017) many examples of metaphor use can be seen within design activities. Metaphor Cards by Logler, Friedman and Yoo (2018) is an example of a toolkit treating metaphor as a generative tool, where the associative and relational qualities create opportunities for new ways of seeing objects or phenomena. This may aid designers in imagining future technologies and ways of being in the world. ...
This paper builds on the theme of tensions by focusing on the sub-theme of 'Value Conflicts'. The role of values and world views within complex systems is exemplified via the use of metaphors for associating with, embodying, materialising, diversifying and probing aspects of complex systems in relation to design work. The paper takes a relational and reflexive view on systems oriented design (SOD) and is based on an explorative study conducted as part of a systems oriented design master thesis project.
The study looks at the Norwegian housing system and explores the systemic complexities by engaging a diverse set of stakeholders. The paper highlights how the use of metaphors contributed to the critical systemic enquiries in the study and supported the author's SOD explorations in imagining alternatives within housing in Norway.
... In the comparative study, the mind-map like exploration is suggested to be useful and engaging compared to the Pinterest-like baseline system. After further generalizing and improving the system, future work may evaluate the ideation experience with other different existing methods (e.g., moodboarding [26], metaphor cards [31]) to further investigate the design process. Moreover, since we focus on the design idea rather than the aesthetics of results, we do not constraint the level of finest on ideation drafts as long as the idea can be conveyed. ...
... Some reviewed toolkits propose revisions of well-known design methods, but evolved into a full methodology like the work of Logler et al. [26] that combines Metaphor Design [6] and Card Sorting [33]. This toolkit aims to make the generative metaphorical design approach easier; the authors provide a step-by-step process and a set of cards that can be customized by the users according to their needs. ...
... Metaphors have long been used as a tool in HCI design [11]. More recently, researchers have proposed that generating new metaphors can help not only design better interfaces, but also reframe societal issues around technology [59][60][61]. Since both mental and embodied metaphors (e.g., gesturing) are central to temporal reasoning, as described above, expanding alternative notions of temporality with new metaphors through HCI design can enrich design futuring both for researchers and the communities they serve. ...
... Card decks are popular in design and HCI [16], including some which can be used in 'aleatoric' ways, to introduce chance or ambiguity (the resolution of which often allows a creative leap or insight A project my students and I have been developing over the last few years, called New Metaphors [11] (Figure 1), is a card deck and set of association exercises, aimed at designers, for coming up with new kinds of metaphorical relationships between things in the world (a flock of birds, leftover food, patterns in brickwork) and important / abstract / hard-to-visualize concepts like the climate crisis or mental health. Metaphors, and different ways of generating and using them, are a current topic of much research work in HCI [6,12,14]. The New Metaphors cards are particularly useful for generating ideas for novel kinds of framing, or new approaches to (more qualitative) interface and visualization design, through introducing an element of (Figure 2) helped me go into a faculty meeting with the aim of seeing current stresses and challenges as just a rung on the way to something better, but also reminded me just how many other rungs there would be. ...
This position paper for the CHI 2020 workshop, "Embracing Uncertainty in HCI" (Robert Soden, Laura Devendorf, Richmond Wong, Lydia Chilton, Ann Light, Yoko Akama) briefly explores how uncertainty can work as a generative practice in design, through examples of card decks, metaphors, intentional apophenia, and following a dog's wanderings.
... Zines conjure the aesthetics of punk and activism, making space for marginalized opinions to flourish outside of standardizing bodies. Card decks such as IDEO's "method cards" [39] or Logler et al's Metaphor Cards [48] prompt their performer or player to undertake specific actions in forms that elicit designerly disruptions and reflection. While the HCI-amusements we describe envision similar modes of circulation and disruptive practices, they are more specific in the kinds of content they suggest: focusing specifically on the inclusion of activities for embodied and focused engagement while outside any particular research application. ...
Notions of what counts as a contribution to HCI continue to be contested as our field expands to accommodate perspectives from the arts and humanities. This paper aims to advance the position of the arts and further contribute to these debates by actively exploring what a "non-contribution" would look like in HCI. We do this by taking inspiration from Fluxus, a collective of artists in the 1950's and 1960's who actively challenged and reworked practices of fine arts institutions by producing radically accessible, ephemeral, and modest works of "art-amusement." We use Fluxus to develop three analogous forms of "HCI-amusements," each of which shed light on dominant practices and values within HCI by resisting to fit into its logics.
... Despite such a broad nomenclature, these all aim to help structure thinking around complex themes during the design process. Such cards have been put to a wide variety of uses including: supporting the design of mixed reality games [54], exertion games [41] and sound design in games [2]; architecture [19] designing IoT systems [40]; raising awareness of cybersecurity, threats [18] and privacy [4,35]; promoting value centred [21] and ethical [58] design; stimulating creativity in design [23]; and encouraging new methods [23].Previous studies of cards in HCI have focused on how decks of cards were developed, including their content, visual design, and the rules for using them [2,17,34]; providing guidance on how to create them [33]; discussed user satisfaction and their perceived usefulness in specific design contexts [40,41,52]; considered their use in translating concepts and principles from other fields [21,35,58]; and offered broader reflections on how cards support design in general, including the importance of physicality [17], their inherent playfulness [10,29], what makes them inspiring [24,26,30,54], how they promote and structure discussion [26], and how they provide knowledge and focus [41]. While these studies have involved quantitative as well as qualitative data, little has been reported about patterns of card usage and their effect on the resulting designs. ...
We explore how usage data captured from ideation cards can enable reflection on design. We deployed a deck of ideation cards on a Masters level module over two years, developing the means to capture the students' designs into a digital repository. We created two visualisations to reveal the relative co-occurrences of the cards as concept space and the relative proximity of designs (through cards used in common) as design space. We used these to elicit reflections from the perspectives of students, teachers and card designers. Our findings inspire ideas for extending the data-driven use of ideation cards throughout the design process; informing the redesign of cards, the rules for using them and their live connection to supporting materials and enabling stakeholders to reflect and recognise challenges and opportunities. We also identified the need, and potential ways, to capture a richer design rationale, including annotations, discarded cards and varying card interpretations.
... Thing 2 cards show a photograph and the name of a phenomenon in the world which could potentially be an interesting metaphor for some of the Thing 1s-an arbitrarily chosen mixture of natural and artificial phenomena (and sometimes combinations of the two). The examples were partly drawn from sensory or synaesthesia-inspired ideas [39], such as sweetness, and partly from everyday phenomena that seemed interesting as potential 'design' materialparticularly drawing on work around qualitative interface design [45], indexical visualisation [51] and data physicalisation [33]-from the hum of a fridge to the arrangement [25] the most notable current metaphor generation work in the HCI community comes from Nick Logler, Daisy Yoo and Batya Friedman, whose Metaphor Cards [47] offer a detailed domain-centred process which brings designers into a much deeper, reflective understanding of the field in which they are generating new metaphors, with an example application around international justice. ...
Metaphors are important at multiple levels within design and society—from the specifics of interfaces, to wider societal imaginaries of technology and progress. Exploring alternative metaphors can be generative in creative processes, and for reframing problems strategically. In this pictorial we introduce an inspiration card workshop method using juxtaposition (or bisociation) to enable participants to explore novel metaphors for hard-to-visualise phenomena, drawing on a provisional set of inspiration material. We demonstrate the process through illustrating creative workshops in France, Portugal, Chile, and the USA, and reflect on benefits, limitations, and potential development of this format for use within interaction design.
... using juxtaposition (or bisociation) process to enable participants exploring novel concepts within interaction design (Lockton et al., 2019). Researchers (Logler et al., 2018) talks about potential for incorporating the 'metaphor search stage' into nearly all design activities. They believe in "the potential for new metaphors to allow different and deeper understanding, change human reasoning model, support decision-making, behaviour change and, specifically helping to understand agency/ people's relationships with the systems" (Lockton et al., 2019). ...
Crowdsourcing initiatives have been used in diverse domains. When user-generated data is the foundation of the crowdsourced application, users need to engage with it and not use it sporadically. For a solution to have strong engagement from design, we developed an 18-card deck as part of a design thinking approach. This approach offers domain-specific insights to designers in crowdsourcing initiatives. We applied the cards in a study where we analyzed five online design workshops and reflected on the results from the perspective of 14 facilitators and 17 workshop participants. The results generated ideas that were evaluated by the crowd through online surveys. With that was possible to visualize how engagement was thought using the Engagement by Design methodology in different crowdsourcing initiatives.KeywordsDesignCrowdsourcingEngagementEvaluation of Engagement
In this paper, we explore the use of metaphors for people working with artificial intelligence, in particular those that support designers in thinking about the creation of AI systems. Metaphors both illuminate and hide, simplifying and connecting to existing knowledge, centring particular ideas, marginalising others, and shaping fields of practice. The practices of machine learning and artificial intelligence draw heavily on metaphors, whether black boxes, or the idea of learning and training, but at the edges of the field, as design engages with computational practices, it is not always apparent which terms are used metaphorically, and which associations can be safely drawn on. In this paper, we look at some of the ways metaphors are deployed around machine learning and ask about where they might lead us astray. We then develop some qualities of useful metaphors, and finally explore a small collection of helpful metaphors and practices that illuminate different aspects of machine learning in a way that can support design thinking.
Editorial
The RSD10 symposium was held at the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, 2nd-6th November 2021. After a successful (yet unforeseen) online version of the RSD 9 symposium, RSD10 was designed as a hybrid conference.
How can we facilitate the physical encounters that inspire our work, yet ensure a global easy access for joining the conference, while dealing well with the ongoing uncertainties of the global COVID pandemic at the same time? In hindsight, the theme of RSD10 could not have been a better fit with the conditions in which it had to be organized: “Playing with Tensions: Embracing new complexity, collaboration and contexts in systemic design”.
Playing with Tensions
Complex systems do not lend themselves for simplification. Systemic designers have no choice but to embrace complexity, and in doing so, embrace opposing concepts and the resulting paradoxes. It is at the interplay of these ideas that they find the most fruitful regions of exploration. The main conference theme explored design and systems thinking practices as mediators to deal fruitfully with tensions. Our human tendency is to relieve the tensions, and in design, to resolve the so-called “pain points.” But tensions reveal paradoxes, the sites of connection, breaks in scale, emergence of complexity. Can we embrace the tension and paradoxes as valuable social feedback in our path to just and sustainable futures?
The symposium took off with two days of well-attended workshops on campus and online. One could sense tensions through embodied experiences in one of the workshops, while reframing systemic paradoxes as fruitful design starting points in another. In the tradition of RSD, a Gigamap Exhibition was organized. The exhibition showcased mind-blowing visuals that reveal the tension between our own desire for order and structure and our desire to capture real-life dynamics and contradicting perspectives. Many of us enjoyed the high quality and diversity in the keynotes throughout the symposium. As chair of the SDA, Dr. Silvia Barbero opened in her keynote with a reflection on the start and impressive evolution of the Relating Systems thinking and Design symposia. Prof.Dr. Derk Loorbach showed us how transition research conceptualizes shifts in societal systems and gave us a glimpse into their efforts to foster desired ones. Prof.Dr. Elisa Giaccardi took us along a journey of technologically mediated agency. She advocated for a radical shift in design to deal with this complex web of relationships between things and humans. Indy Johar talked about the need to reimagine our relationship with the world as one based on fundamental interdependence. And finally, Prof.Dr. Klaus Krippendorf systematically unpacked the systemic consequences of design decisions. Together these keynote speakers provided important insights into the role of design in embracing systemic complexity, from the micro-scale of our material contexts to the macro-scale of globally connected societies. And of course, RSD10 would not be an RSD symposium if it did not offer a place to connect around practical case examples and discuss how knowledge could improve practice and how practice could inform and guide research.
Proceedings
RSD10 has been the first symposium in which contributors were asked to submit a full paper: either a short one that presented work-in-progress, or a long one presenting finished work. With the help of an excellent list of reviewers, this set-up allowed us to shape a symposium that offered stage for high-quality research, providing a platform for critical and fruitful conversations. Short papers were combined around a research approach or methodology, aiming for peer-learning on how to increase the rigour and relevance of our studies. Long papers were combined around commonalities in the phenomena under study, offering state-of-the-art research. The moderation of engaged and knowledgeable chairs and audience lifted the quality of our discussions.
In total, these proceedings cover 33 short papers and 19 long papers from all over the world. From India to the United States, and Australia to Italy. In the table of contents, each paper is represented under its RSD 10 symposium track as well as a list of authors ordered alphabetically. The RSD10 proceedings capture the great variety of high-quality papers yet is limited to only textual contributions. We invite any reader to visit the rsdsymposium.org website to browse through slide-decks, video recordings, drawing notes and the exhibition to get the full experience of RSD10 and witness how great minds and insights have been beautifully captured!
Word of thanks
Let us close off with a word of thanks to our dean and colleagues for supporting us in hosting this conference, the SDA for their trust and guidance, Dr. Peter Jones and Dr. Silvia Barbero for being part of the RSD10 scientific committee, but especially everyone who contributed to the content of the symposium: workshop moderators, presenters, and anyone who participated in the RSD 10 conversation. It is only in this complex web of (friction-full) relationships that we can further our knowledge on systemic design: thanks for being part of it!
Dr. JC Diehl, Dr. Nynke Tromp, and Dr. Mieke van der Bijl-Brouwer
Editors RSD10
A variety of metaphors are commonly used in systemic design to make abstract concepts more concrete, externalised, and engageable-with, to enable constructs to be discussed and dealt with, and to generate new ideas. This practice builds on a long history of metaphor use in systems theory and cybernetics, and can involve a focus on language, drawing and diagrams, or physical modelling, among other approaches. However, the implications of common metaphors used in systemic design have perhaps not been elaborated and examined. This short paper proposes a discussion and activity over the course of RSD10 in which conference participants contribute and reflect on metaphors in use, tacitly or otherwise, and consider the possibilities offered by alternatives.
The paper deals with the understanding of property relations, a sense of ownership, and the need for property. Ownership relations are presented as a wide range of interactions with or around property, which is based on three interrelated elements: the owner, the target of ownership, and others (potential owners or those who must recognize the legitimacy of psychological possession). Ownership relations, as well as a very sense of ownership, on the one hand is often unconscious, background, and on the other - an ambiguous attitude on the part of society, which encourages people to hide their feelings about a target of ownership. Therefore, to work with such queries, it is best to use, especially in the initial stages, projective methods, including metaphorical associative cards. The aim of the article is to substantiate the practical techniques and means of the psychologists’ work with property relations, attitude towards property and feeling a sense of ownership with metaphorical associative cards as a tool for diagnosing and correcting client behavior and feelings about property relations. Methods. To achieve the goal of the study, the methods of analysis, synthesis and comparison are used to understand the general algorithm of work with the topic of psychological ownership and in general the principles and techniques of working with MAC, as well as the descriptive method. The main demands that can be caused by ownership relations are jealousy, envy, pathological accumulation, waste, excessive frugality, greed, feelings of loss of property, inability to own, irresponsibility, and so on. The possibility of using metaphorical associative cards as a projective method for diagnostic and correctional-therapeutic work of a psychologist with property relations is substantiated. The advantages of metaphorical associative cards for working with such type of queries are shown. The basic algorithms of request processing are described, as well as the techniques "Relationship with the target of ownership", "Ownership and parental guidelines" are presented. It has been shown that projective methods are an effective tool in the work of a psychologist and psychotherapist with such often unconscious issues as ownership and the desire for possession.
Conventional interaction design methodologies cannot fully encompass the redefined relationships between humans and increasingly intelligent technology. New methods are necessary to address interaction at early stages in the design process. Both design metaphors and enactment techniques have been suggested, and this paper explores whether a combination of these can support the design of future interactions. Across three workshops, 27 participants utilised the combination to design the interaction with an automated driving system. Analysis shows that the method combination supported imagining and designing; metaphors aided the creation of a joint conceptual vision of the relationship, and the enactment created tangible experiences and contextualisation of the design concepts. Jointly the methods brought together multi-disciplinary teams in a shared vision, by acting as a shared language and enacted representations of insights that could be engaged with and experienced together.
Analogue tools offer distinct benefits for collaborative design ideation and can take a variety of tailored forms including card decks, templates, toys and board games. However, owing to the disparate and multidisciplinary sources of these tools, there is currently no easy way to gain a coherent view of the tool landscape. To resolve this, we conducted a survey of analogue ideation tools within the design and HCI literatures, and within commercial practice. Of 3,395 results, 76 met the inclusion criteria. The resulting collection is presented and classified according to 10 descriptors including a novel taxonomy for distinguishing 7 tool types (methods, prompts, components, concepts, stories, embodiment, and construction). We also discuss gaps and opportunities for future tool development in inclusivity, cultural-tailoring and embodiment. Our aim is to help designers and design teams more fluently select, customise, critique, analyse and/or build tools to support collaborative designerly inquiry.
The recent refugee crisis has escalated and expanded in to a global challenge. In their flight from hostility, refugee populations face challenges in accessing services that are often compounded by political and social tensions. The urgency and complexity of the situation calls for HCI researchers to contribute to the management of this crisis. This SIG aims to bring to the surface the challenges faced by refugees and elicit the experiences of the authors. It also calls for forming a collaborative network of researchers that have an interest in innovatively addressing issues surrounding refugee populations.
With this research we investigate how to account for multi-generational perspectives in the design of multi-lifespan information systems, particularly in support of long-term peace-building and international justice. We do our work in the context of the publicly available Voices from the Rwanda Tribunal testbed, a historically significant collection of video interviews with personnel from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. In the research reported here, we worked with 109 Rwandan adults and youth from perpetrator and survivor communities in three provincial cities in Rwanda (Byumba, Kibuye, and Gisenyi) to understand the potentials and challenges they envision for the interview collection. Participants envisioned five categories of long-term positive outcomes for individuals and society from a multi-lifespan information system for the interview collection; and eight categories of challenges to realize those potential outcomes. In terms of multi-generational perspectives, while adults and youth tended to share an overall vision for the long-term potential of such a system, adults emphasized actionable tasks while youth educational benefits. Based on the findings, we highlight issues for appropriation of multi-lifespan information systems and reflect on our methods for eliciting multi-generational perspectives on information system design in a post-conflict society.
We introduce a design method for evolving a co-design space to support stakeholders untrained in design. Specifically, the purpose of the method is to expand and shape a co-design space so that stakeholders, acting as designers, focus not only on the form and function of a tool being envisioned but also on the social context of its use and values that lie with individuals, groups, and societies. The method introduces value sensitive stakeholder prompts and designer prompts into a co-design process, creating a particular kind of reflection-on-action cycle. The prompts provide a means for bringing empirical data on values and theoretical perspective into the co-design process. We present the method in terms of a general model, the Value Sensitive Action-Reflection Model; place the model within discourse on co-design spaces; and illustrate the model with a discussion of its application in a lo-fi prototyping activity around safety for homeless young people. We conclude with reflections on the model and method.
Value Sensitive Design is a theoretically grounded approach to the design of technology that accounts for human values in a principled and comprehensive manner throughout the design process. It employs an integrative and iterative tripartite methodology, consisting of conceptual, empirical, and technical investigations. We explicate Value Sensitive Design by drawing on three case studies. The first study concerns information and control of web browser cookies, implicating the value of informed consent. The second study concerns using high-definition plasma displays in an office environment to provide a “window” to the outside world, implicating the values of physical and psychological well-being and privacy in public spaces. The third study concerns an integrated land use, transportation, and environmental simulation system to support public deliberation and debate on major land use and transportation decisions, implicating the values of fairness, accountability, and support for the democratic process, as well as a highly diverse range of values that might be held by different stakeholders, such as environmental sustainability, opportunities for business expansion, or walkable neighborhoods. We conclude with direct and practical suggestions for how to engage in Value Sensitive Design.
The original version of this chapter is published by M.E. Sharpe (www. mesharpe. com). This chapter contains a reprint of the original paper with an additional commentary.
Most research on metaphors and computers focus on the augmentative power of the similarity between the computer application and something already familiar to the user. But metaphor may play two fundamentally different roles depending on whether the primary role of the metaphor is to express something by building on the similarity between the two referents or whether the primary role is to express something new by emphasizing the dissimilarities. On the one hand, when designing computer system we strive for system with a resemblance with the previous environment but, on the other hand, we would also like to benefit from the power of the technology and provide opportunities not available in the current environment.
Metaphor and Thought, first published in 1979, reflects the surge of interest in and research into the nature and function of metaphor in language and thought. In this revised and expanded second edition, the editor has invited the contributors to update their original essays to reflect any changes in their thinking. Reorganised to accommodate the shifts in central theoretical issues, the volume also includes six new chapters that present important and influential fresh ideas about metaphor that have appeared in such fields as the philosophy of language and the philosophy of science, linguistics, cognitive and clinical psychology, education and artificial intelligence.
The now-classic Metaphors We Live By changed our understanding of metaphor and its role in language and the mind. Metaphor, the authors explain, is a fundamental mechanism of mind, one that allows us to use what we know about our physical and social experience to provide understanding of countless other subjects. Because such metaphors structure our most basic understandings of our experience, they are "metaphors we live by"--metaphors that can shape our perceptions and actions without our ever noticing them.
In this updated edition of Lakoff and Johnson's influential book, the authors supply an afterword surveying how their theory of metaphor has developed within the cognitive sciences to become central to the contemporary understanding of how we think and how we express our thoughts in language.
This design inquiry engages concerns set within the frame of network anxieties. Our work projects and engages negative affective dimensions of digital networks including anxiety, exhaustion, overstimulation, overload, paranoia, unease, distrust, fear, and creepiness. We do this by designing alternative Internet metaphors and then applying these metaphors to the design of IoT (Internet of Things) technologies to generate speculative design proposals.
In this chapter, we focus on design techniques that employ a particular form of design materials, namely design cards. Design cards can support different phases of a design process, from initial ideation through ongoing concept development towards evaluation of design concepts. We present three different techniques, namely PLEX Cards, Inspiration Card Workshops and the Video Card Game, and how they are used. Once we have illustrated the three techniques, we discuss general characteristics of design cards that make them great tools in collaborative design (i.e., tangible idea containers, triggers of combinatorial creativity, and collaboration enablers).
In recent years, the HCI community has recognized the need to address long(er) term information system design around on-going societal problems. Yet how to engage stakeholders effectively in multi-lifespan design thinking remains an open challenge. Toward that end, the work reported here extends an established envisioning method by introducing two new design methods, the multi-lifespan timeline and multi-lifespan co-design, with an emphasis on the element of (long) time. The new methods aim to stimulate participants' visions of future information systems by: (a) enhancing participants' understanding of longer timeframes (e.g., 100 years), and (b) guiding participants to effectively project themselves long into the future in their design thinking. We explored these multi-lifespan design methods in work with 51 Africans from Rwanda and the Great Lakes region living in the USA to understand the challenges and opportunities they envision for designing future information systems for transitional justice in Rwanda. Contributions are two-fold: (1) methodological innovation, and (2) a case study of multi-lifespan design thinking generated by diaspora members of post-conflict societies.
Introduction What is Value Sensitive Design? The Tripartite Methodology: Conceptual, Empirical, and Technical Investigations Value Sensitive Design in Practice: Three Case Studies Value Sensitive Design's Constellation of Features Practical Suggestions for Using Value Sensitive Design Conclusion Acknowledgments References
Metaphor and Thought, first published in 1979, reflects the surge of interest in and research into the nature and function of metaphor in language and thought. In this revised and expanded second edition, the editor has invited the contributors to update their original essays to reflect any changes in their thinking. Reorganised to accommodate the shifts in central theoretical issues, the volume also includes six new chapters that present important and influential fresh ideas about metaphor that have appeared in such fields as the philosophy of language and the philosophy of science, linguistics, cognitive and clinical psychology, education and artificial intelligence.
We introduce the Envisioning Cards - a versatile toolkit for attending to human values during design processes - and discuss their early use. Drawing on almost twenty years of work in value sensitive design, the Envisioning Cards are built upon a set of four envisioning criteria: stakeholders, time, values, and pervasiveness. Each card contains on one side a title and an evocative image related to the card theme; on the flip side, the card shows the envisioning criterion, elaborates on the theme, and provides a focused design activity. Reports from the field demonstrate use in a range of research and design activities including ideation, co-design, heuristic critique, and more.
"Methods of Educational and Social Science Research: An Integrated Approach" provides students with a realistic view of how research is done and a useful framework for designing, implementing, and evaluating studies. Pulling together criteria into a single, easy-to-remember model, the text clarifies the relationship of the criteria to the research, helps students understand the human nature of the scientific process—where the criteria by which research is judged come from—and provides a useful way of arranging the constantly changing scene of research methods. Emphasis throughout is on the nature of research—how research findings become accepted knowledge. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Previous research on metaphor and a collection of cases where metaphors have been consciously or unconsciously used are reviewed. Based on these cases, a set of guidelines for metaphorical design is offered. Finally, based on the cases and the guidelines, a set of characteristics of metaphorical design is presented as a theoretical basis for understanding what metaphors are and how they work.
Despite causing many debates in human-computer interaction (HCI), the term “metaphor” remains a central element of design practice. This article investigates the history of ideas behind user-interface (UI) metaphor, not only technical developments, but also less familiar perspectives from education, philosophy, and the sociology of science. The historical analysis is complemented by a study of attitudes toward metaphor among HCI researchers 30 years later. Working from these two streams of evidence, we find new insights into the way that theories in HCI are related to interface design, and offer recommendations regarding approaches to future UI design research.
The now-classic Metaphors We Live By changed our understanding of metaphor and its role in language and the mind. Metaphor, the authors explain, is a fundamental mechanism of mind, one that allows us to use what we know about our physical and social experience to provide understanding of countless other subjects. Because such metaphors structure our most basic understandings of our experience, they are "metaphors we live by"âmetaphors that can shape our perceptions and actions without our ever noticing them. In this updated edition of Lakoff and Johnson's influential book, the authors supply an afterword surveying how their theory of metaphor has developed within the cognitive sciences to become central to the contemporary understanding of how we think and how we express our thoughts in language.
Dark Clouds, Io&#!+, and (Crystal Ball Emoji)
- James Pierce
- Carl Disalvo
Collaboration in Creative Design
- Andrés Lucero
- Peter Dalsgaard
- Kim Halskov
- Jacob Buur
Andrés Lucero, Peter Dalsgaard, Kim Halskov, and
Jacob Buur. 2016. Designing with cards. In Panos
Markopoulos, Jean-Bernard Martens, Julian Malins,
Karin Coninx, and Aggelos Liapis (eds.), Collaboration
in Creative Design. Springer International Publishing
Switzerland, 75-95.
Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice: The Definitive Text Of Qualitative Inquiry Frameworks And Options
- Michael Quinn Patton
- Patton Michael Quinn
Michael Quinn Patton. 2015. Qualitative Research &
Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice:
The Definitive Text Of Qualitative Inquiry Frameworks
And Options. SAGE Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks,
CA.
Session 28: Values & Ethics DIS
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab. 2011.
Session 28: Values & Ethics
DIS 2018, June 9-13, 2018, Hong Kong
Envisioning Cards. Available at: http://www.
envisioningcards.com
19. Voices from the Rwanda Tribunal. Website.
Retrieved September 18, 2017 from http://www.
tribunalvoices.org
- Ideo
IDEO. 2014. Nature Cards. Available at: https://www.
ideo.com/post/nature-cards
Methods of Educational and Social Science Research: The Logic of Methods. Waveland Press Long Grove IL. David R. Krathwohl. 2009. Methods of Educational and Social Science Research: The Logic of Methods
- R David
- Krathwohl
Methods of Educational and Social Science Research: The Logic of Methods
- R David
- Krathwohl
- Krathwohl David R.