Showing papers in "Interactions in 2008"

TIMELINESTag clouds and the case for vernacular visualization

Abstract: Most HCI history articles trace digital developments back to the 1980s, 1960s, or earlier. Information visualization is moving so rapidly that it's great to have a look back and glance forward on tag clouds, just over a decade old in digital form, from leading visualization researchers Fernanda Viegas and Martin Wattenberg. ---Jonathan Grudin

ON MODELINGAn evolving map of design practice and design research

Abstract: How Is the Map Organized? The design research map is defined and described by two intersecting dimensions: One is defined by approach and the other is defined by mind-set. Approaches to design research have come from a research-led perspective (shown at the bottom of the map) and from a design-led perspective (shown at the top of the map). The research-led perspective has the longest history and has been driven by applied psychologists, anthropologists, sociologists, and engineers. The design-led perspective, on the other hand, has come into view more recently. (See Figure 1.) There are two opposing mind-sets evident in the practice of design research today. The left side of the map describes a culture characterized by an expert mind-set. Design researchers here are involved with designing for people. These design researchers consider themselves to be the experts, and they see and refer to people as “subjects,” “users,” “consumers,” etc. The right side of the map describes a culture characterized by a participatory mind-set. Design researchers on this side design with people. They see the people as the true experts in domains of experience such as living, learning, working, etc. Design researchers who have a participatory mind-set value people as co-creators in the design process. It is difficult for many people to move from the left to the right side of the map (or vice versa), as this shift entails a significant cultural change. (See Figure 2.) The largest and most developed of the areas on Design research is in a state of flux. The design research landscape has been the focus of a tremendous amount of exploration and growth over the past five to 10 years. It is currently a jumble of approaches that, while competing as well as complementary, nonetheless share a common goal: to drive, inspire, and inform the design development process. Conflict and confusion within the design research space are evident in the turf battles between researchers and designers. Online communities reveal the philosophical differences between the applied psychologists and the applied anthropologists, as well as the general discontent at the borders between disciplines. At the same time, collaboration is evident in the sharing of ideas, tools, methods, and resources in online design research communities. We can also see an increase in the number and quality of global design research events and a growing emphasis on collaborative projects between industry and the universities, particularly in Europe.

Empowering kids to create and share programmable media

Abstract: such as Flickr and YouTube and blogs, which support usergenerated content, enabling people to create and share text, graphics, photos, and videos. But for the most part, Web 2.0 does not include interactive content. People interact with Web-based animations and games all the time, but few people can create and share their own interactive content. The Scratch project [1] from MIT Media Lab aims to change that, making it easy for everyone, especially children and teens, to create and share interactive stories, games, and animations on the Web, in the participatory spirit of Web 2.0. With the Scratch programming environment [2], users snap together graphical programming blocks to control the actions and interactions of rich media content, including photos, graphics, music, and sound. Then they upload their interactive creations to the shared Scratch website, where other members of the Scratch community can interact with the projects on the site and download the original source code to examine or modify the project [3]. The Scratch website offers an alternate model for how children Empowering Kids to Create and Share Programmable Media

THE WAY I SEE ITSignifiers, not affordances

Abstract: It's time for a review. As times and technologies change, as we have moved from individual to group, social, and even cultural computing, and as communication technologies have become as important as computational ones, how well have our design principles kept up? One of our fundamental principles is that of perceived affordances: how we know what to do in novel situations. That's fine for objects, but what about situations? What about people, social groups, cultures? The answer is the same, yet different. Yes, there are still perceived affordances, constraints, and conceptual models, but there's more. There are trails. There are behaviors. We know how to behave by watching the behavior of others, or if others are not there, by the trails they have left behind. As we move from the world of stand-alone objects to social structures, complex, intelligent products, and a heavy dominance of services, then new principles are needed. Powerful clues arise from what I call social signifiers. A " signifier " is some sort of indicator , some signal in the physical or social world that can be interpreted meaningfully. Signifiers indicate critical information, even if the signifier itself is an accidental byproduct of the world. Social signifiers are those that are relevant to social usages. Some social indicators simply are the unintended but informative result of the behavior of others. Let me illustrate. Suppose you are rushing to catch a train. You know the train was scheduled to depart soon. You run across the city, run up the stairs in the train station, and rush on to the platform. But there is no train. Did you miss it, or perhaps it simply has not arrived yet? How can you tell? The state of the platform serves as a signifier. People milling about? The train has not arrived. An empty plat-form? Oops, you missed it. This is an example of an incidental, accidental signifier. It isn't completely reliable, working better in small towns with only occasional trains than in crowded cities where many trains use the same platforms, but that is the nature of signifiers: often useful , but of mixed reliability. Social signifiers, such as the presence or absence of people on a train platform, painted lines on the street, the trails that signal shortcuts through parks or across planted areas, are examples of signaling systems. Signals come in many forms, sometimes naturally evolved, sometimes conventions …

COVER STORY Pencils before pixels: a primer in hand-generated sketching

Abstract: position themselves on the periphery of concept generation. The fact is that we all can draw, and there is a misperception that one has to be the Michelangelo of design drawing to be able to communicate visually. As young children, we had no fear of drawing and putting our work out in the public domain, but as adults, we’ve grown extremely self-conscious of our abilities and inabilities and now fear being judged. Gaining competence in drawing is similar to becoming a marathon runner; it can’t happen overnight. But, like running, most of us can already somewhat do it—we just need to devote the time and energy toward building this skill to become truly versed in it. As a drawing instructor in the School of Design at Carnegie Mellon University, my role is to shape students to become better visual communicators and therefore, better visual thinkers. We always start our creative processes with hand drawing: pencils before pixels. This article will touch upon some of the methods used in the School of Design to present a primer for practicing interaction designers to become better visual thinkers and communicators by employing hand-generated techniques to enrich their creative design processes.

FEATUREDesigning worth---connecting preferred means to desired ends

Abstract: Thingness is a consequence of physicality. Objects have boundaries, but even these are a function of context. Soak them, roast them, freeze them, squeeze them, drop them, or swing them and their forms may no longer endure. Our idealized reification of things strips away contingencies to construct “normal” encounters and usage, but every property that we attribute (e.g., color, weight, strength) is the result of interactions in context. We can sketch explicit connections by adapting techniques used in advertising and marketing, which ladder from product attributes to the happy endings of consumer values. I call the resulting connection sketch of intersecting means-ends chains a “worth map.”

On modeling The analysis-systhesis bridge model

Abstract: Analysis-synthesis bridge model Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without the fee, provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage, and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on services or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. © ACM 1072-5220/08/0300 $5.00 Abstract Researching Prototyping

Lucerne Declaration on Geographical Education for Sustainable Development

Abstract: A brief review of the contribution of Geography to Education for Sustainable Development is presented. Education for sustainable development is based on the concept of the "Human-Earth", and sustai...

FEATUREIntimate interactions: online representation and software of the self

Abstract: FEATURE The user now has an explicit and visible representation inside the screen as well. This representation has different names, including \" profile \" and \" avatar, \" and it is ultimately through this representation of the self, rather than the \" real \" self sitting in \" meat space, \" that people interact with data, systems, and one another in computer-mediated settings. Avatars are perhaps the most visible example. They can range from a simple photo (e.g., in Facebook) to a fully realized videogame character with an otherworldly appearance, extensive cultural history, and set of abilities and racial characteristics (e.g., in World of Warcraft). Going back in time, avatars in the multiuser dungeons (MUDs) of the 1990s were text-based representations of the self, composed by users and shared with other users. Though diverse in origin and use, avatars all share a common feature: Their relationship to their meat-space counterparts is symbolic, manipulable, ideal-ized, and/or dynamic. A glimpse of one's Facebook or Twitter contacts, for instance, reveals a range of profile photos, from glamour shots to Simpsons characters, rather than every-Few people would say that they wished their romantic lives were more like computing: efficient , automated, inorganic, and lightning fast. Yet technology is becoming increasingly implicated in the most intimate aspects of our lives and selves. At the same time we see calls in HCI to make technology more human scaled, everyday, domestic, and emotionally competent. Both of these trends are evidence that technology and cultural practices are still calibrating to one another. As a result, paying special attention to the intersections of technology and symbolically and emotionally dense cultural experiences, such as sex, food, and art, can be especially illuminating. We use the term \" intimacy \" as opposed to \" sexuality \" to emphasize the broadest and most inclusive notions of human sexuality as they have been explored in psychology, women's studies, philosophy , sociology, and literary theory, among other fields. This more expansive conceptualiza-tion of sexuality goes far beyond acts of physical sex to include a wide range of human relationships , such as friendship and romantic attachment; categories of experience, from pleasure to anxiety; and philosophically rich conceptual domains, such as embodiment and identity. To be sure, technology has created abundant opportunity for emotionally vacuous sexual content. However, we bracket such content aside, not because it lacks social or technical significance , but rather because …

FEATUREIgnorance of interaction programming is killing people

Abstract: Almost a century ago, the April 9, 1929, issue of the International Herald Tribune reported the death of three young brothers. All of them had been given a dose of thallium acetate 10 times what was intended, because of a decimal point error. Decimal-point errors occur regularly. For instance, on October 7, 1998, The New York Times reported the death of a 10-month-old from a decimal-point error. In May 2001, the Canadian Institute of Safe Medication Practice (ISMP) reported two deaths caused by decimal-point errors: In two separate cases, .5 mg of morphine was misread as 5 mg. The ISMP report mentioned that decimal-point errors were among the first safety issues the Institute had dealt with when it was founded almost 10 years ago. We are still risking such errors every day. The title of this article mentions " interaction programming , " a term I've introduced to distinguish the programming aspects of interaction from the more-often-emphasized human aspects [1]. Human factors and design, together with user-centered processes, are often taken to be all there is to interaction design, but the hidden partner is the details of how things work when they are used. As they say, the devil is in the details, and this is a matter of programming. This article shows that the programming matters a great deal. A crucial point is that good interaction programming has to be engineered into a device's design by good programmers; it cannot be established by inspection after it is working. A very simple example is the Cardinal Health Alaris GP infusion pump, a new model introduced in 2006. I have one, and its firmware failed, so the manufacturers replaced it. The replacement has a new user interface quite different from the old, but of course the physical ergonom-ics are identical. Although there are some obvious differences between the old and new user interfaces, the exact differences (all of which affect users) cannot be established by inspecting the device. Interactive programs are too complex for unaided human comprehension; instead, good user-interface-design requirements must be engineered into programs by rigorous, formal processes. User-centered methods and processes are essential, and, quite rightly, are emphasized by the usability community, but they are not sufficient to assure safe interaction. For too long user-centered methods and programming have lived in different worlds—programmers discount human factors, and usability people discount programming. Users do not understand design; neither they …

ON MODELINGDesign in the age of biology: shifting from a mechanical-object ethos to an organic-systems ethos

Abstract: 35 FORUM In the early 20th century, our understanding of physics changed rapidly; now our understanding of biology is undergoing a similar rapid shift. Freeman Dyson wrote: \" It is likely that biotechnology will dominate our lives and our economic activities during the second half of the twenty-first century, just as computer technology dominated our lives and our economy during the second half of the twentieth [1]. \" Recent breakthroughs in biology are largely about information—understanding how organisms encode it, store, reproduce, transmit, and express it—mapping genomes, editing DNA sequences, mapping cell-signaling pathways. Changes in our understanding of physics, accompanied by rapid industrialization, led to profound cultural shifts: changes in our view of the world and our place in it. In this context, modernism arose. Similarly, recent changes in our understanding of biology are beginning to create new industries and may bring another round of profound cultural shifts: new changes in our view of the world and our place in it. Already we can see the process beginning. Where once we described computers as mechanical minds, increasingly we describe computer networks with more biological terms—bugs, Over the past 30 years, the growing presence of electronic information technology has changed the context and practice of design. Changes in the production tools that designers use (software tools, computers, networks, digital displays, and printers) have altered the pace of production and the nature of specifications. But production tools have not significantly changed the way designers think about practice. In a sense, graphic designer Paul Rand was correct when he said, \" The computer is just another tool, like the pencil [2], \" suggesting the computer would not change the fundamental nature of design. But computer-as-production-tool is only half the story; the other half is computer-plus-network-as-media. Changes in the media that designers use (the Internet and related services) have altered what designers make and how their work is distributed and consumed. New media are changing the way designers think about practice and creating new types of jobs. For many of us, both what we design and how we design are substantially different from a generation ago. What do Electronic Media and designing have to do With Biology? Emerging design practice is largely information based, awash in the technologies of information processing and networking. Increasingly, design shares with biology a focus on information flow, on networks of actors operating at many levels, and exchanging the …

FEATURE When users "do" the Ubicomp

Abstract: ing with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers, or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or fee. Request permission to publish from: Publications Dept., ACM, Inc., Fax +1-212-869-0481 or email permissions@acm.org For other copying of articles that carry a code at the bottom of the first or last page or screen display, copying is permitted provided that the per-copy fee indicated in the code is paid through the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, +1-978-750-8400, +1-978-750-4470 (fax). A BIMONTHLy PUBLICATION OF ACM in te ra c ti o n s M a rc h + A p ri l 2 0 0 8

TRUE TALESPersona non grata

Abstract: my office and found a small woman astride my desk. Well, to be precise, it wasn't an actual woman. It was a cutout of a photograph of a doll representing an archetypal customer—a persona. My officemate had brought this odd item back for me from the CHI conference, and, knowing my extreme discomfort with this sort of tool, had left it for me as some sort of a gift. I took a closer look at the effigy and recognized a familiar level of dollmaker had outfitted her with meticulously crafted accessories such as a digital watch, ID badge, CD-ROM, and Day-Timer. And, frankly, it creeped the hell out of me. The company that produced the persona is announcing to the world that it regards its users as mere dolls, as dehumanized, lifeless , plastic lumps that are without will, motion, action, or emotion until their master (creator?) physically animates them. There is powerful subtext here—does this company manipulate its customers the way a benevolent yet stern tween stages her tea party? The back of the cardboard cutout has some smart text about the type of user represented: her skill level, experience, attitude, objectives , job priorities, and relationship to the products this company makes. It also shows some thumbnail photos depicting the figure through the course of her workday. Unfortunately, these images evoke Team America World Police more than they evoke any actual empathy or (heaven forbid) convey useful information. This isn't a critique of this particular (frightening) persona manifestation ; this is a critique of per-sonas and the inevitable impulse to misuse them. Personas are misused to maintain a \" safe \" distance from the people we design for, manifesting contempt over understanding, and creating the facade of user-centeredness while merely reinforcing who we want to be designing for and selling to. This impulse to distance oneself from the customer while simultaneously claiming to embrace the human element isn't limited to designers and to their use of personas. Market segmentation is often presented in a similarly limiting format. For instance, a client recently approached us and outlined the different types of people they wanted to know more about. Each one came with its own infan-tilizing alliterative name, such as Critical Incident Carl, Integrator Ian, and so on. The ease with which she spoke to us about real people as if they were characters from the Strawberry Shortcake universe was …

LIFELONG INTERACTIONSOlder adults, health information, and the internet

Abstract: Margaret (not her real name), a 64-year-old, says she is interested in finding out more information about Vitamin D. A recent blood test performed as part of her annual checkup showed that Margaret’s Vitamin D level was low. She has since been taking Vitamin D, following her doctor’s directions. Margaret understands that it is “not critical” that she find out more information about this condition, and from a medical point of view, she is right. After all, the diagnosis has already been made, the treatment has already been prescribed, and she is taking the medicine as prescribed. There is really no need for this patient to have more information. Still, Margaret stresses that she is “simply interested in finding out” more information about this condition because she is “curious.” Like the majority of her age peers, Margaret has always relied on doctors as her primary source of health and medical information [1]. Since this situation is not critical, she does not want to make a special appointment with her doctor. She plans to wait until her next regular appointment to see if she might be able to get information from her doctor—although she realizes that her time with the doctor during an office visit is typically too short, and she tends not to have the time to ask every question that she would like to ask. Meanwhile, since Margaret has been a computer user for a few years and has been hearing about all of the wonderful information that is available on the Internet, she wonders, would it be possible to find some information about Vitamin D online? Margaret had been wondering about this for the past several months but had not actually tried to search for the information on the Internet—until she volunteered to participate in my summer 2007 study of older adults’ health-information behavior. When I asked Margaret what factors would affect her decision about whether or not to use the Internet to find heath information, she responded immediately (and quite emotionally): “If I knew how to use it!” She then started laughing, awkwardly: “That’s the factor! And the fact is, I don’t know how very well.” I asked her if she would be willing to actually try out her search ideas on a computer and show me her process; she agreed, after some hesitation. She sat in front of a computer, opened Internet Explorer, and when Google came up, she typed in “Vitamin D and absorption.” This search returned 1,400,000 results. She looked at the screen and said, “Okay, I need to do something so that I don’t have this many hits. I don’t know very well what to do, so I’m going to think of something to do.” She paused, and then typed in “Vitamin D and calcium absorption.” This time she got 1,200,000 results. She started laughing awkwardly again while staring at her search results and struggling to try to figure out what to do: “I don’t know what to do now. I’ve got a million two hundred thousand hits, and I guess I just start reading? That’s where I am with it. It just seems like there must be a better way to do something. So at this point I read for a while and I pick one that sounds good... it’s just hit and miss now, and it doesn't strike me as the best way to do any of this, but I don't know what to do.” Margaret’s story can illustrate several important points regarding older adults’ health-information behavior, and the role and potential of the Internet in helping older adults obtain necessary health information. First, older adults typically have greater needs than younger adults for health services and information, yet those needs are often unmet through conventional channels such as physicians and nurses [1]. There is extensive evidence that patients, older or younger, Internet users or not, want to have detailed information about their conditions and treatments, even if they still prefer that doctors make decisions about their healthcare [2]. As Margaret has told us, she is interested in having information—that would be noncritical from a medical point of view—because she wants to have [1] Wicks, D. A. \"Older Adults and Their Information-seeking.\" Behavioral and Social Sciences Librarian, 22, no. 2 (2004): 1–26.

When users "do" the ubicomp

Abstract: ing with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers, or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or fee. Request permission to publish from: Publications Dept., ACM, Inc., Fax +1-212-869-0481 or email permissions@acm.org For other copying of articles that carry a code at the bottom of the first or last page or screen display, copying is permitted provided that the per-copy fee indicated in the code is paid through the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, +1-978-750-8400, +1-978-750-4470 (fax). A BIMONTHLy PUBLICATION OF ACM in te ra c ti o n s M a rc h + A p ri l 2 0 0 8

COVER STORYToto, I've got a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore…

Abstract: Editor's Note: Meredith's critique---adapted from her opening keynote address of the 2008 AIGA Massaging Media 2 conference---speaks to design education beyond the boundaries of graphic design. Our thanks to Hugh Dubberly for bringing her speech to our attention.

(P)REVIEWDesign education for business and engineering management students: a new approach

Abstract: tive thinking” at the Rotman School in Toronto. But MMM’s focus on the design of operations is unique. The structure of the program is still evolving, but the basic outlines are clear. Students in the MMM design track will take courses along with other MBA students in the three basic components of business— finance, marketing, and operations—and will do an industry internship. The design track will add new courses on the operations side, taught by both the regular faculty and consulting faculty with experience in design, such as Karen Holtzblatt of InContext and Larry Keeley from Doblin Design. Students in the engineering design and innovation program (codirected by Ed Colgate) will join the MMM designers in this series of courses, which includes an integrative project course in which a small group works with a company on a real design problem. Of course, this will all change as they try it out. Don admits that he really doesn’t know yet what he will be doing. As he said, “I never understand what I’m working on while I’m working on it. When I do, I write a book and move on.” At this point the book isn’t yet written; this review of the program is prospective. Don is well aware of the problems that lie ahead in turning a good idea into effective action. This program is one of many experiments in design teaching going on around the world, and a few years from now we’ll all read the books and help write the next chapter in interaction design.

TIMELINES Themes in the early history of HCI---some unanswered questions

Abstract: influential reflection on HCI history. It was widely read, reprinted, and served as a model or starting point for subsequent histories. In this review of major themes, Ron poses questions and encourages us to seek out answers while we can. In the 1970s and 1980s I worked for two leading technology companies that eventually went out of business. They left surprisingly few traces. It would be ironic to lose knowledge of the origins of an industry that may preserve almost everything that transpires in the future. Ron’s questions demand continued attention; finding the answers may require years of effort. —Jonathan Grudin

FEATURERealizing the vision of mobile spatial interaction

Abstract: Rainer Simon Telecommunications Research Center (ftw.) | rainer.simon@ftw.at Mobile computers are increasingly used as a link between the physical and the digital worlds. This innovation demands a more sophisticated multidisciplinary approach to the modeling of spatial interaction than has yet been developed. Our aim in this article is to open up the “black box” of mobile spatial interaction (MSI) and discuss some issues and possible approaches that could be taken. Groundbreaking concepts that proposed how to combine virtual information with the user’s direct surroundings arose as early as the 1990s. Two early examples include Egenhofer’s Smart Compasses, which point and direct people to places of interest, and Geo-Wands, virtual geographic pointers for the selection of surrounding objects and

THE WAY I SEE ITWorkarounds and hacks: the leading edge of innovation

Abstract: For years I have been pondering the similarities and contradictions among the ways of coming up with new ideas for products. “Design research,” as this phase is called, offers a wide range of methods. The marketing community has long championed focus groups, surveys, and questionnaires, whereas the user-centered community favors observation, contextual analysis, and ethnography. Each method has its proponents and detractors. I have also pondered the emphasis by most practitioners, abetted by many product-design courses, to invent novel products and services to fill the needs discovered through whatever form of design research the group practices. This pondering led to my “Filling Much-Needed Holes” column in the January + February 2008 issue of interactions, where I suggested that although many of our clever ethnographic and field methods are designed to find unmet needs, most are far better off if they stay unmet [1]. Where do new ideas come from? How should designers create, transform, innovate? Some assume that inspiration strikes suddenly in the night: Without warning insight strikes, and the inventor astounds all with a powerful, innovative idea. Psychologists agree that this can happen, but they add the important caveat that chance favors the prepared mind. These insights usually follow a prolonged period of intensive thought and study of the problem. Do we need formal observational methods? When I talk to today’s foremost designers, most are scornful. At first, I was quite disturbed by this attitude: Why were they so dismissive of these methods? Was it just arrogance? The problem is, I found their work excellent; if they were arrogant, it was well deserved. But further interaction with them convinced me that they were experts at human-centered design, except that they did it informally, without the fuss and formality that we ascribe to the activities. Great designers are like great novelists: scrupulous observers of human behavior. Although they are scornful of formal methods, they themselves are expert practitioners of observation, and if you can corner them in a quiet room (or better yet, a noisy bar), they will brag about those abilities. Moreover, the great inventions that have changed our lives did not come into being through our ethnographic methods: They preceded the invention of these techniques. Think lightbulb, radio, automobile, telephone, television, home computer, cooking equipment, and for that matter, almost everything that we use on a daily basis. Does this mean that we should ignore the formal methods? No, because great designers are rare. And all of us have seen the horrors that result when unskilled, unobservant designers, engineers, or programmers create their products. So what methods should those of us who are less skilled use? I am not a fan of undirected, explorative ethnography. This is an excellent procedure for developing our scientific understanding of human behavior, but it is too diffuse for practical application. I prefer directed observation: Search out the workarounds, hacks, and clever improvisations of everyday life. That’s where the answers lie: someone else has already encountered the need, someone else has already hinted at a solution. Nokia’s designers, the New York Times tells us, visited China and noticed people using the backlight from their mobile phones as a source of light, so they added a penlight to some of their phones [2]. [1] Norman, D. A. “Filling Much-needed Holes.” interactions 15, no. 1 (2008): 70–71.

THE WAY I SEE ITSimplicity is not the answer

Abstract: Everyone wants simplicity. The same desires are there, whether the device is a new cell phone or a shop tool, the dashboard of an automobile or the choices offered while shopping in a store. \" Why can't my technology be as easy to use as my garage-door open-er? \" asks one paper on the topic. \" One button and it opens or shuts the door. Simple, elegant. \" The cry has been picked up by everyday people, newspaper reviewers, and professionals alike. But if it is so obvious, if the need is so great, why don't the products rise to the occasion? Everyone misses the point. Simplicity is not the goal. We do not wish to give up the power and flexibility of our technologies. The garage-door opener may be simple, but it hardly does anything. If my cell phone had only one button, it certainly would be simple, but, umm, all I could do would be to turn it on or off—I wouldn't be able to make a phone call. Is the piano too complex because it has 88 keys and three pedals? Should we simplify it? Surely no piece of music uses all of those keys. The cry for simplicity misses the point. Just look at what people actually buy in the stores, says the marketing expert: People really want features. And yes, that is very true. I made this point in my earlier article on the subject (\" Simplicity Is Highly Overrated, \" interactions March+April 2007). There is indeed an apparent conflict here. As the number of features increases, so too does the desirability of the device. But as the number of features increases, simplicity goes down. Subsequently, even as people buy the devices with extra features , they cry out for simplicity. Features versus simplicity: Is there really a conflict? By standard measures, yes. We want devices that do a lot, but that do not confuse, do not lead to frustration. Aha! This is not about simplicity—it's about frustration. The entire debate is being framed incorrectly. Features do not equal capability. Simplicity is not the same as usability. Simplicity is not the answer. There is an implicit assumption: Features Capability Simplicity Ease of use These two statements translate into simple logic: Everyone wants more capability, so therefore they want more features. Everyone wants ease of use, so therefore they want simplicity. Alas, this simple logic is …

LIFELONG INTERACTIONSUnderstanding children's interactions: evaluating children's interactive products

Abstract: It was Peter Medawar who wrote, “Today the world changes so quickly that in growing up we take leave not just of youth but of the world we were young in....” The world of interactive technology changes so rapidly that for most adult observers, the interactive world inhabited by children is both unknown and, once entered into, under-comprehended. Some interaction design researchers have tried to make sense of children’s interactive technology by immersing themselves, as much as they are able, in children’s worlds. In particular, these researchers place great emphasis on involving children in the design and evaluation of interactive technologies, both to learn about the technologies and to learn about children’s interactions. This immersion was, to some extent, a result of the considerable activity in the study of interactive technology for children that took place about 10 years ago. One product of this era was the seminal work by Hanna, Risden et al. on usability testing with children [1]. This work was published in interactions at a time when the emphasis on the design of interactive technology for children was shifting from a concern with educational aspects to a more general interest in designing for children [2]. As it was set in an industrial landscape (the authors of this work were usability engineers at Microsoft), the paper provided well-considered advice for “would-be” evaluators of children’s interactive technology at a time when the inclusion of children in the testing and design of their own products was only really just gaining ground.

FEATUREWhat should be automated

Abstract: One of the most influential figures in the early development of computer science, George Forsythe, argued in 1968 that \" the question 'What can be automated?' is one of the most inspiring philosophical and practical questions of contemporary civilization [1]. \" Almost 20 years later, Peter Denning wrote that computer science is \" the body of knowledge dealing with the design, analysis, implementation , efficiency, and application of processes that transform information \" and suggested that \" What can be automated? \" is the fundamental question underlying all of computing [2]. That question emphasizes the very foundations of computing as a discipline—it asks, in a very general way, what in principle can be automated with any kind of machinery. Later Denning et al. [3] refined the question to \" What can be (efficiently) automated? \" Although the discipline of computing has diversified greatly since 1968, this \" fundamental question \" has rarely been challenged. In addition to that one fundamental question, Denning listed 11 topic areas of computing and outlined a number of fundamental questions asked in each topic area [2]. In the end Denning had 50 questions altogether. However, in 19 of the 50 fundamental questions that Denning mentioned, the question deals with how instead of what. Denning's 50 fundamental questions include questions such as: \" How can large databases be protected from inconsistencies generated by simultaneous access…? \" \" How can the fact that a system is made of components be hidden from users who do not wish to see that level of detail? \" and \" What basic models of intelligence are there, and how do we build machines that simulate them [2]? \" The theoretical question \" What can be automated? \" is the central question in computabil-ity theory, which studies what in principle can be computed with any kind of machinery. The theoretical question \" What can be efficiently automated? \" is one of the central questions in computational complexity theory, which studies the amount of resources, such as time and storage , that it takes to solve different kinds of computational problems. Researchers in those fields often are indifferent about the specific technologies that might be used to automate processes. Many computing researchers do not, however, stop at theories about automation, but their work includes implementing systems that automate various things. \" How can one automate things efficiently and reliably? \" is the crucial …

FEATUREThe dilemma of the shared mobile phone---culture strain and product design in emerging economies

Abstract: it’s essential, and what’s more, it’s everywhere. It is, in fact, hard for people in developed markets to remember what it was like not to be available 24/7. The ability to reach anyone, anytime, from absolutely anywhere has become a given. BlueToothed or iPhoned, the connected yet very private (or at least self-absorbed) world of the cell phone could very well be the quintessential expression of Western culture. Yet in much of the rest of the world, where even clear, accessible landlines are more of a plan than a reality, mobile telephony is starting to have an impact. Clearly, it’s a huge economic opportunity for the industry. But there’s more to entering these markets than throwing up a network of towers. Before you get the product in people’s hands, it’s essential to understand the culture. Cultures are complex and dynamic systems, moved by often contradictory forces. Looking only at the dominant characteristics of a culture—as more than a few companies have done in failed attempts at crosscultural marketing—is a bit like the Indian story of several blind men describing an elephant (“It’s a wall!” “It’s a tree!” “No, it’s a snake!”). So when going from a cellphone-rich environment to one that is cell-phone poor, mobile phone designers need to throw out everything they thought they knew about their product— and about culture. Instead, they have to look carefully at how people actually use cell phones in a particular emerging market. What they will find—as will designers of every type of product and service—are rich opportunities for value-added solutions that lie in the gaps between cultural ideal and cultural practice. To get a better idea of how this sort of research works in the cross-cultural design process, let’s look at three scenarios from an emerging market. In each of these stories from India, a Western product creates tension and exposes tensions within Indian culture itself.

On modelingThe experience cycle

Abstract: In this article, we contrast the “sales cycle” and related models with the “experience cycle” model. The sales cycle model is a traditional tool in business that frames the producer-customer relationship from the producer’s point of view and aims to funnel potential customers to a transaction. The experience cycle is a new tool, synthesizing and giving form to a broader, more holistic approach being taken by growing numbers of designers, brand experts, and marketers. The experience cycle frames the producer-customer relationship from the customer’s point of view and aims to move well beyond a single transaction to establish a relationship between producer and customer and foster an ongoing conversation. We acknowledge the sales-cycle model has value. And designers need to be familiar with it. But when the sales cycle comes up as a topic of discussion in a client engagement, designers should also think of the experience cycle as an alternative frame—and should introduce it into the discussion. We believe the experience cycle is a more useful model not only for designers but also for marketing and sales people, because it is more likely to lead to an experience of lasting value for customers, and thus greater long-term value for producers. The sales cycle is a model commonly used in business. It often frames the basic structure of marketing and sales activities, providing a practical template for planning. The sales cycle describes the series of steps leading to a sale (or purchase), including awareness, consideration, and selection. The goal is to push customers to buy—advertising to increase familiarity, informing to build knowledge, offering incentives to close a deal. The sales cycle also refers to the time required to complete the sales process. The length of the sales cycle varies depending on the cost, complexity, and context of use of the product being sold. For example, a hospital information system might have a three-year sales cycle; a new game console might have a sales cycle lasting a few days or weeks. The sales cycle does not have a single, canonical form. Many variations appear in the literature, and in practice people often tailor the model, adding or subtracting steps to fit their own situations. A common characteristic of sales-cycle models is the funnel shape, a visual analogy to a process that begins with a large pool of candidates, narrows to a group of interested prospects, and narrows again to those who purchase. The funnel model is useful in managing a “sales pipeline.” Defining a series of steps in the sales process creates opportunities for setting goals, tracking performance, and analyzing effectiveness, which makes forecasting more reliable and enables improvement of the process. An update to the sales-cycle model frames stages in the process as goals the seller has for customer thinking, adds actions the seller may take to achieve those goals, and measures its effectiveness. This model also adds a stage for customer feedback, important for product improvement and innovation. Related to the sales-cycle model are models of decision making and technology adoption. Rogers[1] articulates a five-step innovation decision process: 1. Knowledge 4. Implementation 2. Persuasion 5. Confirmation 3. Decision The funnel shaped sales-cycle model Stage Awareness Consideration Selection

COVER STORYToward a model of innovation

Abstract:  A Model of innovation, March 00 . Dubberly Design Office prepared this 27-by-38inch concept map as a project of the Institute for Creative Process at the Alberta College of Art and Design (ACAD). Written and designed by Hugh Dubberly, Nathan Felde, and Paul Pangaro, additional design by Sean Durham and Ryan Reposar. Research by Satoko Kakihara and ACAD faculty Chris Frey, Wayne Giles, and Darlene Lee.

FEATURE What robotics can learn from HCI

Abstract: As the robotics field grows and becomes competitive, robotics companies are beginning to inject user-centered design methods into their processes. Applying HRI methods to industrial and commercial products introduces new challenges and a focus on cheap, proven methods. The specialty of human-robot interaction (HRI) is a growing group of roboticists, social scientists, and designers, but the field of industrial practitioners is still small. Robotics has yet to reach the transition point that Don Norman talks about in The Invisible Computer, where the level of performance exceeds users’ needs [1]. For that reason, the robotics industry to this point has focused on technology rather than user experience. As we see robots become ubiquitous consumer products, that focus is starting to change. At iRobot we have one practitioner of HRI (that’s me). iRobot has begun the transition from a technology-centered company to a user-centered company, as we grow from research robots toward commercial products. As we focus more on product development, we transform many research methods from the HCI and HRI fields into practice. Additionally, robotics companies provide a good opportunity to put HCI principles into practice. What Robotics Can Learn from HCI

FEATURETake a chance on me: using randomness for the design of digital devices

Abstract: Randomness has long beguiled and fascinated human beings. It is widely used as a powerful computational resource, as mathematicians and scientists use it to encrypt, model, and predict. Artists, on the other hand, have recognized randomness’s versatility and ability to provoke, seed, and capture our imagination. They exploit the ephemeral qualities of randomness, utilizing them as creative tools to produce innovative artistic output. For interaction designers, randomness can be used to enrich designed user experiences. Encounters with randomness exploit our natural urge to interpret and our tendency to try to make sense of things when engaging with content in unpredictable and unexpected ways. As design discourse shifts from “beyond the object” into “experience design,” the design of digital devices is increasingly motivated by users and their experiences, and an appreciation of the role of randomness can provide designers with a unique perspective as they grapple with the complexities of “users” and “experiences.” Experiencing randomness Our experience of randomness is suffused with a host of other phenomena, including the concepts of luck and chance. Our encounters with randomness also result in qualities such as uncertainty, unpredictability, indeterminacy, and unexpectedness. Randomness is often something to be managed, and whose negative effects mitigated. Culturally, “uncertainty avoidance” is considered one of the five defining dimensions of human beings [1]. Yet unanticipated encounters can also lead to particularly pleasant experiences with desirable ends, such as that of serendipity. Van Andel’s extensive study of more than a thousand examples shows that serendipity has had very strong relevance in the progress of science. Many scientific breakthroughs have been credited (in part) to the accidental, unforeseen nature of randomness [2].