Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
beyond work 08.ppt
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

beyond work 08.ppt

296

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
296
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Investigating collaborative (mobile) media beyond work Shooting and sharing Converging Giving Living together
  • 2. Today’s topics
    • Mobile collaborative activity
      • Shooting and sharing
        • How and why are images shared?
        • What can be learned from everyday capturing and sharing of images to support the design of camera phones
      • Giving
        • Txts as ‘gifts’ and implications for design
      • Converging
        • Usability and acceptability issues in the merging of collaborative and personal technologies
    • Living together
      • Researching cooperation at home
  • 3. What are photos for - printed photos as shared resources
    • Printed photos - Liechtl & Ichikawa (2000)
      • Shared photos: giving to/sharing with friends
      • Household photos: framed and displayed
      • Work photos: displayed at work
      • Wallet photography: personal photos carried in wallet or purse
      • Tourist photography: holiday photos
    • OK, but what are photos for? This surely affects the way we might store, share and search on camera phones
      • Reminiscing?
      • Reinforcing social contact?
      • Reference, shared or otherwise?
  • 4.
    • Classify the images stored on your (or your neighbour’s) camera phone according to
      • Type of picture content - people, objects, landscapes
      • Why they were captured and stored
      • How - if at all - they are shared with other people
  • 5. What are photos for - camera phones
    • Increasingly researched from the perspective of technology design
    • Two in-depth naturalistic studies, sociological/ethnographic (Okabe) and design-oriented (Kindberg), but similar observations
  • 6. Emergent social practices: Okabe (2004)
    • Okabe, D (2004) Emergent Social Practices, Situations and Relations through Everyday Camera Phone Use, Proc. Int’l Conf. Mobile Comm. and Social Change, 2004, pp. 1–19.
    • http://keitai.sfc.keio.ac.jp/ja/pdf/okabe_0410-1.pdf
    • Japanese ethnographic study, undertaken in 2003
      • Camera phones comprised >60% of all mobiles
    • Aim “to provide qualitative and experiential contexts”
    • Diaries of usage - content and contextual details
      • Time of usage, who in contact with, recipient or initiator, where…
    • Records of photos taken, received & shared (& collected last 10 pictures)
    • In-depth interviews
    • 15 participants: high school & college students, housewives, professionals
  • 7. Usage patterns 1
    • Personal archiving “most photos”
      • Note taking
      • “ momentary slice of a viewpoint”
        • Highly personal and individual, related to identity construction
      • Onamori (good luck charm)
    • Intimate sharing
      • Usually viewed together on handset, not sent
        • Sending photos is intrusive and expensive
      • Close family and friends
        • “ distributed co-presence”
        • Maintaining close contact as an end in itself: “tele-cocooning”
  • 8. Usage patterns 2
    • Peer-to-peer news and reporting
      • “ noteworthy events that others may be interested in”
      • Less intimate mode of sharing
      • Everyday photo-journalism
    • Also for online photo-journals
  • 9. Conclusions
    • Ubiquitous and lightweight camera phones capture fleeting and unexpected moments
    • More strongly personal, first-person content compared with the third party perspective of a family group or scene captured with a traditional camera
    • Archive of fragments of everyday life
    • Sharing protocols still evolving
    • Gaze of others always potentially present
  • 10. The Ubiquitous Camera: Kindberg et al (2005)
    • Kindberg, T. Spasojevic, M., Fleck, R. and Sellen, A. (2005) The Ubiquitous Camera: An in-depth study of camera phone use, IEEE Pervasive Computing , April-June 2005, 42-50
    • Interview-based study
    • Aim to “understand how people use these devices to help steer a course for facilities that people will truly value”
    • Two interviews, 2-5 weeks apart
      • 5 ‘random’ images from phone
        • For each image asked details of capture, sharing and usage
      • Logged image data for inter-interview period
      • Difficulties, perceived value and wishlist
    • 34 participants, rather more men than women
      • 9 aged 16-21 and 10 over-21 in UK
      • 4 aged 16-21 and 11 over-21 in US
      • Experienced users, variety of comms technology
  • 11. Basic findings
    • Around 34 photos captured per month
    • Only c.2 images received per month
    • Most sharing face-to-face
      • Around 6 images sent directly per month, also some sent via PCs
    • Only 12 people printed photos
    • Around 15 photos archived per month
  • 12. Kindberg et al. (2000), p.46
  • 13. Reasons for capture 1
    • 6 categories
      • Affective or functional
      • Social or individual
        • To share with others present
        • To share with absent others
    • Mutual experience (affective/social) (35%)
      • To be shared immediately
      • As mementos
    • Absent friends (affective/social) (21%)
        • Usually images of specific meaningful things or people, often woven into conversational context
        • A way to stay close: “telepresence”
    • Often intended to be shared but not sent
      • Time and effort? Or lost impulse? Or quality?
    • Wanted to keep some indefinitely but quality problems
  • 14. Reasons for capture 2
    • Personal reflection (affective/individual) (41%)
      • Largest category - as in the Osabe study
      • Portability important
        • “ It’s nice to capture a little moment to carry with you.”
      • Keeping treasured object/person close
      • Reflecting aspirations and achievements (e.g.coveted house)
      • Around two-thirds also shared, around one-third intended to keep
    • Mutual task (functional/social) (4%)
      • Task undertaken together at the time
      • Demonstrating/experimenting with phone
      • Shared record required (e.g. meeting, state of plumbing)
    • Remote task (functional/social) (8%)
      • Task undertaken with someone absent at the time of capture
      • Mostly of object connected with the task e.g. fish to feed, jacket to buy
      • Timeliness often important, images sent rather than shown
  • 15. Reasons for capture 3
    • Personal task (functional/individual) (10%)
      • Usually things connected with the task, e.g. gift ideas, meeting notes
      • Personal reminders
    • ‘ Functional’ images tend not to be kept
  • 16. Overall observations/design implications
    • Sharing mostly face-to-face and spontaneous - as in Osabe study
    • Images sent rely on shared context; depend on and strengthen relationships
    • Support for tasks is a ‘new form of communication’ (?)
    • Substantial element of keeping images long-term (27%)
    • Images captured in settings where unlikely to carry conventional camera
    • Need for
      • Reduced technical complexity, lower costs, improved quality
      • Simple send and broadcast
      • Continue communication while browsing/sharing
      • Better searching/browsing/archiving - role for contextual information?
        • Sound, location, other people…
  • 17. So, what about video on mobiles?
  • 18. www.3g.co.uk , June 2006 - Use of fixed and mobile videotelephony, Western Europe, 2006–11
  • 19.
    • Usage of personal videocommunications devices and services is set to take off in Western Europe
      • Analysy “global advisers on telecoms, IT and media”
      • http://research.analysys.com
    • By 2010
      • household penetration of fixed videocommunications will reach 32%
      • 11% of adult population will be using mobile videotelephony.
    • Mobile videotelephony's ergonomic complexity means that its usage levels may never be as high as broadband's, even with the higher quality of 3.5G
    • While 30% of 3G users in the UK had tried videotelephony, impact on revenue has been minimal
  • 20. Why?
    • O’Hara, Black & Lipson (2006) Everyday Practices with Mobile Video Telephony
      • Authors from HP Labs and Orange, suggesting real commercial pressure to find out what’s going on
    • Marketing experience and established research has consistently found resistance to the adoption of fixed-point videotelephony
      • Business video-conferencing facilities underused
      • Personal videotelephony failed to replace voice, despite confident predictions
      • Social concerns - privacy, control of self-presentation…
      • Practical barriers - setting up the kit, cost…
  • 21. Might mobile videotelephony change this?
    • Mobile phones have stimulated shifts in behaviours and attitudes in relation to audio technology
    • Does similar shifts occur with video calls?
      • More scope to show objects, context and other people with mobile video
      • More spontaneous set-up
    • “ identify new behaviours, attitudes and concerns around mobile video telephony”
  • 22. The study
    • 21 participants, all users of 3G phones
      • 13 men, 8 women, aged 20 - 40
      • Distributed across full range of market segments for lifestyles and patterns of phone use
      • Each knew some of the others (so they had someone to talk to using video)
      • Paid for participation
    • Data gathering
      • Diary (via answerphone) of all video calls over 5 weeks
        • Made or received the call
        • Who, when, why, what
        • Why video
      • Interviews pre- and post- 5 week period
  • 23. Usage findings
    • Only 58 successful video calls made, 32 received
      • On average received 1 call every 3 weeks and made one every 2 weeks
    • Location for making calls
      • Home 30%
      • Workplace 19%
      • Shop 14%
      • Car 8%
      • Public transport 6%
      • Bar 4%
  • 24. Reasons
    • Keeping in touch with ‘small talk’ - 50%
      • Maintaining relationships with partner, family and especially children
        • Here mobility and flexibility are the important factors, as well as adding emotional depth
    • Showing things - 28%
      • Potential purchases e.g. trying on a dress
      • Other people - who’s in the office?
      • Again mobility and opportunistic availability, but problems with framing the desired image & switching between face-to-face and object vie
    • Functional to achieve a goal or task - 22%
      • Typically making arrangements, business discussions
      • Video is incidental, and even a hindrance
  • 25. Social barriers (largely about managing boundaries)
    • Audio is too public
    • Video is too public
    • More inconvenient to receive than audio in inappropriate circumstances
    • Too much personal information
    • Difficult to lie
    • Aurally and visually intrusive
  • 26. Practical barriers
    • High ambient noise - because the phone is held away from the face
    • Poor lighting and camera angles
    • Difficulties of dual tasking - physical and social
  • 27. Design suggestions
    • Easier switching between audio and video modalities
    • More sophisticated profiles settings to filter video calls or to inform callers of recipient’s context (e.g. home, work, car…)
    • Some issues inherent to mobile video use, e.g. dual tasking?
  • 28. ‘ Gift-giving’ through txt
    • Taylor, A.S. and Harper, R. Age-old practices in the “ N ew World ” : A study of gift-giving between teenage mobile phone users. Proc. CHI’02, New York, ACM Press
    • From giving images to giving txts - sociological study demonstrating how the practical use of mobile technology shaped by entrenched social practices - in this case, gift giving in the shape of text messages
    • 4 month ethnographic study of six London 16-19 year olds, 2 boys, 4 girls
      • Observations and interviews
      • Experienced and frequent use of phones, more particularly, text
  • 29. Aspects of gift giving 1
    • Gifts embody meaning associated with the giver and the relationship
      • Yeah, Peter sends me loads of nice messages and I want to keep them all. It ’ s so sad cause he sends me so many nice ones and I have to delete some. I feel horrible.... And like, I really don ’ t want to give the phone back because it ’ s got so many little memories and things on. And it ’ s not the same having them written down... cause it ’ s not from him anymore...
    • And often form a ritual of exchange
      • ‘ Good-night’ messages between friends
  • 30. Aspects of gift giving 2
    • Gifts impose obligations of exchange
    • Alex: [Asks where they use their phones and what for.]
    • Jennifer: Mostly text messages, I think… At home, in my room, on my bed…. And then I get moody if they don’t reply and it’s like one o’clock in the morning. I’ve got ones that are recorded at like three o’clock in the morning. [group laughs] It’s like wicked.
    • Alice: And I do that to. Sometimes I’m like ‘okay, if I’m not sleeping then you have no right to be asleep.’
    • Jennifer: Yeah, that’s what I do. ‘How dare you be asleep when I’m awake?’
    • Alice: … and then I wake them up. And if I send a message and I see that they’re ignoring it then I call them. [Laughs] It rings and they just can’t get away from me.
  • 31. Aspects of gift giving 3
    • Reinforce alliance and friendship
      • Both at distance and face-to-face
      • A group of four girls sit round a table. Two of the girls are using mobile phones. One, G1, looks as though she is playing a game. She is heavily engaged with the phone and seems focused on it. The other, G2, is looking at a phone’s display with a third girl, G3. They laugh and talk as they look at the phone. G2 hands the phone to G3 and then retrieves another phone from a bag on the table. Meanwhile, G1 has taken G3’s phone and now holds two phones – one in each hand. She seems to be pressing the keys on one of the phones and looking between them (perhaps copying something). The four girls carry on interacting with their phones.
  • 32. Aspects of gift giving 4
    • Gifts demonstrate status and rivalry
    • You can use it to wind people up. Sometimes when, umm, I call him [boyfriend], I call his phone and the minute it rings – just the first ring – I’ll hang up… I’ll do that about five or six times. And I’m always afraid he’s in a lesson. He doesn’t tend to switch his phone off or put it on silent. It’s always on personal. So if it rings I know it’s going to interrupt his lesson. If I’m feeling evil I just do that and I call him like six times and just hang up each time and then eventually he’ll switch it off. And then he’ll call me and go: ‘You stupid girl. Why were you calling me?’ I’m like: ‘Calling you? Oh my phone must have been… I forgot to lock it or something so I must have sat on it or something.’ I’m like ‘how dare you call me stupid!’ and he starts apologising. I feel really good. I’ve never told him that I actually do it intentionally. He doesn’t know that yet,… but it’s fun… And he’s like: ‘I’m sorry, I’m sorry. You know I love you really. I’m so sorry, I’ll never ever...’
  • 33. Aspects of gift giving 5
    • Gifts carry different values
      • I hate it when they do it [send text messages] in capitals and sometimes when they don’t put punctuation marks in, ah, it annoys me. Another thing I’ve noticed is that… Ok, you’re going outside the normal rules of the normal everyday English language writing and everything and so because of that you don’t have to keep conforming to the commas, full stops, and the capitals and all that. But still, it bugs me when people refuse to do it properly. They put three words together and there’s no indication of where it starts or where it ends, no full stop, no nothing. It just looks horrible…. Yeah, because there’s some words for instance… if you don’t have enough space ok and you’re too cheap to send two messages instead of one, what you cando is probably,… use the symbol - ‘&’– so even if you join it together… that kind of isn’t as bad as if you squashed everything together… just looking urgh…
  • 34. Aspects of gift giving 6
    • Gifts can be personal or shared
      • … And ones that are directed at a lot of people like I told you my friend text me to say ‘thanks for asking me out. I had really nice time. Say hi to everyone.’ And I showed that around and said ‘argh, how cute is she?’ Because she hardly ever comes out with us, and umm,… everyone was like ‘arr, yeah…’ And then there are ones that say… Umm, I can’t think of anything. Like [pauses]… Like my friend was telling me that he used to get bullied at school and stuff and like he was saying how horrible it was and like I would never show that message to anyone, which is why I deleted it.
  • 35. Taylor and Harper’s design suggestions
    • A tangible means to store messages, such as memory cards, could be used so as to support the embodiment of meaning in the physical object.
    • Mobile phones should be designed so that the objects of exchange—the memory cards—can be shared and swapped in practical ways, ways that support observable ritual performance.
    • Elements of the design, such as access privileges to stored messages, could be used to sustain alliances and rivalries between social groups.
    • By allowing stored text messages to be accessed in the proximity of particular places or people, meaning and thus value may be ascribed to the messages.
  • 36. Convergence in mobile devices
    • Murphy, J., Kjeldskov, J., Howard. S., Shanks, G. and Hartnell-Young, E. The Converged Appliance: I love it but I hate it, Proc. Ozchi ‘05
    • Perspectives on convergence:
      • Utopian: more means more
      • Dystopian: less is more
      • Hybrid: only up to a point - the ‘usability knee’
    • Convergence of functionality and merging of collaborative, work, social and individual purposes
  • 37. Empirical study of convergence and divergence
    • Use of converged devices by young urban professionals
      • 6 people, 5 completed the study
    • Data gathering using ‘cultural probes’ - multi-faceted technique originally popularised by Gaver (1999) to have users collect data themselves on technology-in-use
      • In this case diary, scrapbook, Polaroid camera, set of catchphrases “prompting the participants to reflect on their use of technology” - used for 4 weeks
      • Interviews before and after
    • Analysed for convergence and divergence themes
  • 38.  
  • 39. Study results
    • No neat patterns of convergence or divergence, or support for utopian, dystopian or hybrid perspectives
    • Reported added value of converged devices
      • BlackBerry email devices with phone
      • Phones with cameras and email
      • Desire for the device which would be good at everything
    • But frustration with converged devices pushed past the ‘usability knee’
      • Poor usability of BlackBerry phone: separate phones used instead, hence problems solved by divergence
  • 40. Convergence-in-use findings
    • Convergence of different purposes for same device: work, home, leisure (e.g. all on the same PC)
    • And divergence in use according to purpose
      • iPods used for music in leisure settings, even though could be done through PDA or phone
      • In some cases seemed to be done explicitly to demarcate work and leisure
        • E.g. multiple mobile phones, as well as the iPod example
    • The position of the ‘usability knee’ seems to change according to purpose (and presumably goals and tasks)
      • Carrying a highly converged PDA in work hours, but a simple mobile at weekends
    • A tendency for convergent devices for work and divergent for leisure
  • 41. Researching collaborative technologies in the home
    • Technologies for the home change and are changed by domestic social relations
      • designing for the home can be viewed as ‘a social and political act’ (Bell et al. , 2005)
    • Much of what goes on at home requires, in some sense, cooperation and coordination
    • We all ‘know’ about home life, so assumptions are invisible
      • Need to defamilarise the home (Bell)
  • 42. Techniques for investigating the home
    • Technology biographies
    • Cultural/technological probes
    • Sharing domestic activities
    • Supported by
    • Interviews, usually in situ
    • Ethnographic observations
    • Diaries
    • Artefact collection and narration (remember the studies of camera phones)
    • Use of techniques woven through the following examples…
  • 43. At home with the technology
    • O'Brien, J., Rodden, T., Rouncefield, M. and Hughes, J. At home with the technology: an ethnographic study of a set-top-box trial . ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, Vol.6, No. 3, 1999, pp. 282 – 308.
    • “ study of the social organization of a number of domestic environments in the northwest of England…the ways in which an understanding of the nature of the home is of interest to the developers of future interactive technology.”
      • Specifically a set-top digital box for interactive services delivered by broadband(note date is 1999, but the approach remains valid)
      • A set of “sensitising concerns” for design
    • 11 households, range of household types, technological experience, etc.
    • Aim not to be representative, but to obtain a broad understanding of how particular technologies might be used
  • 44. Techniques & topics
    • Homes are private, so conventional ethnography unacceptable
      • Evening visits by researchers, taking part in activities and sharing meals
      • Informal interviews and observations
    • In conjunction with a trial of the set-top box (STB)
    • The report discusses, in the context of media technology in general
      • Daily routines
      • The ownership and management of domestic space
      • Co-ordination and interaction
  • 45.
    • F usually gets back at about 2:30/3:00 p.m. and picks C2 up and then starts “the evening”—she then watches children’s TV with C1 when he gets in. Then they eat at about 6:30 when M comes back from work; have dinner together in the kitchen around the table.
    • M “There’s no conflict [over use of space]. They all do what they’re told! [All laugh]... There could be a possible conflict of interest, but it’s such a big house,that if you want to do something and find a hole in which to do it... um, the only conflict arises when we’ve got one television and one hifi stereo system, in a similar area... and that... which is up there... but both of them can actually be plugged into headphones, so if there’s only one person wanting to watch Baywatch [R had joked earlier about his enjoyment of this program]...”
  • 46. The STB trial
    • Box provided access to film, television, music, radio, games, shopping, local information, timetables, tickets, energy use monitoring, bill-paying, home banking - pin-based security
    • Issues surfaced
      • Aesthetics
      • Control of the technology and its costs
      • Perceptions and understanding of the technology
      • M “Where’s it all stored, all the past episodes... is it stored in there?” [Points to STB. Fieldworker briefly outlines the infrastructure]
      • F “So you have got virtually infinite storage?”
      • M “So are you paying all the time on all the services on-line?”
    • Security
    • Concentration of technology
  • 47. Conclusions
    • Need for technology which can be exploited in a flexible manner, often in distributed locations
      • homes and routines are very different
    • Need for transparent management and control of the technology
    • Distributed and cooperative nature of domestic live
    • The importance of social aspects in the adoption of technology
    • Useful role of ethnography in surfacing these issues
  • 48. Technology biographies
    • Blythe, M., Monk, A., and Park, J. 2002. Technology biographies: Field study techniques for home use development. CHI’02 Extended Abstracts.
    • A structured technique for home ethnography
  • 49. Elements of the technology biography
    • Technology tour
      • Tour of the house, what technology is used where, why, when, by whom
      • Also ‘tour’ of PCs
      • Social and temporal patterns of use
    • ‘ Last time’ questions
      • E.g. when was the last time you enjoyed a domestic task?
      • Patterns, routines, disruptions
    • Personal history
      • Changes in domestic technology over one’s lifetime
    • Guided speculation
      • Hopes and fears for homes of the future
    • Three wishes
      • I wish I had…
  • 50. Findings from small pilot study
    • Labour saving devices do not save time
    • Housework is no fun
    • Gendered technology
    • Privatisation of domestic space
    • “ a move towards a holistic and explicit method that takes the researcher from home visits to provocative illustrative product suggestions”
    • Used in later studies
  • 51. “Probes” 1
    • The interLiving project’s technology probes
    • Hutchinson, H., Mackay, W., Westerlund, B., Bederson, B., Druin, A., Plaisant, C., Beaudouin-Lafon, M., Conversy, S.,Evans, H., Hansen, H., Roussel, N., Eiderbäck, B., Lindquist, S. and Sundblad, Y. (2003) Technology Probes: Inspiring Design for and with Families. Proc. CHI’03, 17-24
    • “ families from Sweden, France, and the U.S. to design and understand the potential for new technologies that support communication among diverse, distributed, multi-generational families”
    • Aim to achieve active participation in the design process
  • 52. Cultural probes and technology probes
    • Gaver et al.’s cultural probes - materials such as disposable cameras and diaries
      • meant to inspire people to reflect on their lives
    • interLiving’s technology probes
      • installing a technology into a real context, watching how it is used over a period; reflecting on use to gather information about the users and inspire ideas for new technologies
      • Idea is that users will both adapt and adapt to the technology
      • Not prototypes, but probes
      • Encountered logistical & technical problems, but all probes used for > 1 month
    • Other data collection
      • Families logged use
      • Interviews
      • Lo-tech participatory prototyping workshops
  • 53. Message probe
    • Digital Post-Its in a zoomable space
      • Written in Java
    • Synchronous
    • Writable tablet/pen interface
    • Connected to small number of family members
      • No need for address list etc
      • All could edit each note
      • All notes visible to everyone
  • 54. The probes deployed
    • US
    • 3 families, 6 weeks
    • Nuclear family + grandparents
    • Used everyday
    • Usage
      • Grandfathers > fathers > children & mothers > grandmothers
    • Mainly grandparents to/from nuclear family
      • coordination of childcare
    • Not considered reliable
    • Wanted notification of new items
    • Sweden
    • Two pairs of sisters & partners/children over several months
    • Used mainly by sisters (frequently) to complement other communication
    • Often playful
    • Messages annotated and re-annotated
    • Also notification issue, but thought might be intrusive
    • Overall
      • “ helpful in revealing communication patterns and technology needs and desires”
  • 55. videoProbe
    • Simple, impromptu image sharing
    • Snapshots from a (detachable) video camera mounted above a simple display
    • Could be stored and browsed, faded over time
    • Attempted - not very successfully - to fit in with the furniture
    • Installed in homes of pairs of brothers and sisters in France
    • Used for fun - making faces - and messages - by taking a picture of the message (early results)
  • 56. Conclusions
    • Revealed directions for further investigation: design for playful or purposeful communication
    • Need for better means of specifying recipients of communication
    • Design to augment existing objects
    • “ staying connected with and aware of family was important, but people had different motivations for doing so and wanted to do it in different ways” (!)
  • 57. From ethnography to design - supporting interactive design for domestic settings with patterns
    • Crabtree, A., Hemmings, T. and Rodden, T. (2002) Pattern-based support for interactive design in domestic settings”, Proc, DIS’02, 265-276
    • Means of structuring ethnographic material for use in design
    • Similar to work-based CSCW Patterns
      • Alexander’s original idea of a pattern language for architecture, based on the patterns of actions and events that organise people’s interaction with places
      • Later translated to software analysis and design, becoming very popular
      • Proposed as a means of dealing with the rich ethnographic data from field studies for computer supported cooperative work
  • 58. The basic idea
    • Condensed from a much more theory-laden presentation in the original
    • Using patterns to structure analysis & presentation of the data, but not - at this stage at least - to generalise between studies, because domestic life is so diverse
      • Aligning research results with “the broad needs of design”
    • Place-based patterns of action and technology usage
  • 59. Data for the patterns
    • Video ethnography
      • 6000 hours of digital video from 16 households
      • Minimum 10 consecutive days per year over 2 years
      • Kitchen, childrens’ bedroom and (where available) study
      • “ conducted their affairs without undue concern” - more concerned with getting on
    • Analysed in detail to identify regularities
  • 60. The patterns themselves
    • Web-based, allowing multimedia contents
    • Elements:
      • Title
        • Key technologies
      • Interactional setting
        • Where and who and what is involved, and related primary pattern
      • Organizational context
        • The practical issue addressed
      • Work of the pattern
        • Synopsis of activities and transcript
      • Social practices ordering the work of the pattern
        • Recurring ways in which things get done
      • Connecting patterns
  • 61.  
  • 62.  
  • 63. Comment
    • The various elements of the patterns seem too undifferentiated for easy use as an analysis tool
    • The contents and structuring of the patterns are very much in academic sociological terms
    • Authors’ conclusions:
      • Importance of legacy technologies in domestic interaction design
      • Generic patterns of interactional practices may be usefully drawn upon in design of new technologies
      • A contribution to the development of models of domestic technology use
  • 64. In summary
    • The role of mobile phones in supporting some aspects of everyday social life
    • Cooperation at home, and how it has been investigated

×