Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

HCI Seminar Fall 2015

Advances of research on Interaction Design Rhetoric - HCI Rhetoric - UX Rhetoric.
INFO I609: Advanced Seminar I in Informatics. Indiana University Bloomington. School of Informatics and Computing. Fall 2015.

  • Be the first to comment

HCI Seminar Fall 2015

  1. 1. InteractionDesignRhetoric OmarSosa-Tzec School of Informatics & Computing Indiana University Bloomington info I609 HCI Seminar Fall 2015 A quest for an account of the rhetoricity of HCI and the so-called UX… whatever that means
  2. 2. Whatisthis presentationabout?
  3. 3. Checking-in
  4. 4. Checking-in • Persuasive Technology 2015
 10th International Conference on Persuasive Technology
  5. 5. Checking-in • Persuasive Technology 2015
 10th International Conference on Persuasive Technology • LearnxDesign 2015
 The 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers
  6. 6. Checking-in • Persuasive Technology 2015
 10th International Conference on Persuasive Technology • LearnxDesign 2015
 The 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers • Critical Alternatives 2015
 5th Decennial Aarhus Conference
  7. 7. Rhetoric Visual Rhetoric HCI Design User Experience ? Visual Argumentation Visual Appeal & Persuasion Rhetorical Composition & Criticism Interaction Criticism (IC) + HCI Hermeneutics Semiotic Engineering Metaphor in HCI Comm Des Infodesign UID Motivation + Quest
  8. 8. Explorationofrhetorical appeals,operationsand figuresinUI/UXDesign Sosa-Tzec, O., Siegel, M.A., and Brown, P. (2015). Exploration of Rhetorical Appeals, Operations, and Figures in UI/UX Design. InProc.ofLearnxDesign2015.The3rd InternationalConferenceforDesignEducationResearchers.DRS//Cumulus//Design-ed
  9. 9. Argument • The three modes of appeal (logos,ethos,pathos)fluctuate during the UX
  10. 10. Argument • The three modes of appeal (logos,ethos,pathos)fluctuate during the UX • Rhetorical operations (addition,subtraction,inversion, substitution) provide a vocabulary to describe the adjustments of an interface from one platform to another
  11. 11. Argument • The three modes of appeal (logos,ethos,pathos)fluctuate during the UX • Rhetorical operations (addition,subtraction,inversion, substitution) provide a vocabulary to describe the adjustments of an interface from one platform to another • Rhetorical figures (tropes and schemes) provide a vocabulary to describe both interface and interactions
  12. 12. What did we do?
  13. 13. Rhetoricalhandbook
 An illustrated manual for graphic designers ‣Ehses & Lupton (1988) ‣NSCAD student work ‣Application of rhetorical concepts in graphic design Modes of Appeal Rhetorical Operations Rhetorical Figures
  14. 14. ‣ “Rhetoric and Design”(Ehses,1987) ‣ Interview ‣ Selected Bibliography ‣ Three modes of appeal ‣ Rhetorical operations ‣ Rhetorical figures ‣ More student work Extracts Other references (Online/Offline) Illustration of Concepts 
 (Desktop,Web,Mobile) What is our beta version about?
  15. 15. What did we observe?
  16. 16. Logos, ethos, and pathos fluctuate UX-wise
  17. 17. Logos, ethos, and pathos fluctuate UX-wise YahooWeatherAppforiOS (initialscreen) YahooWeatherAppforiOS
  18. 18. Rhetorical operations describe UI adjustments BloombergBillionaires–Thewebversionisthestandardcomposition
  19. 19. Rhetorical operations describe UI adjustments BloombergBillionaires–Themobileversionistheresultoftheapplicationofrhetoricaloperations Addition + Subtraction + Inversion Subtraction + Inversion Inversion + Subtraction
  20. 20. Rhetorical figures describe interaction design Alliterationrepeatsthe initialpartsofelementsin asequence.
 (Ehses&Lupton,1988) ClearforiOS
  21. 21. Ellipses deliberatelyomits elementsfroma statement.
 (Ehses&Lupton,1988) Vinewebinterface Rhetorical figures describe interaction design
  22. 22. What does it mean?
  23. 23. 1.The UI/UX rhetorical handbook would be used as a framework to engage designers in discussion and reflection upon possible meanings conveyed by the interface composition as the user interacts with the software ‣Denotation ‣Connotation
  24. 24. 2.The UI/UX rhetorical handbook offers a vocabulary for UI/UX designers to analyze,conceptualize,and critique interfaces ‣To go“beyond”the figures of metaphor and metonymy
  25. 25. 2.The UI/UX rhetorical handbook offers a vocabulary for UI/UX designers to analyze,conceptualize,and critique interfaces ‣To go“beyond”the figures of metaphor and metonymy ‣To move away from the skeuomorphic“origin” of interfaces
  26. 26. 2.The UI/UX rhetorical handbook offers a vocabulary for UI/UX designers to analyze,conceptualize,and critique interfaces ‣To go“beyond”the figures of metaphor and metonymy ‣To move away from the skeuomorphic“origin” of interfaces ‣To consider interfaces as a kind of visual artifacts with its particular materials and ways to be shaped
  27. 27. 2.The UI/UX rhetorical handbook offers a vocabulary for UI/UX designers to analyze,conceptualize,and critique interfaces ‣To go“beyond”the figures of metaphor and metonymy ‣To move away from the skeuomorphic“origin” of interfaces ‣To consider interfaces as a kind of visual artifacts with its particular materials and ways to be shaped ‣To consider interfaces as visual artifacts that affect people's lives,beliefs,and attitudes
  28. 28. 3.The UI/UX rhetorical handbook would function to introduce UI/UX designers to rhetoric (classic and contemporary) ‣To consider software as a form of argument
  29. 29. 3.The UI/UX rhetorical handbook would function to introduce UI/UX designers to rhetoric (classic and contemporary) ‣To consider software as a form of argument ‣To have a better comprehension of persuasion and persuasive technology
  30. 30. 3.The UI/UX rhetorical handbook would function to introduce UI/UX designers to rhetoric (classic and contemporary) ‣To consider software as a form of argument ‣To have a better comprehension of persuasion and persuasive technology ‣ To create a link with other contemporary approaches in HCI,including interaction criticism,sustainability and feminism
  31. 31. Softwareas rhetoricalargument Sosa-Tzec, O., Stolterman, E., and Siegel, M.A. (2015). Gaza Everywhere: exploring the applicability of a rhetorical lens in HCI. InProc.CriticalAlternatives2015.The5th DecennialAarhusConference.
  32. 32. Argument • Software could be regarded as a visual(interactive) enthymeme,the form of the rhetorical argument • “Gaza Everywhere”illustrates a case of application software working as enthymeme • The paper suggests the use of rhetoric as a generative tool to be part of HCI/UX design pedagogy
  33. 33. Why do we care?
  34. 34. Rhetoric HCI The applicability of a rhetorical lens in HCI ?
  35. 35. Rhetoric HCI Enthymeme ? Speaker delivering arguments in order to win an audience Truncated syllogism (leaving a premise unstated)
  36. 36. Rhetoric HCI Enthymeme Visual Argumentation ?
  37. 37. Rhetoric HCI Visual Argumentation Enthymeme ?
  38. 38. Rhetoric HCI Visual Argumentation Enthymeme ?
  39. 39. The possibility of visual arguments “Hearts”by United Colors of Benneton (1996)
  40. 40. What did we do?
  41. 41. Source/screenshots from: http://ahmadnassri.github.io/gaza-everywhere/ Gaza Everywhere
  42. 42. Source/screenshots from: http://ahmadnassri.github.io/gaza-everywhere/ Gaza Everywhere
  43. 43. Source/screenshots from: 
 http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/gaza-everywhere-app-highlights-true-scale-of-humanitarian-crisis--lJ7Dz3JgQg Publication on i100 from The Independent
  44. 44. Source/screenshots from: 
 http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/gaza-everywhere-app-highlights-true-scale-of-humanitarian-crisis--lJ7Dz3JgQg Publication on i100 from The Independent
  45. 45. Source/screenshots from: 
 http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/gaza-everywhere-app-highlights-true-scale-of-humanitarian-crisis--lJ7Dz3JgQg Publication on i100 from The Independent
  46. 46. •Gaza Everywhere's intent is not oriented to provide a territorial truth
  47. 47. •Gaza Everywhere's intent is not oriented to provide a territorial truth •Each user has a different awareness of the conflict in the Gaza Strip,which affects the perception of the application's intent
  48. 48. •Gaza Everywhere's intent is not oriented to provide a territorial truth •Each user has a different awareness of the conflict in the Gaza Strip,which affects the perception of the application's intent •Not only the interactive map,but the whole user interface (interactive map,stats,information design, and Twitter embedded timeline) functions to support the detected or interpreted claim
  49. 49. What did we observe?
  50. 50. •Unlike other traditional forms of visual enthymeme, Gaza Everywhere allows the user to play with the composition at will
  51. 51. •Unlike other traditional forms of visual enthymeme, Gaza Everywhere allows the user to play with the composition at will •Interaction and experiential knowledge help the user to fill in the unstated premise
  52. 52. •Unlike other traditional forms of visual enthymeme, Gaza Everywhere allows the user to play with the composition at will •Interaction and experiential knowledge help the user to fill in the unstated premise •The user might revisit the detected or interpreted claim,which makes the rhetorical/persuasive effect of Gaza Everywhere evolve with the user
  53. 53. What does it mean?
  54. 54. user user designer i j k user user UserExperience Context of Use appl.software (visualenthymeme) Discourse
  55. 55. Future Directions
  56. 56. •Dialecticalorrhetorical(visualinteractive)argumentation? If software is about argumentation…
  57. 57. •Dialecticalorrhetorical(visualinteractive)argumentation? •HowdotheseeffortsandideasrelatetoProceduralRhetoric (Bogost,2010),PersuasiveDesign(Buchanan,1985;Redström, 2006),andPersuasiveTechnology(Fogg,2003)? If software is about argumentation…
  58. 58. •Dialecticalorrhetorical(visualinteractive)argumentation? •HowdotheseeffortsandideasrelatetoProceduralRhetoric (Bogost,2010),PersuasiveDesign(Buchanan,1985;Redström, 2006),andPersuasiveTechnology(Fogg,2003)? •HowdotheseeffortsandideasrelatetoInterfaceCriticism (Andersen&Pold,2011),InteractionCriticism(Bardzell,2011), andotherworkinHumanisticHCI(Bardzell&Bardzell,2015)? If software is about argumentation…
  59. 59. Do you have questions? Because I have many… tzec.com

×