Crea%ve technology use — cogni%ve and behavioral fundaments An9 Salovaara, Aalto University School of Business INUSE seminar 20 November 2012
Discovering the use of a digital camera as a mirror: an example of “repurposive appropria%on”
Repurposive appropria%on: Discovery of a novel purpose of use By an individual or a group COMPARE TO: Integra%on of technology into prac%ce Increased mastery of a tool Learning from others
Appropria%on: deﬁni%ons in literature Interpretation! Field of research / Framework!Invention of new purposes of use! Design! Cogni&ve Science Improvisation! CSCW / Ethnomethodology!Customisation and adaptation! End-user computing!Trying new features of technologies! Information Systems!Integration into existing practice! CSCW! —”—! Information Systems / Social construction of technology!Renewal of structures of work! Organisation studies / Structuration theory!Making the technology one’s own! Sociology of consumption / Domestication! —”—! End-user computing / Sensemaking! —”—! CSCW / Activity theory!
IN-‐SITU OBSERVATION IN-‐SITU OBSERVATION CHI2006 CHI2007 !PERIODIC INTERVIEWING WEB SURVEY CHI2007 J Am Soc Info Sci Tech 2012
Individuals maZer In digital camera use, over 50% of crea%ve uses are discovered alone by the user
Previous experience (e.g. on cameras) Everyday problem solving Current Technologies Environment solu%on at hand and aZempt other people
How a repurposive appropria%on can take place: 3 cogni%ve explana%ons Example: How the camera-‐as-‐mirror workaround can be discovered?
1. Recogni%on of par%al solu%on in the environment E.g.: You see someone taking a picture of another person, which reminds you of the camera phone in your pocket
1. Recogni%on of par%al solu%on in the environment 2. Solu%on through generaliza%on of problem E.g.: You no%ce that mirroring is generally related to seeing yourself, and you ﬁgure out other ways of seeing yourself
1. Recogni%on of par%al solu%on in the environment 2. Solu%on through generaliza%on of problem 3. No%cing a tool with analogical eﬀects E.g.: You no%ce that camera phones also
Some theore%cal implica%ons • Importance of individual cogni%ve processes • Importance of technology undersatnding • Repurposive appropria%on as problem-‐solving • Focus on breadth-‐oriented knowledge • Focus on problem solving tools (analogies), not solu%on strategies (e.g., means-‐ends)
Prac%%oner’s take-‐away • Design for crea%ve users • Make features observable • Provide hints on possible eﬀects to facilitate interpreta%on • Provide cross-‐technology connec%vity • Allow experimenta%on • Support both old and new ways of use
Call for PhD students @ Aalto BIZ • Deadline 15 January 2013 • Opportunity for a funded posi%on • More info: Google: “Aalto Applying for doctoral studies” or hZps://into.aalto.ﬁ/display/endoctoralbiz/ Applying+for+doctoral+studies
Propaga%on of crea%ve uses in organiza%ons • Social Network Analysis: – “who invents?” – “who learns from whom?” • Iden%ﬁca%ons of social roles: – Inventors, mediators, normal workers – Do inventors have “courts”?
How do diﬀerent workers diﬀer? • Diﬀerent appropriators in organiza%ons: – Tinkerers, programmers, mediators, normal workers (MacLean et al., CHI1990) – Worker diﬀerences have not been studied systema%cally • Use SNA results to iden%fy diﬀerent workers – In-‐depth comparison (ethnographic + psychometric)
Does technology understanding increase repurposive appropria%on? • Our web survey* found that technology understanding is strongest predictor of repurposive appropria%on – But regression studies are correla%onal, not causal • Longitudinal study: Crea%ve use Crea%ve use Tech understanding Tech understanding Self-‐eﬃcacy Self-‐eﬃcacy Perceived usefulness Perceived usefulness Personal innova%veness Personal innova%veness Beginning End * Salovaara, Helfenstein, Oulasvirta, A. (2011). Everyday appropria%ons of informa%on technology: A study of crea%ve uses of digital cameras. Journal of the American Society for Informa%on Science and Technology
Empirical refuta%on of TAM • Technology acceptance models are ambiguous and may be tautological Perceived usefulness (PU): 1. Using the system in my job would enable me to accomplish tasks more quickly. 2. Using the system would improve my job performance. U 3. Using the system in my job would increase my produc%vity. 4. Using the system would enhance my eﬀec%veness on the job. 5. Using the system would make it easier to do my job. 6. I would ﬁnd the system useful in my job. PU Use (U): Amount or frequency of use
Publica%ons • Salovaara, A., Jacucci, G., Oulasvirta, A., Saari, T., Kanerva, P., Kurvinen, E., and TiiZa, S. (2006). Collec%ve crea%on and sense-‐making of mobile media. CHI 2006. • Jacucci, G., Oulasvirta, A., Ilmonen, T., Evans, J., and Salovaara, A. (2007). CoMedia: Mobile group media for ac%ve spectatorship. CHI2007. • Salovaara, A. (2007). Appropria%on of a MMS-‐based comic creator: From system func%onali%es to resources for ac%on. CHI2007. • Salovaara, A. (2008). Inven%ng new uses for tools: A cogni%ve founda%on for studies on appropria%on. Human Technology. • Salovaara, A. and Tamminen, S. (2009). Acceptance or appropria%on? A design-‐ oriented cri%que on technology acceptance models. In Saariluoma, P. and Isomäki, H. (eds.), Future Interac%on Design II, Springer. • Salovaara, A., Helfenstein, S., and Oulasvirta, A. (2011). Everyday appropria%ons of informa%on technology: A study of crea%ve uses of digi-‐ tal cameras. Journal of the American Society for Informa%on Science and Technology. Available in PDF from people.aalto.ﬁ/an9_salovaara