From Hybrid Spaces to Experiencing Augmented Places

565 views

Published on

Talk as part of the research seminars in media technology at Södertörn University, Huddinge, Sweden on January 27, 2012.

Abstract:
When mobile location-based systems interweave physical and digital spaces, augmented places emerge. I understand places as "the ways in which settings acquire recognizable and persistent social meaning in the course of interaction" (Dourish 2006: 299). Places can attain an augmented quality through the superposition of two modes of experience: physical and digital experiences. Technologies, I will argue, can help us to use this augmented quality for reflection and deliberation processes.

Based on case studies, I will explore how physical and digital spaces are brought into connection and how this connection is experienced by users: To which extent are augmented places viewed as integrated wholes? How does technology mediate interaction with augmented places?

In my presentation, I will address these questions drawing on examples from two participatory design cases in the domain of participatory urban planning and one study on the use of Foursquare, a location-based social networking service. The two participatory design cases explore questions of how 'being there' may facilitate reflection through the use of a mobile location-based discussion platform. The Foursquare study specifically investigates how the link between physical and digital is created and experienced by users.

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
565
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • I am a PhD student at AU in Denmark with Susanne Bødker as my supervisor. I am currently visiting the MobileLife Centre in Kista. Concerning my background,I have a Master in information systems from the University of Siegen, Germany with a strong focus on HCI and CSCW.And this talk is about my PhD project for which I have about 1 year left to finish. Today, I won’t present so many findings, however. Or at least, I am not framing them as findings but rather as tensions and questions. In the end, I have some more general questions, which I hope will open up for an interesting discussion.The title of my talk is “From Hybrid Spaces to Experiencing Augmented Places”. It is structured in three different cases and the central tensions that evolve from them. But first, setting the scene….
  • So, my research lies in the domain of mobileLBS for participatory land use planning and similar civic engagement processes – that means, processes where topics have a central spatial reference (a reference to a location).For a better picture, at the top are some screenshots of the latest incarnation of a mobile app we have developed at AU. Basically it lets citizens discuss topicslocated on a map while out and about in their immediate living environment –eg. on their way to work. I’ll talk more about this later.You may also know other systems, such as, FixMyStreet or SeeClickFix [bottom] that just allow you to report pot holes, graffiti or the like to your municipality.The aim with my research is to facilitate suchdeliberation processes that are spatially interwoven with the planning objects. The intuitive hypothesis behind this is that ‘being there’ – that is, the citizen being on that spot, in an everyday situation – adds something new or different to the discussion. I [tentatively] call this situateddeliberation.
  • So, let’s get some definitions in place. I’ll illustrate and unfold a conceptual model. This model is rather simplified and only provides me with a frame to talk about my research. [Yet, I am also expanding on some of the original notions.]Simply put, space, according to Harrison & Dourish, is the physical 3-dimensional environment that we live in (the opportunity for practices to emerge); and places are spaces invested with meaning and understandings that frame appropriate behavior – eg. the notion of a behavior being “out of place”. They are spaces that people put to use, adapt, and appropriate (the social reality).Hybrid spaces talks about physical and digital spaces – eg. the your library and its venue on 4sq. According to de Souza e Silva 2006, “Hybrid spaces arise when virtual communities [..]migrate to physical spaces because of the use of mobile technologies as interfaces.” They are, she says, “created by the constant movement of users who carry portable devices continuously connected to the Internet and to other users.” For an example, we can see the role that the BlackBerry Messenger supposedly played during the London riots in coordinating activities of rioters.My first research question is then, how do users make [understand & experience] that link between physical and digital spaces? And, how is that link [creation] mediated by technology?The second main question concerns, how to conceptualize these augmented places that I claim emerge. [We remember: spaces that people put to use, adapt and appropriate.] What are they made up of? Or rather, how! How are they perceived? Dourish [eg., in his 2001 book], eg., criticizes the prevalent layer-cake model of the world, where the virtual world is seen as a new, separate layer on top of the physical or real world.[There is, of course, also something happening in the other direction.]This models helps me a bit to talk about my work in coherent terms.But of course, the reality is much more messy.So, let’s move on to the cases.
  • So, let’s get some definitions in place. I’ll unfold a conceptual model on the whiteboard. This model is rather simplified and only provides me with a frame to talk about my research. [Yet, I am also expanding on some of the original notions.]Simply put, space, according to Harrison & Dourish, is the physical 3-dimensional environment that we live in (the opportunity for practices to emerge); and places are spaces invested with meaning and understandings that frame appropriate behavior – eg. the notion of a behavior being “out of place”. [eg. this seminar room and many other places at the same time for each one of us] They are spaces that people put to use, adapt, and appropriate (the social reality).Hybrid spaces talks about physical and digital spaces – eg. the your library and its venue on 4sq. According to de Souza e Silva 2006, “Hybrid spaces arise when virtual communities [..]migrate to physical spaces because of the use of mobile technologies as interfaces.” They are, she says, “created by the constant movement of users who carry portable devices continuously connected to the Internet and to other users.” For an example, we can see the role that the BlackBerry Messenger supposedly played during the London riots in coordinating activities of rioters.
  • My first research question is then, how do users make [understand & experience] that link between physical and digital spaces? And, how is that link [creation] mediated by technology?The second main question concerns, how to conceptualize these augmented places that I claim emerge. [We remember: spaces that people put to use, adapt and appropriate.] What are they made up of? Or rather, how! How are they perceived? Dourish [eg., in his 2001 book], eg., criticizes the prevalent layer-cake model of the world, where the virtual world is seen as a new, separate layer on top of the physical or real world.[There is, of course, also something happening in the other direction.]This models helps me a bit to talk about my work in coherent terms.But of course, the reality is much more messy.So, let’s move on to the cases.
  • Case 1. In the Mobile Democracy case, we worked with a sparsely populated municipality in western Denmark to explore the use of mobile technology in urban planning. The aim was to engage new citizen groups in the participation process. The goal of the overall processes is to solicit input and feedback from citizens, among other stakeholders, on a municipal plan that is created every 12 years and continually revised.
  • At the outset ofthis case was a combination of mobile PP-GIS on one side and urban planning on the other. We explored the design space in this context through a Participatory Design process and from a user experience perspective forroughly over a year. As we show in this diagram, we utilized various design activities and design artifacts in an iterative process. There is more about the process and the results in the paper at C&T last year (that was send around)
  • What we see here are screenshots from the prototypes that helped us toexplore the use of mobile technology in participatory urban planning. There are two inter-connected PTs: a mobile app [right] and a browser-based version [left]. The simple idea behind this is to gather feedback and opinions in the moment (when users are physically close to the planning object) and allow for deeper reflection and collaboration later (remote to the planning object).Using the platform, citizens can explore, create and react to topics created by other citizens or by the municipality in a number of ways: through maps, lists, expressions of agreement, comments, and photos.
  • So, the questions that we explored in these cases emerged from each case itself.The central question here is: What is the distinct quality of a citizen “being there”, of “being in place”? How does it differ from being remote?How can we exploit this quality and design for it?It’s still an open question; but I do have two examples to underline how we conceptualized and tried to explore this.
  • We build a mobile AR app that visualizes planned buildings on-site. It connects people to the place and with the planning object mediated through the phone. When we used this in an outdoor workshop [ie. the walkshop paper that was send around], we saw the participants really experiencing the planning object and their own location in space as one – that is, they perceived the planning object was there with them [and even suggested to communicate that feeling to their friends through screenshots]. This suggests, additionally, that it’s not only about the user “being there”, but very much about the planning object “being there” as well!
  • Another example is mood. Here we explored letting users express their mood when making a comment in-situ (while “being in place, in the moment”) and kind of capture that moment for themselves and others later. The hypothesis here is that mood may allow the user to reflect back on the situation and let other users put the specific comment into [some] perspective.So these two examples show how we might design for “being there” to add another quality to the planning discussions.[PAUSE]
  • This second case explores the citizen participation process in the forming of a new national park in Denmark. MolsBjerge [“Danish mountains”], which is not far from Aarhus, is the 2nd of 5 NPs to be established in DK. This one is somewhat unconventional in that it is not just a nature reserve, but people actually live and work there. Thus, residents have a strong interest in the development of the park.
  • This development is a long and complicated process with many stakeholders involved. This is just their project schedule – for illustration. We’ve been observing and studying that process almost from the very beginning. The main goal of the NP was to solicit input from citizens to develop an initial plan for the first 6 years of the park in a first public hearing phase. After a draft plan was released a while later, citizens were asked again to provide comments and feedback on this plan in a second public phase. Our invention took place in this second phase.
  • For a local tourism festival in the park during the autumn school holiday week, we’ve introduced an adapted version of the Mobile Democracy app – now called Mening@Park that we published openly on the Android Market. We used the festival and the buzz and activity around it as the springboard for our deployment of the app and the study of its use.
  • The aim of this intervention was a field trial of the Mening@Park prototype to see how our ideas and concepts work and can be applied to other contexts. From the original prototype, we did quite a bit of polishing and adapting, as it was now out for real use by real people. [branding, adding real and meaningful content]
  • How can we facilitate citizens to make links between physical and digital spaces? [ie. linking places that are meaningful to them with corresponding digital discussion topics]Or, How can a discussion topic be intimately tied to a place? [or to several places; to virtual places; or several discussion topics to the same place; etc.] [felt life/user experience focus]The two naïve concepts that we employ here are those of access (gettingfrom a place to a topic) and representation (getting from a topic to a place).a) How can people explore, find and access discussion topics that refer to physical spaces?Again, how we explored this…on the lowest level: the problem of quick, easy & direct access to topics (eg. a mobile website VS a native app users have to install)but then we also explored the use of: location-specific QR codes for access (problematic: in this setting, from ads, low literacy, attract attention), location-specific notifications for awareness and as reminders [vicinity; depending on your interest profile] (reminders, but disturbing)[[and alternative anchors instead of QR codes: like using sound (eg. birdcalls, or just noise-level), NFC, or image recognition (PicIn), …]]b) How can topics refer back to the physical space? How can the place be represented in each topic?beyond simply pointing to the locations they refer to (as we did) or showing topics on a small map. [[What are meaningful mechanisms for facilitating or stimulating a sense of place to emerge?]]more useful and also meaningful for citizens may be to work with user photos and user stories as well as AR to facilitate a sense of place to emerge from the topic[PAUSE]
  • So, in the last case, we are doing a study on 4sq to find out how 4sq users experience the relationship between physical and digital spaces – that is, 4sq venues. So, again the library and its 4sq venue.How do they see their actions on the digital platform linked to the physical world? How do they perceive what we called augmented places?
  • Briefly, what we are doing here is a study in two parts focusing on whole experiences that are captured in the moment. (McCarthy & Wright 2004, Technology as Experience)- In the first part, we’ve automatically send participants a text message with a random question each time they check-in on 4sq. This captures in-the-moment realizations of their experiences. [see snapshot of text messages data]- In the second part, using the participants’ check-in info and answers, we have conducted experience interviews by asking them to recount individual situations from the first part thereby connecting back to these situations and inquiring for more in-depth accounts of their experiences. You can think of it as deferred contextual interviews, because we try to re-create the original context.
  • We are still analyzing this data. These are questions that we are trying to answer with the study. The quotes are not necessarily representative.How are augmented places perceived and experienced? Are the physical and the digital seen as distinct (as two different worlds), as hybrid (interweaved), or as integrated wholes? [eg. layer-cake model argued against by Dourish; he might argue for the latter]How has the 4sq venue changed your opinion or perception of the place? (a café in a foreign city)“It has with a tip about the wifi password that was very useful [..]. There were also other [tips] and new images, so the perception of the place is changing in that it has good connection between the physical place and Foursquare.” [info on 4sq (unsurprisingly) influences the perception of a place; place is well represented on 4sq?]Do people think their actions on 4sq have any kind of impact in the physical world or on other people?“It does not change the physical environment, I think.”“I am trying out for a while to check in when I travel. Today, I'm late, so my group can see, I'm there in a minute if they want ...”How is the link between physical and digital spaces mediated by technology? How is that mediation experienced? Is 4sq just another channel for communication and expression augmenting our action possibilities of acting in the world?“I just got a workout badge with a small comment and they have written something funny about working out before. So I think that Foursquare manages it better than the [fitness] center does itself.” [4sq as personal real-world motivation for working out]“To be honest, I do not think Foursquare has contributed to some form of interaction with an airport :)”[PAUSE]
  • For summing up, I have located the three cases in the conceptual model.With Mobile Democracy, I have explored how ‘being there’, being at the site of interest, facilitated by technology adds a different quality to the interaction and thus the discussion about that place.With Mening@Park, I have explored on how to facilitate the link users make between physical and digital spaces through technology with explorations into access and representation.With the 4sq study, I looked at an established but evolving practice to investigate how users understand and experience the link between physical and digital spaces, that is, how they perceive and experience augmented places.
  • I’ve shown that…Through location-based services, physical spaces become increasingly expanded by digital spaces. Users experience digital spaces first-hand through interacting with technology. [and successively, e.g., through social interaction]Places emerge through cultural, social, historical, and personal ascriptions of meaning to these spaces. Places are augmented due to the additional source of experiences emerging from the digital realm that adds a new quality to such places.I have brought up a number of tensions that are associated with this idea.Finally,I’ll leave you with a utopian and a dystopian scenario:Utopia: amplified experience & enhanced reflection leads to augmented action possibilities in deliberationDystopia: disconnected and numb experience & lack of reflection leads to superficial deliberationThese are the chances we have…This is where it can go…
  • And with that I am open for questions and discussion. Thanks!I have some broader questions for the discussion. Do you want to me raise them now or first take some specific questions on the talk itself?
  • So, with augmented places I presented you one rather concrete idea how the digital and the physical realm might be conceptualized. But I want to broaden the discussion a bit.So, if we step back a bit1) What kind of quality does the digital realm as such add to our everyday experiences?In contrast to a couple of years back, many of us have fully integrated networked technologies into our lives – even more so with mobile technology (as de Souza e Silva discussed; ever-present).[A new experience of the one world we have? Something separate? A parallel world to the physical one? [physical, social, digital, …]][We not only experience it first-hand (as users), but also second-hand through other (social) interactions (eg. as users, but also as non-users)]2) What kind of quality does it add if technology facilitates direct linking to the physical realm?We have had digital spaces since the beginning of the Internet and earlier. (eg. usenet, several places)[They are independent of physical structures; Others refer to locations in the real world (what’s the diff?)][implicit linking by users is normal (more versatile/flexible), but if the techno facilitates (and offers) this directly (re: IoT?)][Also digitally connected spaces vs. virtual worlds (cf. usenet!?)]Looking for alternative conceptualizations3) What does all this mean for citizen involvement and deliberation?potentials and opportunities, but also challenges and tensionsFuture Qs:How do digital and physical experiences interact?What is ‘the augmented’ – and how is it perceived/dealt with by the user?
  • From Hybrid Spaces to Experiencing Augmented Places

    1. 1. AARHUSUNIVERSITY 27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHFROM HYBRID SPACES TOEXPERIENCING AUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORNPHD STUDENT1SHMTMKORN@CS.AU.DKHTTP://CS.AU.DK/~MKORN/@MATSCH_O0
    2. 2. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYSITUATED DELIBERATION›  Mobile location-based systems in the domain ofparticipatory land use planning›  Topics have a central spatial reference Does ‘being there’ add something new ordifferent to the discussion?2
    3. 3. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYplacesCONCEPTUAL FRAMING3physicalspacesdigitalspacesaugmentedplaceshybrid spaces8use, adapt, appropriateuse, adapt, appropriate
    4. 4. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYFRAMING / CONCEPTUAL MODEL›  Space is the physical 3-dimensional environment (the opportunity)›  Places are spaces invested with meaning and understandings that frameappropriate behavior (the social reality)– Harrison & Dourish 1996›  “Hybrid spaces arise when virtual communities [..] migrate to physical spacesbecause of the use of mobile technologies as interfaces.”– de Souza e Silva 20064
    5. 5. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYRESEARCH QUESTIONS›  How do users make that link between physical and digital spaces?How is that link mediated by technology?›  How can we conceptualize augmented places?How are they perceived by users?5
    6. 6. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 1: MOBILE DEMOCRACY6
    7. 7. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 1: MOBILE DEMOCRACY7De tilføjer alle dereskommentarer og tilkendegivelserEn lokal entrepreneur ser nu opslaget..Mange andre borgere ser opslagetog tilkendegiver deres enighedEn anden borger, der kender byggereglementet, ser denførste borgers opslag på sin mobilen borger falder over et skilt han er utilfreds medDet er bareikke i orden!han har ret! ogdet er pga. § 17,stk. 14!han tilkendegiver sin utilfredshedDe har ret! men hvorforikke opføre anstalten påsøndermark hos mig? Denbruger jeg jo ikkealligevel..Han tilføjer relevante informationertil opslaget på mobil-demokratiDen tredje borger tilføjer en alternativ placeringmed begrundelse til mobil-demokratien ansat hos kommunen ser de mange tilkendegivelser ogkommentarer og tager sagen op med sine kollegerJa, måske skulleman overveje enanden løsningDe harret!!-1-2 -3-79Kommentarer§ 17, stk. 14Kommentarer§ 17, stk. 14Alternativ løsningSøndermarkKommentarer§ 17, stk. 14blablablablablablablablablaAlternativ løsningSøndermarkKLIK!..og arrangerer et offentligt mødefor at diskutere de bedste foreslag--------------------------------------Kommunen har et problem..Planlæggeren markerer allebyggegrundende på et kortGeneral Møller ser opslaget ogfår en idé..men Hanne har en anden idé..Planlæggeren gennemser nu alleforeslageneJeg kunne nu godttænke mig at det blevbrugt i den lokale parkHvad skal vigøre med alden her grus?!Vi kan ikkebare smideden ud!Vi kunne godtbruge det grusi vores lejr!Typical FeaturesFighting spirit, frustrated, social, strong sense for local surroundings, been livingfor a long time in the region.About ClausACCOUNTANT, 45 YEARS OF AGEClaus, lives in Stadil with his wife and a teenage son in a small community inWestern Jutland. In his spare time he is highly involved with the local sportsassociation as a treasurer, although he is really more passionate aboutbadminton.He moved to Stadil 20 years ago after graduating from Aarhus School ofBusiness, and knows “everybody” in the village by now. A few years ago hewas deeply frustrated when he experienced some, in his opinion, injustices inthe municipalities’ sports funding. He realized that if politicians are not madeaware of his countryside of the municipality, they will pay less attention to it.As such, he sees it as his duty to keep them aware. It fits his personality; self-determined, and with a strong sense of justice. He is active in the localcommunity organization, although it is not his main leisure activity. Hesometimes volunteers in various community tasks, and takes pride in doingsomething for his village, and the things they achieve by working together as acommunity.Two or three times he has written letters to the local newspaper.Technical Skills and Media ConsumptionSubscribes to the local paper and reads it daily, along with watching the newson DR1.Uses the internet for various purposes, and uses Home Banking on his laptop.Owns a fairly new Mobile Phone.Persona 1: ClausBohøj, M.; Borchorst, N.G.; Bødker, S.; Korn, M. & Zander, P.-O. Public Deliberation in Municipal Planning: Supporting Action and Reflection withMobile Technology. In Proc. of C&T 2011, June 29-July 2, Brisbane, Australia, 88-97.
    8. 8. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 1:MOBILE DEMOCRACY8
    9. 9. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 1: QUESTIONS›  What is the distinct quality of a citizen “being there”, of “being in place”?How does it differ from being remote?›  How can we exploit this quality and design for it?9
    10. 10. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 1:EXAMPLE – AUGMENTED REALITY10
    11. 11. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 1:EXAMPLE – MOOD11
    12. 12. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 2: MENING@PARK12
    13. 13. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 2: MENING@PARK                                                                                                                 13
    14. 14. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 2: MENING@PARK14
    15. 15. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 2: MENING@PARK15
    16. 16. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 2: QUESTIONS›  How can we facilitate citizens to make linksbetween physical and digital spaces?›  How can a discussion topic be intimately tiedto a place?›  How can people explore, find and access discussiontopics that refer to physical spaces?›  How can the place be represented in each topic?Et forskningsprojekt vedFor yderligere information kontakt Matthias Korn (mkorn@cs.au.dk)Kræver “Mening@Park” fra Android MarketScan denne QR kode med din smartphone til at deltage i diskussionen.Brug f.eks. Google Goggles, Barcoder Scanner eller QR Droid fra Android Market.?Hvad er din mening om stedet?Hvad mener de andre?Nationalparkbesøgscenter i Kalø — et Mening@Park diskussionsemne16
    17. 17. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 2: QUESTIONS›  How can we facilitate citizens to make linksbetween physical and digital spaces?›  How can a discussion topic be intimately tiedto a place?›  How can people explore, find and access discussiontopics that refer to physical spaces?›  How can the place be represented in each topic?17
    18. 18. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 3: USER STUDY ON FOURSQUARE18
    19. 19. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 3: USER STUDY ON FOURSQUARETwo part study:I. Via text messages for in-the-momentrealizations of experiencesII. Deferred contextual interviews formore in-depth accounts19
    20. 20. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCASE 3: QUESTIONS›  How are augmented places perceived and experienced?›  “There were also other [tips] and new images, so the perception of the place is changing in that it hasgood connection between the physical place and Foursquare.”›  Do people think their actions on Foursquare have any kind of impact in thephysical world or on other people?›  “It does not change the physical environment, I think.”›  “Today, Im late, so my group can see, Im there in a minute if they want ...”›  How is the link between physical and digital spaces mediated by technology?›  “I just got a workout badge with a small comment and they have written something funny aboutworking out before. So I think that Foursquare manages it better than the [fitness] center does itself.”20
    21. 21. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYSUMMING UP21placesphysicalspacesdigitalspacesaugmentedplaces8use, adapt, appropriateuse, adapt, appropriateFoursquareMening@ParkMobileDemocracyhybrid spaces
    22. 22. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYCONCLUSION›  Through mobile location-based services, physical spaces become increasinglyexpanded by digital spaces.›  Places are augmented due to the additional source of experiences emergingfrom the digital realm.›  Utopia: amplified experience & enhanced reflection leads to augmented actionpossibilities in deliberation›  Dystopia: disconnected and numb experience & lack of reflection leads tosuperficial deliberation22
    23. 23. AARHUSUNIVERSITY 27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHYou!ThankFROM HYBRID SPACES TOEXPERIENCING AUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORNMKORN@CS.AU.DKHTTP://CS.AU.DK/~MKORN/@MATSCH_O0
    24. 24. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYDISCUSSION›  What kind of quality does the digital realm add to our everyday experiences?›  What kind of quality does it add if technology facilitates direct linking to thephysical realm?›  What does all this mean for citizen involvement and deliberation?
    25. 25. FROM HYBRID SPACES TO EXPERIENCINGAUGMENTED PLACESMATTHIAS KORN27. JANUARY 2012MT @ SHAARHUSUNIVERSITYPHOTO ATTRIBUTIONS›  Slide 2 (bottom): SeeClickFix http://seeclickfix.com/›  Slide 12: Nils Jepsen / CC-BY-SA-3.0, via Wikimedia Commonshttp://bit.ly/10SsVbK›  Slide 14: Ebelfestival http://ebelfestival.dk/25

    ×