Minor Experience Design for the Internet of Things

Transcription

1 Internet of Things Days Rotterdam, April 10th, 2013 Minor Experience Design for the Internet of Things Peter van Waart Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences Internet of Things Days Rotterdam Minor Experience Design for the Internet of Things Peter van Waart CMI Creating april 2013

2 Peter van Waart Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences Lecturer Communication & Multimedia Design School of Communication, Media and Information Technology Knowledge Center Creating010 Researcher Human Centered ICT PhD candidate, Industrial Design Engineering @petervanwaart

3 Minor Experience Design for the Internet of Things Ratio As technology becomes more pervasive, it will have more impact on how we give meaning to our lives and living environment

4

5

6 Internet of Things Days Rotterdam, April 10th, 2013 Minor Experience Design for the Internet of Things Peter van Waart Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences The 1st paradigm, an amalgam of engineering and human factors, saw interaction as a form of man-machine coupling in ways inspired by industrial engineering and ergonomics. The goal of work in this paradigm, then, is to optimize the fit between humans and machines Harrison, Sengers & Tatar (2007) F16 fighter jet cockpit (source: The 2nd paradigm, in contrast, is organized around a central metaphor of mind and computer as symmetric, coupled information processors. At the center is a set of information processing phenomena or issues in computers and users such as how does information get in, what transformations does it undergo, how does it go out again, how can it be communicated efficiently etc. Harrison, Sengers & Tatar (2007) Macintosh computer interface (source:

7 Internet of Things Days Rotterdam, April 10th, 2013 Minor Experience Design for the Internet of Things Peter van Waart Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences The 3rd paradigm One set of issues arises out of work in ubiquitous computing which suggests a renewed centrality for the usecontext of computing. While context could be sidelined to some extent in looking at the desktop interface, the appearance of computing embedded everywhere in both work and personal life has raised the context of computing to a central problem for ubicomp design. [ ] A fourth set of issues arises out of the domain of nontaskoriented computing. These approaches tend to be bad fits to the 1st and 2nd paradigms, whose methods tend to require problems to be formalized and expressed in terms of tasks, goals and efficiency - precisely what non-task-oriented approaches are intended to question. It is difficult, for example, to apply usability studies to ambient interfaces, since standard evaluation techniques are task-focused in the sense of asking users to pay attention to and evaluate the interface, precisely what the system is devised to avoid. We begin with the recognition that one of the themes that underlies the 3rd paradigm is a focus on embodied interaction. Embodiment, of course, also plays a role in the 1st and 2nd paradigms. In human factors, attention is paid to such factors as the fit of a mouse to the human hand or the amenability of particular font sizes to be easily read. Cognitively based work in HCI has laid out physical constraints that usefully inform interface design such as the speed at which humans are able to react in various situations. Embodiment in the 3rd paradigm is based on a different, central stance drawing on phenomenology: that the way in which we come to understand the world, ourselves, and interaction derives crucially from our location in a physical and social world as embodied actors. Last, yet another set of issues arise out of the marginalization of emotion in classic cognitive work. A wide range of approaches to emotion, notably those of Picard [25] and Norman [24], has been inspired by more recent cognitive psychology, which argues that emotion plays a central role in cognition and models emotion as a type of information flow. THE CONSTRUCTION OF MEANING The 1st paradigm tends to take a pragmatic approach to meaning, ignoring it unless it causes a problem, while the 2nd interprets meaning in terms of information flows. The 3rd paradigm, in contrast, sees meaning and meaning construction as a central focus. It adopts the stance that meaning is constructed on the fly, often collaboratively, by people in specific contexts and situations, and therefore that interaction itself is an essential element in meaning construction. Meaning derives from information, of course, but in this perspective cannot be summed up by mapping information flow; it is, instead, irreducibly connected to the viewpoints, interactions, histories, and local resources available to those making sense of the interface and therefore to some extent beyond the reach of formalization. Harrison, Sengers & Tatar (2007) thinking is also achieved through doing things in the world, for example expression through gestures, learning through manipulation, or thinking through building prototypes. Harrison, Sengers & Tatar (2007) Harrison, Sengers & Tatar (2007) source: janetnewenham.wordpress.com

8 The development of Internet of Things seems to progress on it s own. Small contributions of all of us leads to an autonomous development. How do you contribute? To what direction and with what effects? Above all, how do you make it meaningful to people? Kevin Kelly s technium. Kevin Kelly, TEDx

9 Human Experience 1 4 ECTS Exam Pervasive Technology 1 4 ECTS Report (sceanrios) Pervasive Explorations 1 7 ECTS Prototypes - Academic poster Human Experience 2 3 ECTS Essay Pervasive Technology 2 4 ECTS Essay Pervasive Explorations 2 8 ECTS Prototypes - Academic poster

10 Learning goals! Human Experience! Pervasive Technology! PEP! Quarter 1 - is able to define how people experience meaning [kennen] Theory about making meaning - is able to identify current and future developments of pervasive technology and its impact on society [kennen, inzicht]! - is able to identify current and future developments of pervasive technology and its impact on human and consumer behaviour [kennen, inzicht]! - is able to apply his knowledge and skills in experimental innovative projects using personal devices, sensors and (public) infrastructures and screens; [toepassen]! - is able to apply different view points in literature to a given case; [toepassen]! Theory about current and future developments of pervasive technology en societal impact (scenarios)!! Theory about HCI (3 rd!! paradigm) and impact on personal making meaning!! Theory about characteristics of technology (scale, mobile en locative, (in)visibility, openess, control, interaction, privacy, security)! Theory about human experience in HCI Theory about different applications of pervasive technology in different domains Practice based situations (real life experiments)!

11 Learning goals Human Experience Pervasive Technology PEP Quarter 2 - is able to assess theoretical cases with regard to the design of pervasive technology; [analyseren, evalueren] Theoretical case study Theoretical case study - is able to design for meaningful experiences; [creeren] - is able to assess real-life cases with regard to the design of pervasive technology; [analyseren, evalueren] - is able to evaluate the intended effect of his design on people; [evalueren]! - is able to reflect on the process of pervasive design. [evalueren] - is able to take position in the discourse of pervasive design; [creeeren]!!! Practice based situation (real life case study)! Reflection on personal position with regard to making meaning! Reflection on personal position with regard to societal issues!!

12 Meaningful Design

13

14 Meaningful design 1. From creating things to creating experience 2. Experience depends on human values

15 Experiences Services Brewed coffee Goods Packaged coffee Commodities Coffee beans Pine & Gilmore (1999)

16 From creating things Product design Product experience Product Dienst Beleid Communicatie Hardware Infrastructuur Protocollen....

17 to creating experience Experience design Product design Product experience Product Dienst Beleid Communicatie Hardware Infrastructuur Protocollen....

18 Microsoft Research: Harper, Rodden, Rogers, Sellen (2008)

19 Sleeswijk Visser et al. (2005) why, why, why...

20 Values determine experience experience human values things Inspired by P. Desmet: Model of product emotions TU Delft.

21

22 Examples: Concepts from students project Emerging Media Open Data How did it start? Greenway: groene fietsroutes Studeerplekken app voor Bibliotheek Rotterdam Hergebruik Gemeentearchief voor persoonlijk familie-album Rotterdam Onbeperkt: toegankelijkheid voor rolstoelgebruikers

23

24 TIME AND SPACE

25 Waarmee moet je rekening houden bij het ontwerpen voor interactie in ruimte en over tijd

26

27 Internet of Things Days Rotterdam, April 10th, 2013 Minor Experience Design for the Internet of Things Peter van Waart Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences

28 Internet of Things Days Rotterdam, April 10th, 2013 Minor Experience Design for the Internet of Things Peter van Waart Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences

29 User experience over time Figure 1. Temporality of experience, consisting of three main forces, an increasing familiarity, functional dependency and emotional attachment, all responsible for shifting users experience across three phases: orientation, incorporation and identification. In each phase, different product qualities are appreciated. Karapanos. E., Zimmerman J., Forlizzi J., & Martens, J.B. Experience Over Time: An Initial Framework. CHI 2009, April 4 9, 2009, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Copyright 2009 ACM /09/04

30

31 Ontwerprichtlijnen A. Those pervasive systems and applications that are most usable to be of meaning over time - enhance social capital as collective goods - involving shared goals and values and - social norms of reciprocity Carroll, J.M. & Mentis, in: Schifferstein et al., 2008 A. No design for immediate interaction only, but interaction over time: a day, a week, a year,.. B. No design for known displays only, but use technology in space (nearby your body such as wearables or away from you such as sensors)

32 END