While Celine is a very engaging presenter and there were many interesting insights in the presentation and the comments, I would like to narrow the focus to the three methodological questions posed by this course:
Concerning procedures, Celine presented a pretty clear idea of user centered design as the foundation of HCI. The paper on Body Centric design space was a clear example of this method. It attempts to exhaustively enumerate the possibilities for interaction in this arena and to develop very speicific metric for empirical measurement.
Interestingly, her own work, while using many of these same methods, also proposes an alternative to user centered design; technology centered design. Her argument for this is mostly focused on the possibility of transformative design that may never arise from the incremental approach of user centered approaches.
In this case, the repeatable procedures are likely to shift from measurable user actions to speculations on the feel or appropriateness of new technology. The relevant measurements are likely to be less about measurement of speed or accuracy and more about self-reported affective states.
In terms of the conceptual space of her work, it would seem that a reasonable goal of her work is to imagine new paradigms of interaction. The use of the technology is to discover ways in which people might see the world with fresh eyes; it is likely that there are multiple possible designs that engage this sense, rather than a single "right" answer.
E
For each meeting session please submit approximately 400 words which should focus around the following three questions: What are specific and repeatable procedures used within a particular domain or discipline; do we make a list or draw a diagram or make a calculation? What is the conceptual space of the discipline; how many alternatives can and should be considered at the same time? What is the evaluative criteria; how do we know good alternative from less good ones?
No comments:
Post a Comment