1. Probe and proxies : unravelingmeaningful technology experiences An Jacobs Wendy Van den Broeck Bram Lievens Lizzy Bleumers4th TQR conference 2013 , Fort Lauderdale

2. Our focus on the use of technologyas applied social scientists in technology development Source: The Process of Design Squiggle, Damien Newman

3. Why applied social sciences within technology development?Problem Current design pitfalls: Technology push

4. A solution: Human centered design approach Combining consumer research & product development (social & technical aspects) characteristics: 1. Understanding requirements by user involvement 2. Balanced distribution between human and technology of functions 3. Iteration of evaluation and design 4. Multidisciplinary

5. Human Emphasis on is on a current situation or on a problem centered design moves Participatory design Ethnographic fieldwork Emphasis on Emphasis on end-users researchers and knowledge Lead User Contextual designers Lead User Approach Contextual design and on their Approach design knowledge and on move towards their move towards research and end users design activities Co- Empathic designing designSource: Steen etal 2007 Emphasis on ought on future situation or on an opportunity

6. Users as innovatorsGoal: beyond buying behavior (adoption)Appropriation/habitualization (domestication) Beyond people as end-users consumers Creativity does not stop when product is on market, innovative use User does not simply adapt to product/technology Mutual shaping Unanticipated use ( inappropriate use) Contextualized, situated use DOMESTICATION PERSPECTIVE Detect cultural and structural change in everyday practices, meaning and conflicts in use

7. BUT Innovation paradox : user insights can not be based on experience with final product that is not developed yet Their cognitive map is functionally fixated in the present The future is unpredictable Reflection of several stakeholders in making choices Is helping to co-create this future Solution ? doing research with probes

8. Probing techniques:Why and what? 1) information/inspiration 2) deeper 3) Participation

9. Probing methods in human computer interaction: Origin and history: 1990sCULTURAL PROBESGavers et al. 1997 Titel van de presentatie 19/01/2013

10. Technological probing Used by different disciplines different Hutchinson et al (2003) Social science goal: data collection concerning technology use and the users Design goal: inspiration among users & designers on new technologies Engineering goal: technology tests in the users natural setting

11. Example Transecare: (2009-2010)indepenefor care dependentstory board pictures to probe Piloting 2 X 3 set ups 5 monts 2009 4 months 2010 Detecting user and technical issues and redesign

12. Proxy technologies + mock ups

13. Solutions doing research with probes:Our approach: Low Fidelity : Pen & paper, pictures, scenarios, mock ups High Fidelity: Technological solution made for the social research = Technological probe Prototyping/demo of new technology: often bounded to lab or still instable (New) technological solution on market Proxy Technology Assessment (PTA) (Pierson et al, 2006; Bleumers et al. 2010)

14. Type of R&D phase Time of Experience probe with probes Idea/concept Concept Concept Short Long development elaboration evaluation 1 moment 4 weeksNon techprobes Techprobes POC/prototype Off the shelf tech

15. Proxy technology assessment vsTechnology assessment Technology assessment = forecasting possible routes for different stakeholders future development of technology will or can have Proxy technology assessment =analytical process, on micro level to co-construct plausible everyday practices with future technologies1) Substitute 2) indirect connection

16. Compare technological probes/proxiesTechnological probes Technological proxiesHutchinson et al (2003)Not necessary Resemblance to Some characteristics envisioned similar technologyCollect information about Logging Collaboration withtheir own use. producer, else diary methodOpen-ended, give users Flexibility Less open ended,freedom how they Innovative use alwaysappropriate it. Possible Analysis/reflection triggering from usersSimple & technical sound Deploy in real world Be fully functional toCould have deliberate setting prevent fall out due tochosen usability issues usability issues.

17. Characteristics of PTA Starting not from person, place or product but a practice Then decide: which stuff ? situation? by who? Using state of art technology having characteristics and functions under study Study Innovation in everyday practices In conceptual phase of technological/product development

18. Example MADUF(Maximising DVBH usage in Flanders), 2006-2007 TV watching = ! domesticated everyday life practice = Stabilized, taken for granted social bonding ontological security domestic evening new portable devices potential being on the move Mobile TV technology (e.g. DVB-H) = developed idea generation phase = concept phase for application layer 19

19. Selecting suitable proxy technology central proxy technology = UMTS phone with Vodafone Live (third generation mobile technology, 3G) 20

20. Recruiting , mapping and roll out Week 1: task list and questionnaire Week 2: no data collection by user Week 3 diaries and cultural probes Week 4: no data collection by user Week 5: depth interviews

21. Monitoring usage Elicit everyday life user experiences/practices to forecast everyday practices with future technologies Integrated in a multi method social research plan Desk research, observations Questionnaires, logging, diaries, cultural probes, visual clues, in-depth interviews 22

22. How to do a PTA in practice? 1. Scoping 1. Which practice(s)? Which concept? 2. Which user group 3. which setting(s)? 4. List adequate proxy technologies 2. Selecting/sampling 1. suitable proxy technology 2. Selecting recruiting and profiling participants 3. Starting up proxy period 1. Mapping user setting 2. Distribution of proxy technology 4. Proxy period 1. Monitoring use 2. Eliciting reflection right after proxy period 5. Analysing data (in // with 4) 6. Reporting results

23. Technological objects as stimulus Not new Taste testing, lab testing In behavioral testing/experiment tradition Creativity design tools To generate new ideas Here in PTA: 1) in combination with other interpretative techniques 2) offering new reference point for systematic reflection 3) And collect data on use and experience of use, design implications are secondary

24. Time for some more examples ?

25. Example HI-Masquerade (Human Interface MulticameraAcquisition for story telling and qualitative enhance reality in ambient3D environment ) (2008-2010) The concept? Project goal: Real-time, authentic, immersive remote family interaction in virtual worlds Question? Investigate potential value of virtual worlds for family interaction Establish requirements

26. Method: profiles of respondents Participants Focus on interaction between young children and grandparents Child between 8 and 12 y old One of grandparents One of parents Focus on appropriation among those that have the basic skills and means to use a virtual world application Access to the Internet Basis Internet skills Long term, in-depth qualititative study 3 families participated Media rich households Mediated contact relatively traditional

27. Probing by storyboards Storyboards Visualizations of use scenarios To elicit attitudes and opinions First storyboard theme Sharing and reliving past experiences together Second storyboard theme Creative and cooperative play

28. Proxy Technology Chobots Web-based virtual world targeted at families Avatars (customization) Individual and multi- play Communication tools 4 weeks use (logbook) + interview

29. Example IM3 project Interactive Mobile Medical Monitoring (2007 jun-sept) (Interactive Mobile Medical 12 people with chronic heart failure Offline diary and auto-collection of pictures Intake and follow up interview 4 weeks total, 2 weeks diary Open ended & closed questions 30

30. PTA Faking the real thing? Fake? Proxies are not the real, final products Real? Proxies provoke real reactions and information about possible everyday use of final product.

31. Q&Aan.jacobs@vub.ac.be 32