Top Banner

of 44

D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

Apr 03, 2018

Download

Documents

Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    1/44

    D2.1.4

    Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology

    2013-04-18

    Rmi Francard (FDF)

    Peter Ljungstrand, Eriksson Magnus (Interactive)

    Peggy Valcke, Aleksandra Kuczerawy (KU Leuven)

    www.experimedia.eu

    This document updates the methodology defined in D2.1.1 based on usage experience fromthe driving experiments, the design work completed by experiments funded during the firstopen call and ethic committee recommendations.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    2/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 2

    Project acronym EXPERIMEDIA

    Full title Experiments in live social and networked media experiences

    Grant agreement number 287966

    Funding scheme Large-scale Integrating Project (IP)Work programme topic Objective ICT-2011.1.6 Future Internet Research and Experimentation

    (FIRE)

    Project start date 2011-10-01

    Project duration 36 months

    Activity 2 Construction

    Workpackage 2.1 Architecture Blueprint

    Deliverable lead organisation FDF

    Authors Rmi Francard (FDF)Peter Ljungstrand (Interactive)

    Eriksson Magnus (Interactive)

    Peggy Valcke (Leuven)

    Aleksandra Kuczerawy (Leuven)

    Reviewers Sandra Murg (JRS)

    Martn Lpez Nores (UVIGO)

    Version 1.0

    Status FinalDissemination level PU

    Due date PM15 (2023-12-31)

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    3/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 3

    Table of Contents

    1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 5

    2. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 6

    3. Current method review ...................................................................................................................... 7

    3.1. VIA assessment ......................................................................................................................... 7

    3.2. TheMediaConnectcase, a VIA example .................................................................................. 8

    3.2.1. VIA methodology during experiments .............................................................................. 8

    3.2.2. VIA first assessment ............................................................................................................. 9

    3.3. Experimental approach .......................................................................................................... 10

    3.4. Privacy Impact Assessment ................................................................................................... 11

    3.4.1. Privacy Impact Assessment method ................................................................................ 11

    4. Recommendation .............................................................................................................................. 13

    4.1. PIA - assessment of the applied method ............................................................................. 13

    4.2. VIA research framework ........................................................................................................ 13

    4.2.1. Pre-experimentation business assessment ....................................................................... 14

    4.2.2. Exploratory qualitative stage ............................................................................................. 15

    4.2.3. Exploratory quantitative stage........................................................................................... 16

    4.2.4. Concluding and validating report ..................................................................................... 174.2.5. VIA methodology table overview .................................................................................... 18

    4.3. Experimental method framework......................................................................................... 20

    4.3.1. Purposes for interventions ................................................................................................ 20

    4.3.2. An alternative design methodology .................................................................................. 20

    5. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 23

    Appendix A. Ethnographic field study at CAR ................................................................................ 24

    A.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 24A.2. Life at CAR .............................................................................................................................. 24

    A.2.1. The CAR perspective ......................................................................................................... 24

    A.2.2. Residence.............................................................................................................................. 25

    A.2.3. Daily schedule ...................................................................................................................... 25

    A.2.4. Education ............................................................................................................................. 26

    A.2.5. Leisure .................................................................................................................................. 26

    A.2.6. Nutrition ............................................................................................................................... 27

    A.3. Sport specific insights ............................................................................................................. 28

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    4/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 4

    A.3.1. Trampoline ........................................................................................................................... 28

    A.3.2. Taekwondo .......................................................................................................................... 28

    A.3.3. Interlude: computerized judgments in sports ................................................................. 29

    A.3.4. Gymnastics ........................................................................................................................... 30

    A.3.5. Tennis ................................................................................................................................... 31

    A.3.6. Synchro ................................................................................................................................. 31

    A.4. Technology and communication .......................................................................................... 32

    A.4.1. Personal devices and use of technology .......................................................................... 32

    A.4.2. The social life of information ............................................................................................ 33

    A.5. Conclusions .............................................................................................................................. 33

    A.5.1. Suggested research directions ............................................................................................ 33

    A.5.2. Conducting experiments at CAR ...................................................................................... 34

    A.6. References ................................................................................................................................ 36

    Appendix B. Example of feature analysis .......................................................................................... 37

    Appendix C. Application of business assessment to the tourism ecosystem ............................... 42

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    5/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 5

    1. Executive SummaryOne of the main challenges of the EXPERIMEDIA approach is to cope with the diversity of theconstraints of each experiment with a systematic response. Although the methodology defined at

    the early stage (Document 2.1.1 Methodology definition) of the project takes into considerationsuch issues, the differences between venues and the diversity of the experimentation havecreated the needs for specific and local adaptation. This document aims at reviewing themethodology usage during the first period and proposing recommendations to improve themethodology and create wider common baseline for the next period usage.

    After an introduction, the second section of the document reviews the overall methodologiesand policies in place during this first period. At that stage of the project the work necessary to setup the experiments has been set up and risks analysed by experimenters. This is the opportunityto review at the design stage how the methodology is contributing to the success of the future

    experimentation and what are the current problems faced by experimenters.

    The last section outlines the recommended changes to improve current methodology in place,complementing with ethno-socio study approaches, Ethical and Data Protection AdvisoryBoards' recommendations and value impact and business opportunity assessment.

    Finally, Appendix A gathers all the elements and details of the ethno-sociological study that wasconducted in the first period of the project and Appendices B and C provide examples of theapplication of the methodology to Schladming.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    6/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 6

    2. IntroductionThe activities of the current period have mainly focused on setting up the facility; making thearchitecture working and ensuring that experimentation could be effectively rolled out. At

    different stages of the project, from early design phase to the current first deployment at thevenues, the project's stakeholders have been exposed and involved in the EXPERIMEDIAmethodology and technology. This is the opportunity to review successes and challenges facedby the experimenters. This document has gathered the feed backs of the methodology usage atthe early stages of the experimentation.

    The privacy assessment methodology, ethno-socio trial done at CAR and the VIA phase 1methodology set up are reviewed. At that stage the EXPERIMEDIA project introduces newapproaches to complement the one in place for the first period. This evolution is reviewed in therecommendations as to lead with adapted operational deliverables for the next phase which will

    be set up during first experiments and developed with the new open call.

    The overall challenge for EXPERIMEDIA is the definition of a general methodology of theexperimentation with evolving EXPERIMEDIA ingredients; meta-component, venuesspecificities, experimenter's technology. The methodology is a key contributor to the creation ofthe business value and factor of success for the facility that should layout the competence centrestructure and offer. As such the VIA is expected to build the proper momentum within theexperimenters and the venue's stakeholders to validate also the future value proposal of thefacility.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    7/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 7

    3. Current method review3.1. VIA assessment

    As proposed in D2.1.1 document EXPERIMEDIA's meta-method frame is based on Value

    Impact Assessment (VIA). The Business Release is the milestone on which measures can beeffectively tested and conclusion can be drawn.

    In order to build the BR1 (Business release described D2.1.11) experimenters have to analyse theelements of the innovative services in detail. As a reference to conduct the analysis one canconsider the Service Dominant Logic paradigm, which is focused on how uses create consumers

    value and satisfaction. According to Vargo et Lusch (2004, p6), A service-centered dominantlogic implies that the value is defined by and co-created with the consumer rather thanembedded in output, i.e. goods are acquired to obtain competences, services.

    At that stage of the project the engagement of the business stakeholder has not been generallysuccessful. In effect, when the community is large and the business scope is wide, the valueimpact assessment is becoming a tedious and complex approach without proper guideline.Experimenter may encounter difficulties to understand and take into account the venueexpectations in the experiment. A first impact is mostly a lower implication from the venues andas an immediate result the possible delay in getting feedbacks to the experimenters' requests. Amore damageable risk for the overall project is the partial or complete disengagement of the

    venue in the experiment. As such it may result in poor returns for the experiment (lowparticipation) and higher difficulty for the next phase of the experiments.

    The application of the VIA must take into account the specificity of each venue "specialization"which is defined by their ecosystem. As such a screening should be done with the experimenterand the venue stakeholder to fine tune and negotiate the expectation of the experiment.

    The features of the experiments require the 3 components:

    Business assessmento The Business assessment should be done with a representative set of stakeholder of

    the venue. For instance in an experimentation area such as Schladming, the people

    working at the office of tourism could represent the interest of the different actors ofthe ski resort such has the shops, the hotel, the ski station .

    The experimenters should conduct the business assessment. The experimenters canexpect direct benefits in the execution of their experiments:

    The first benefit is to develop a mutual understanding between the venue and theexperimenter of what are the constraints of the experiment that will help the

    venue to set or adjust their expectations.

    1 D2.1.1 First EXPERIMEDIA Methodology p14

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    8/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 8

    This is the opportunity to find an adequate protocol of inquiry negotiated with the venue so tohave the support from local actors within the ecosystem. This support will help to identify andsupport the recruitment of users and increase the chances of higher number of participants.

    User Valuationo The qualitative feedback taken by the different experimenters will allow us to come

    with sound results in terms of benefits. At that stage the experimenters have alreadydefined a protocol with a panel of users and questionnaires. This will becomplemented with new methodology guidelines to insure a coherent collection ofthe results and capacity to draw effective conclusions with the venues.

    Technology Assessmento At phase 1 of the VIA (where EXPERIMEDIA stands today) the assessment can

    only outline a first feasibility study of the exploitation of the proposed potentialservices. The cost of the operations or the analysis of necessary capability forinstance will be analysed by benchmarking related existing solution already in place.

    The objective will be the settings of indicator's value targeted for a second phase ofexperimentation. These indicators will effectively allow validating some of thehypothesis of the capacity to effectively build such kind of solution or service.

    3.2. The MediaConnectcase, a VIA example3.2.1. VIA methodology during experimentsThe VIA approach was rolled out with the MEDIAConnect experiment. A step by stepapproach to implement the business review one was followed with the support of FDF.

    MediaConnect aims at testing the benefit that augmented reality interface can bring on mapreading. The experiment proposes a mobile application as a service of information about skicondition and point of interest in the ski resort for tourists. One of the hypotheses of theexperiment is that the interface can simplify the access to the information such as ski conditionor point of interest and as a consequence improve the overall experience of the skier. (SeeMediaConnect Experiment in D4.5.2 Experiment progress report).

    At first we reviewed the list of features of the mobile application that could be "consumed" bythe end user. A simple table of the different functions of the services was produced and analysed(see appendix B) as to understand the feasibility and select the features weighted by the interestfor the end user.

    In a second step once chosen a potential business sector, such as the Tourism-Mobile Service wecould review a list of global indicators to follow. This exercise helped the experimenter to get abetter understanding of the potential business outcomes. .

    A table (see appendix C) outlines the critical indicators that can influence or impact thebehaviour of tourists in mobile services.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    9/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 9

    The experimenters also came up with hypotheses which would confirm the interest of theaugmented reality technology. The relevant indicators were also defined accordingly to confirmthe technology and the usage interests.

    The gathering of the three elements; list of consumable features, business indicators, technology

    usage indicator set a first understanding of the indicators to measure and have a firstunderstanding of the quantitative and qualitative analysis.

    The VIA requires a business analysis with a proper understanding of the ecosystem challenges.The map of tourist and mobile services was proposed prior to validation with venues. Theanalysis of tourist behaviour with mobile services is still theoretical at that stage.

    Also practical questions could not be yet answered with the current methodology in place suchas:

    What data to we get in which stage of the experiment? Are they indicators that are relevant to all experiments? How to build the typology / classification of impacts How the data that is measured can relate to a certain indicator and support conclusion to

    hypothesis of the experimenters?

    o For instance for MediaConnect how to validate with the Tourism indicators theAdded Value indicators?

    These questions are examples that the experimenters have to answer to have sound conclusion

    about business potential. The VIA as described in the first methodology 2.1.1 document outlinethe fundamentals of the approach. In practice it requires support to apply the methodology andrequires a frame of work and research to follow which will help experiments to define theindicators and build a business release.

    3.2.2. VIA first assessmentThe experimenters have to cope with the technical uncertainties while managing the expectationof the venues. If the technical approach remains a controllable domain, the expectation settingremains a complex challenge. The experiments' objectives must go beyond QoS measurement

    and must be able to address the different expectation from the stakeholder which will beinvolved in the experiment. This complexity is at different level:

    On one level the business oriented stakeholders members of the venue's ecosystem areexpecting a good understanding of the business case.

    On the other side the experimenters must engage direct users with the challenge thatthey must see direct benefits from participating.

    The latter is usually well managed by experimenters, whereas the former requires a more in depthcontact with the business sector and proper understanding of the ecosystem.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    10/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 10

    Moreover the Experimenters may not be able to benefit from other experimenters' experiences.Each venue has a different ecosystem and the technology used has created a real challenge toinsure a common approach for all. It sets the question of the reusability of the indicatorsdefinition and the practicality to share the approach of observations. This question is one of thechallenges for the facility but also for EXPERIMEDIA to build a core methodology as a

    valuable asset.

    3.3. Experimental approachAs discussed previously the VIA certainly addresses longer term benefits and outcomes in termsof the business for the local ecosystem. However to get the local stakeholders involved in theoverall experiment requires them to be involved at an early stage of the experiment design.During this first period we tried technics of co-design with venues. This approach iscomplementary and effectively addresses the earlier phase of the experiment.

    During the course of the project smaller scale investigations into the relation between the venuesand EXPERIMEDIA technology was introduced. Three days of ethnographic study at CAR anda design competition with interaction design students to develop new services for Schladming

    were conducted. These kinds of interventions are very low cost in terms of resources and man-hours; yet yield a substantial result in the form of new ideas for services and situationalawareness of the design context. The method bears similarities to design methods wheresolutions are built with initial stages of prototyping, brainstorming and field research thatthrough iterative processes are shaped into a final design. These methods are especially preferredin design situations where socio-technical factors create complex environments where it isdifficult to predict the impact of a certain design intervention. The type of designs that

    EXPERIMEDIA are doing in the driving experiments as well as in the open call experimentscan for the most part be characterized as such situations, in particular where large groups ofusers are involved in open-ended environments.

    The first intervention consisted of 3 days of workshops, interviews and observations conductedat CAR by CAR, The Interactive Institute and Atos with athletes, coaches and staff. The purpose

    was both to aid the first internal experiment at CAR as well as provide a detailed guide toexperimenters coming from the open call. The focus was on understanding the process oftraining, on how technology was used to support training today with a special focus on video, ondiscussing potential improvements including sensor technology, as well as to get a better feel forhow life at CAR is when it comes to everything that is not strictly focused on training.

    The intervention led to an ethnographic report (see appendix) outlining the way different sportsinteract with technology as well as on the everyday life at CAR for athletes, coaches and staff.

    The intervention also led to ideas and prototypes for work on experimenting with smallersensors for different sports that can be a resource for future experiments as additional datasource.

    A first conclusion of such trial is to confirm the interest to get the venue stakeholder into theprocess of the experiment design even prior the selection of the experiments. The potential

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    11/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 11

    benefits perceived are a higher level of implication of the stakeholders in the experiment processwhich could be a critical success factor for the overall project results.

    3.4. Privacy Impact Assessment3.4.1. Privacy Impact Assessment methodIn the EXPERIMEDIA project a strong focus is put on conducting research in ethical andlegally compliant manner. To ensure this, the Consortium included a legal partner -Interdisciplinary Research Centre for Law and ICT from KU Leuven in Belgium. The role ofthis partner is to monitor activities of the partners in Driving Experiments, as well as Open Calls,and assist them with advice with regard to issues related to privacy and data protection. Suchactivity takes a form of a Privacy Impact assessment, which is conducted by ICRI - KU Leuven.

    Legal analysis in EXPERIMEDIA consists of several methods. First of all, ICRI - KU Leuven

    applies traditional legal methods like an analysis of legislation and its preparatory works, relevantpolicy documents, case law, and review of legal literature. The sources that are traditionallyconsulted in the area of privacy and data protection include (although are not limited to): theEuropean Convention on Human Rights2, the Convention for the Protection of Individuals withregard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data (Convention 108)3, the OECD PrivacyGuidelines4, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union5, Directive 1995/46 onthe processing of personal data6, ePrivacy Directive 2002/58/EC7 and the data retentionDirective 2006/24/EC8. A lot of attention is also given to the opinions of the Article 29

    Working Party, which consists of the Data Protection Commissioners from the Member Statestogether with a representative of the European Commission. Moreover, the Ethical Guidelines

    for undertaking ICT research in FP79, issued by the European Commission, are taken intoconsideration.

    Other methods employed by ICRI-KU Leuven amount to strong cooperation between legal andtechnical partners in the project. Such cooperation is achieved through guidance, interviews andindividual, as well as group, teleconferences and meetings. This allows for a careful analysis ofthe proposed experiments to detect any possible issues that could be problematic from theethical or legal perspective. It should be also highlighted that a situation of each partner, with

    2 Council of Europe, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, CETS No. 005,

    04.11.1950, Rome3 Council of EuropeETS n108Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to AutomaticProcessing of Personal Data of 28 January 19804 OECD Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal Data, 23 September 19805 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2000/C 364/1, 18.12.20006 Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection ofindividuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data7 Directive 2002/58/EC of 12 July 2002, concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacyin the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communication), O.J. L 201/37, 31July 2002,8 Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of of 15 March 2006on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publiclyavailable electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending

    Directive 2002/58/EC9Annex 5: Ethical Guidelines for undertaking ICT research in FP7,ftp://ftp.cordis.europe.eu/pub/fp7/docs/guidelines-annex5ict.pdf.

    ftp://ftp.cordis.europe.eu/pub/fp7/docs/guidelines-annex5ict.pdfftp://ftp.cordis.europe.eu/pub/fp7/docs/guidelines-annex5ict.pdfftp://ftp.cordis.europe.eu/pub/fp7/docs/guidelines-annex5ict.pdf
  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    12/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 12

    regard to processing of personal data, is different in EXPERIMEDIA. There are three venueswith varying specifics and numerous external experimenters that are conceptually diverse. Thismeans that a case-to-case approach is required as it is not possible to develop one solution that

    would fit all the situations.

    In the process of Privacy Impact assessment ICRI-KU Leuven is assisted by two external bodies,namely Ethical Advisory Board and Data Protection Board. The boards consist of legal andethics experts from academia and data protection authorities across Europe10. Members of thesetwo groups play an important role in EXPERIMEDIA. The intention of the Consortium is toensure that ethical principles and the general legal requirements for EXPERIMEDIA are dulytaken into account in the design and selection of the different experiments. Therefore the EABs

    and DPB's role is to help to achieve this result by providing guidance and oversight. Themembers of these boards critically review all the experiments with regard to ethical and legalissues and provide the Consortium with additional advice on how to tackle them.

    To facilitate the process of legal and ethical guidance EXPERIMEDIA and its legal partner inparticular developed a number of rules and principles that are complied with by the projectparticipants. These rules were introduced at the early stage of the projects and fully described inthe past legal deliverables. The general legal framework applicable to EXPERIMEDIA waspresented in deliverable D5.2.1, which also articulated a number of legal requirements for theexperimenters to comply with. In the later stage of the project it has been noticed that veryextensive technical descriptions of the experiments do not always answer all the questions thatcould arise with regard to legal and ethical issues e.g. processing of personal data. It was thendecided that a short and more explicit list of problematic issues should be created, to alert the

    technical developers about issues they need to pay attention to. This approach resulted in achecklist for the experiments. Such checklist consists of questions that need to be answered bythe developers. The questions are grouped into categories: general, location data, profiling,tracking, consent and anonymisation. The checklist was introduced and described in deliverableD5.1.3.

    Finally, in EXPERIMEDIA it was clear since the very beginning that ethical issues are importantfactor for success of the project. For this reason a list of principles, tailor-made for this project

    was developed in the DoW. This list, called the Ethical Oversight Principles, describes theapproach taken by the project to a number of ethical issues. It has to be followed and respected

    by all the Consortium partners.

    10 The principles for operation of the EAB and DPB and membership were described in EXPERIMEDIAdeliverables D5.1.1 and D5.1.2.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    13/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 13

    4. Recommendation4.1. PIA - assessment of the applied method

    The PIA method in EXPERIMEDIA is generally considered to be an adequate method.

    Nevertheless some improvements are recommended to ensure that the review process is nothindered by minor obstacles.

    First of all, it should be highlighted that the existence of the two advisory boards proves to havegreat effects in the review process of the experiments. The advisory boards consist of experts

    who are competent to advise on numerous legal and ethical aspects of the experiments. Thisgreatly broadens the scope of the review usually done in projects like EXPERIMEDIA. The roleof the advisory board is especially important in the light of the review of the EU data protectionlegislation, namely the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC. Since the proposed Regulation

    which is currently being discussed by the EC, could affect the experiments in EXPERIMEDIAit is highly valuable to have a forum to analyse its possible impact on the project.

    An efficient Privacy Impact Assessment is also possible due to the cooperation between thepartners in the project. The technical partners are responsible for providing information to thelegal partner, and further on to the advisory boards. On the basis of this information the ethicaland legal review is made. In order to help the experimenters with legal and ethical compliance anumber of documents has been prepared, e.g. the Ethical Oversight Principles and the Checklist.

    The experimenters have to familiarize themselves with these documents to be aware of the basicrules and the legal and ethical context of their experiments. A close cooperation between the

    partners is necessary to tackle any possible problems that could arise in the course of preparationof the final versions of the experiments.

    For the second Open Call, the cooperation and review process could be, however, improved.The changes in the process, anticipated by the legal partner, are focused mainly on improving thelevel of the description of the experiments to focus less on the technical specifications and moreon the legal and ethical aspects. This means that for the second Open Call the Consortiumforesees two iterations of the checklist. The participants of the open call will fill in the firstchecklist together with their application. The information provided by them, however, will notbe taken into account in the selection of the experiments. It is meant to make the experimenters

    aware, on the very early stage, of the possible aspects that could be, legally or ethically,problematic. The second iteration of the checklist would be delivered to the legal partner on thevery mature stage of the development of the experiments, to make sure that the reviewed versionof the experiment is the final one. With this change the review process of the Second Open CallExperiments will be faster and more efficient. It will also allow all the involved parties to see thechanges and progress in the development of the experiments with regard to their legal andethical aspects.

    4.2. VIA research frameworkAt that stage of the project the engagement of the business stakeholder is critical. The

    identification and the management of their expectation are not systematically done byexperimenters. This is a complex subject as experimenters have to cope with multiple issues at

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    14/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 14

    the same time with multiple factors such as the business focus, the business stakeholder, thecommunity expectations and technical design issues.

    The application of the VIA must take into account the specificity of each venue "specialization"which is defined by their ecosystem as a first step. As such a screening should be done with the

    experimenter and the venue stakeholder as to fine tune and negotiate the expectation of theexperiment. The screening remains always on the three dimensions:

    Business AssessmentA first understanding of potential business value of each feature with the validation of thevenues will complement effectively the approach taken by the experimenters. The BusinessAssessment is also the key to engage Venue into experimentation; as such it could define, withthe venue a dashboard of the indicators carefully chosen to be reported to the Venue at the endof the experimentation.

    User AssessmentThe modification of the methods is to complement with a questionnaire review with businessvaluation fed from previous Business Assessment into as to insure a coherent collect of theresults and capacity to draw effective conclusion with the venues.

    Technology ReviewThe objective will be the settings of indicators objectives for a second phase of experimentation.

    These indicators will effectively allow validating some of the hypothesis of the capacity toeffectively build such kind of solution or services.

    The analysis of the underlying capability necessary to obtain QoE/QoC/QoS of the solutionmust be conducted by reviewing the potential target architecture. This exercise will be done withthe venue as to understand what the investments on the current infrastructure are. The protocolof study will allow reviewing the gap between current infrastructure capability versus the targetedone. It would be too early at that phase to outline a precise cost breakdown structure thereforethe study will at least identify the potential gap in QoS. The gap analysis would then proposeeither new set of indicators or at least setting values to attain to satisfy the overall QoE/QoC of

    the users.

    The methodology aims to build the Business Review 1 report and as such answer to How theusage of the technology is creating value for consumer, in particular how he becomes a co-producer of the services?

    4.2.1. Pre-experimentation business assessmentA pre-experimentation process is essential. We propose in this part, several recommendations to

    support experiments with business approach and encourage stakeholder engagement. The

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    15/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 15

    experimental approach could certainly at that stage be also used to build the co-creation with thevenues prior the experimentation itself.

    In this recommendation we propose a guideline of the necessary subject to be addressed by theexperimenter. As such an operational Business review can be set up to review each of the points

    with the Act5 VIA leader and the venue before to effectively start the experiment design.

    The subjects that should be covered are to:

    Define the core target (B2B) and potential customers (B2C)An experiment should be able to identify who are the potential customers of thetechnology or service. Thereby, experimenters must differentiate the buyer and the usersof the service. For example, tourism resort can buy EXPERIMEDIA augmented-realitysolution and offer them to tourists.

    Select users sampleExperimenters should choose a sample in order to collect contingent data. This would besupported with local stakeholders. Profiles of potential users should be established beforethe experimentation roll out. This classification will guide technology development withthe objective of stimulate uses. In other words, to achieve that goal, you must get users touse your technology.

    Fine tune the methodologywithin the fieldLiving Lab business methodology is depending of the experimentation fields. An

    assessment of experimentations conditions and constraints allows justifyingmethodological choices from academic and managerial perspectives.

    Construct a control board and the VIA value roadmapThe Control Board and the value roadmap are operational outcomes. They would allowmeasures between Business Releases so to compare the progress of the experiments.

    They result of precedents recommendations (core target & potential customers, userssample and methodological choices). These tools are promoting engagement of the

    venue stakeholders and potentially support relevant recommendations to deployEXPERIMEDIA solutions on the market. Experimenters can use the approach we could

    with MediaConnect experimenters (see for instance Appendix C) extract a first set ofindicators and engage the discussion with the stakeholders of the venue.

    4.2.2. Exploratory qualitative stageOnce the Business assessment has been done, a first VIA Business Report can be proposed andreviewed with the venue. The next step is then to go into the experimentation and preparequalitative enquiry taking into account the element of the BR. At that stage because of smallnumber of participants, experimenters might just want to conduct a qualitative study.

    Description

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    16/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 16

    Given the novelty of multimedia services offered, it is necessary to adopt an approach toemergence of new practices and identify different dimensions of value put forward by customersand ecosystem-targeted professionals. This technique is considered as one of the most efficientin order to assess the motivations and attitudes of people (Evrard et al., 200311).

    The purpose of this step is to ensure a qualitative research within the meaning of Miles andHuberman 12 (2003). And a series of semi-structured interviews will be conducted and analysedin two stages. For instance a first broad analysis could be performed from the NVivo13 softwareand a more detailed analysis will be conducted to identify the dimensions that already exist in theacademic literature to those specific to the establishment of a tourism service.

    Operational executionA series of semi-structured interview will be conducted and analysed in two stages. For instancea first broad analysis will be performed from the NVivo software. Thena more detailed analysis

    can be conducted to identify the dimensions that already exist in the academic literature to thosespecific to the establishment of the service. It is important to take into account the diversities ofthe venues and what makes sense for the ecosystem of the venue.

    4.2.3. Exploratory quantitative stageOnce the qualitative approach has been done, the experimenters can retrieve and analyse theresults of the different indicators measured. The purpose of this protocol is to identify thesources of value creation through multivariate analysis value. At that stage it is important todevelop the understanding of the elements of the services most valued by users and by

    professionals of the ecosystem.Also to get sound conclusions on the experiment hypothesis a minimum number of observationsare necessary. At that stage the number of users to engage should be a lot larger than in theprevious stage.

    DescriptionStatistical analysis will draw on a review of marketing literature to validate the interest of theservice among users of the services but also among the concerned sector (tourism or sport ormuseum exploitation for instance). It will establish the relationship between value added (and

    perceived by the customer) the use and economic performance, improving the quality of service,consumer experience, etc.. (What are the effects of using a technology solution on the perceived

    value of service as perceived by the customer and what are the benefits for users stakeholdersboth economic and organizational?).

    Operational execution

    11 vrard, Y., Pras, B., Roux, E., Desmet, P., Dussaix, A.-M., & Lilien, G. (2003). Market: tudes et recherches enmarketing. Paris: Dunod.

    12 Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2003). Analyse des donnes qualitatives: Mthodes en sciences humaines.Belgica: De Boeck Universite.13 http://www.qsrinternational.com/products_nvivo.aspxNVIVO is distributed by QSRInternational.

    http://www.qsrinternational.com/products_nvivo.aspxhttp://www.qsrinternational.com/products_nvivo.aspxhttp://www.qsrinternational.com/products_nvivo.aspx
  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    17/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 17

    This second step is to make an inquiry either using online methods or through a poll. Theexperimenter should consider an online solution when the number of user becomes large andrequires a tedious process to gather the information. The main objective is to get from users ofthe services offered the validation of the assumptions and have a confirmation of the interests(Thitart et al [2]., 1999) highlighted by the qualitative survey exploratory. The analysis of theresults must also take into account the measure extracted QoE/QoC/QoS during theexperiment. This inquiry should be started at the right time in accordance with the objective ofnumber of observations while the experiment is rolled out.

    4.2.4. Concluding and validating reportA final report will be available to take advantage of experiments conducted within the frameworkof EXPERIMEDIA. It will aim to highlight both the strengths and weaknesses of variouscompleted projects. There will be issued scientific and managerial recommendations in terms ofrealization of a Living Lab project. This report will conclude on economic development of a

    solution in the short and medium term.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    18/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 18

    4.2.5. VIA methodology table overview

    Step 1.

    Qualitative exploratory study

    Preparing VIA Business Release

    Step 2.

    exploratory studies

    Managing User study

    Step 3.

    Concluding and Validating

    Build the Business Release

    Sample 4 focused interviews (Face-to-face, in-depthinterviews)

    Proposal from Experimenters

    Reviewed with Venues

    Validated with Experiment RequirementDocument

    Target Professionals Stakeholders part of theexperiment (Venues, project Sponsors)

    Users/Testers Stakeholders part of the experiment

    Tools Interview guide

    Interview template built by Methodology

    Will be reviewed and validated withExperimenter and Partners

    Survey Built by Experimenter

    Reviewed with Methodology

    Should be validated with Stakeholders

    Results of the interviews andexperimentation feedback

    If possible Gap Analysis of Hypothesis vsResults (Qualitative and Quantitative)

    Objectives Understanding Professionals stakeholdersexpectations towards the experiment of services(increase experience, quality of service,community word-of-mouth, buzz, etc.).

    Defining perceived value impact and global

    associated KPIUnderstanding organizational motivations andlimits

    Managing experimentation team to construct andlead marketing quantitative study in order toidentify :

    Motivations and brakes to use technology

    User Community Perceived value dimensions

    Experience Service Impact (ex: use serviceimprove performance, simplify my experience)

    Engaging Professionals toward next steps

    Share results and perception towardimprovement

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    19/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 19

    Step 1.

    Qualitative exploratory study

    Preparing VIA Business Release

    Step 2.

    exploratory studies

    Managing User study

    Step 3.

    Concluding and Validating

    Build the Business Release

    Outcomes Managerial implications:

    To improve the Experiment organizationaldesign

    To prepare business plan / sustainability (B2B)

    Theoretical implications:

    To enhance management research

    Prepare scalability studies / Validate ImpactAssessment

    Managerial implications on our 3 Dimension:

    Business : Define next steps of experiment withrevised KPI objectives so to validate Marketsegmentation

    Techno : To Assess the likelihood of success for

    technology deploymentUsage : To create new usage or evolution ofcurrent usage and check potential opportunities

    Theoretical implications:

    To develop specific marketing methodology forEXPERIMEDIA as an asset

    Explore the innovation management in a co-creation process

    Managerial implications:

    Reporting with Stakeholder and sharedperspective on next possible steps:

    For instance New experiment with

    > New community user target

    > Potential Technology Investment

    > Fine tuning of Business Impactmeasurement

    Theoretical implications:

    To develop specific Competence Centremethodology for EXPERIMEDIA

    Explore the innovation management in aco-creation process

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    20/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 20

    4.3. Experimental method frameworkThe recommendations for the experimental method are that the small-scale interventions listedcould extend current methodology scope prior the experimentation selection. It is suggested tohave experts in social-ethno analysis who can coach experimenters and/or venue at the design

    phase and frame a co-design "approach".

    4.3.1. Purposes for interventionsThe interventions do not have to target such a narrow aspect of the venues as the experimentshave to. They can therefor serve to examine and present new aspects of venues that have not yetbeen covered by the experiments. This can serve the purpose of presenting incomingexperimenters with a fuller picture of the venue where their experiments are to operate as well asto give context and foster relations between the different experiments at the same venue byproviding a common background understanding of how the specific experiments fit into thedevelopment of the particular venue as well as the general field the venue operates in.

    Results from design interventions could be included as material for new experimenters to helpthem generate ideas for experiments to conduct at the venues. For this purpose they should bepresented in an appealing form such as on the website complete with pictures and video.

    The interventions could also serve a function detached from the larger experiments. Theoverarching purpose of EXPERIMEDIA is to investigate new uses for Future Internettechnologies and how they become embedded in certain socio-technical environments. With thelarger experiments in EXPERIMEDIA, only a fraction of the future potentials of this topic canbe explored. Smaller interventions can therefore be conducted with the purpose of gaining

    knowledge about some aspects of Future Internet technologies within the socio-technicalenvironments that the EXPERIMEDIA venues make up.

    The interventions can also serve as an initial probe into using a certain technology or type oftechnology with the users and stakeholders at the venues. Early prototypes can discover newopportunities for usability, services, content or use that was not explored in the planning phase.Early prototypes can also serve as a means of manifesting, visualizing and making tangible theoften abstract operations of technology yet to be built. This can be especially useful in a multi-stakeholder approach such as experiments where interest and engagement need to be alignedbetween multiple partners within EXPERIMEDIA, other actors at the venues as well as users inthe form of visitors, tourists and athletes.

    4.3.2. An alternative design methodologyWhile these interventions are small prototypes of methods possible to make use of withinEXPERIMEDIA, they take inspiration from a number of methods from design research that aremore thorough in their implementation. An overview of these methods follows here.

    Design methodsare about theorizing the process of designing, about approaches to designing, andabout aiding designers in making thoughtful choices in their design process. Often, design

    methods are human-centred and put the user and their experiences with the design in the

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    21/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 21

    center.14 Design methods should treat in theory the design process. In practice there is not astandard design process to cover the diversity of approaches taken from ideation to theimplementation; this is a complex, mostly ad-hoc and even chaotic process. The goal of thedesign methods is therefore not to give a step-by-step manual that should be followed to thepoint, but to educate designers in recognizing and responding to situations in the design process.

    These methods should suit the EXPERIMEDIA methodology well since this deliverable aims togive guidance to a wide variety of different experimental design processes that involve newcombinations of stakeholders and venues every time.

    This section will present some key concepts that can help making sense of and plan theEXPERIMEDIA design process. The purpose is not to provide a strict code of conduct butallow every experiment to make design choices that make them more flexible, adaptive andreduce risk of failure.

    Prototypingis a key concept in design methods that has extended beyond its initial definition of a"part or all of an interactive system"15. Kelley16 calls prototyping "a state of mind" and a way ofapproaching the whole design process. Prototyping focuses on presenting and releasing designsearly in the design process to see how they are received or how they work and fail, and thencontinuously refine these throughout the process. Prototypes are also used early on in the designprocess to capture a plenitude of possible solutions to a design problem, which in later stagesgets narrowed down to one or a few solutions that gets developed.

    Prototypes can exist in many forms; from videos and paper sketches, to half-finished productsand digital artefacts. In interaction design, the active engagement with prototypes is encouraged,for example in the form of experience prototypes where it is not only an artefact but also a

    whole product or service experience that is tested.

    "Experience Prototyping" as a form of prototyping that enables design team members, users andclients to gain first-hand appreciation of existing or future conditions through active engagementwith prototypes.17

    One general principle of prototyping is to release early and release often in order to discovererroneous assumptions early on, before heavy investment of time and resources has been madein a particular direction. Waiting too long with releasing runs the risk of having invested in a path

    so much that it can't be abandoned even if it is discovered not to be the optimal one.

    Another principle is that trying things out, rather than heavy initial planning should find newinsights and design directions. In complex design problems, such initial planning phases areunable to capture all issues of a novel problem, especially if many interacting users are part of thedesign. Prototypes should not look like finished products. The purpose of a prototype is to

    14 Westerlund, B. (2009). Design Space Exploration(Phd). Kungliga Tekniska Hgskolan, Stockholm15 Beaudouin-Lafon, M., & Mackay, W. E. (2009). Prototyping Tools and Techniques. Human-Computer Interaction:Development.16 Kelley, T. (2001). Prototyping is the Shorthand of Design of innovation. Design Management Journal (Former Series),

    12(3).17 Buchenau, M., & Suri, J. F. (2000). Experience prototyping. Proceedings of the conference on Designing interactive systemsprocesses, practices, methods, and techniques - DIS 00, 424433.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    22/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 22

    stimulate critique, suggested improvements and experimental use. If the prototype looks and feeltoo finished, too closed, users and clients will be less inclined to comment and suggest.

    Iterative design is a design method that views the design process as a series of cyclical processesconsisting of planning, designing, testing, and evaluation.18 Each cycle is repeated over and over

    during the design process as each new design gives a new understanding of the initial problemwhich leads to a new planning phase.19 The purpose of iterative design is to improve both theformulation of the problem and the proposed solutions by continuous learning.20 Iterative designtherefor recognizes that in complex design situations, the initial proposed solution and methodsof evaluation must be adapted during the course of the design process.

    Gaver developed the concept of design probes in his 1999 article "Cultural Probes"21. Designprobes is a method inspired by ethnographic research and participatory design where a designspace is explored by giving props and documentation tools to users in order to document theireveryday lives and come up with design solutions that makes sense to them in their ownenvironment. This is not prototypes resembling a particular design but inspirational andprovocative devices that will help them think about their needs and desires.22

    The purpose of design probes is to get reactions, feedback, and new ideas directly from the fieldone is designing in order to gain a better understanding of the design environment.23

    18 Preece, J., Rogers, Y., & Sharp, H. (2002). Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction. New York, NY: J. Wiley& Sons.19 Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Berkeley: Institute of Urban andRegional Development, University of California.20 Mirijamdotter, A., Somerville, M. M., & Holst, M. (2006). An Interactive and Iterative Evaluation Approach forCreating Collaborative Learning Environments. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation, 9(2), 8392.21 Gaver, W. W., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Cultural Probes. interactions, (february)22 Loi, D. (2007). Reflective probes, primitive probes and playful triggers.Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference

    Proceedings, 2007(1), 232245.23 Boehner, K., Vertesi, J., Sengers, P., & Dourish, P. (2007). How HCI interprets the probes. In Proceedings of theSIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 10771086). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    23/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 23

    5. ConclusionThe modification in the first year approaches proposed includes more operational description ofthe VIA and the setting of the ethno-report. For the latter we have set in Appendix A the ethno-

    report which was conducted in CAR. The observations have been done with the support of thevenues. However these approaches carry with them challenges which need to be addressed andproperly tackle at this phase of the project. The observation set up can be complex as it requiresan open access to the overall facility and availability of the actors. A second challenge is totranslate these observations at the experiment design phase to effectively support thequestionnaires and complement KPI measurement. We believe that at that stage of the projectthe ethno report will give extra benefits in the understanding of consumer behaviour andimprove the engagement of the venue with the experiment by setting a co-design mind set.Moreover the ethno report can effectively help to build hypothesis of the user interest andsupport the understanding the business potential benefits.

    The second challenge for the next period is also to enlarge the impact and the scale ofexperimentation to effectively build the next Business Release of the VIA. The project shouldpropose experiments capable to engage an increase the number of its participant. In effect thePhase 2 of the VIA will require the project to have experimentation with larger scale ofparticipation (over 50 people). This may require the development of a stronger relationshipbetween participants & experimenter. This relationship has not been defined and is mostly builtby necessity on an ad hoc approach. At that step we can select either at next open call or onalready planned experimentation which are the most suitable relationship to foster on a case by

    case basis to validate the Phase 2 approach and construct the Business Release 2. An audit of theexperimenters report could be conducted to analyse the gap toward the second phase and howthe second methodology proposal can operationally be introduced (the roadmap is to bedelivered and execution to be agreed with Act3-Act4 leader).

    The methodology application and its definition is an on-going process. Therefore the operationalfeedback loops are created at different stages of the experiment process from the designinterventions to the larger scale experiments. The overall application of the methodologiesimplies proper support to the different stakeholder. The support will be emphasized on theapplication of the methodology wherever it impacts the proper roll out of the experiment and

    the analysis of its results. At strategic levels the practices of the methodology and the bestpractices shared within the experimenters will be collected so to build the baseline componentsof the EXPERIMEDIA competence centre methodology.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    24/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 24

    Appendix A. Ethnographic field study at CARA.1. Introduction

    This paper will summarize and draw conclusions from 3 days of workshops, interviews andobservations conducted at Centre dAlt Rendiment (CAR) in Sant Cugat del Valls, Barcelona,Spain. Staff at CAR, The Interactive Institute and Atos conducted the study.

    The purpose is to aid the first internal experiment at CAR as well as provide a detailed guide toexperimenters coming from the open call. At this stage the ethno-report can also help toindentify key performances indicators that are used by coaches. These indicators could beintegrated into the QoE/QoS of the experiment and be related to Business impact.

    During these 3 days we were guided by Josep Escoda from CAR around the facilities and wereshown different sports in training as well as met several members of the staff. During these visits

    we focused on understanding the process of training, on how technology was used to supporttraining today with a special focus on video, and on discussing potential improvements includingsensor technology. We also conducted more formal interviews with a Taekwondo athlete, aneducator, a nutritionist, and scientific staff. The purpose of these interviews was to get a betterfeel for how life at CAR is when it comes to everything that is not strictly focused on training.

    In this paper we will first describe what we learned from CAR by interviewing and observingathletes and coaches in training as well as support staff. After that we will draw conclusionsabout what the implication are of what we learned for conducting EXPERIMEDIA experimentsat CAR.

    A.2. Life at CARA.2.1. The CAR perspectiveCAR employs a long-term perspective on mental and physical health as a key to performance ofathletes. The key to a successful athlete career is not only pushing the limits in training, but alsoconsists of keeping motivation, being able to rehabilitate from injuries, having non-distractivedaily routines and being able to relax and socialize when needed. An athlete have to think about

    what happens not only in training but in between training sessions, in the evening, in the

    morning and during weekends. They have to plan their careers and already today start to preparefor a life after the sports career, which in most sports will only form a small part of their lives.The time horizons CAR is dealing with therefor stretch from milliseconds in training to thosespanning an entire lifetime.

    The medium is for an athlete to stay 4 years at CAR and the most common ages are 17 to 21.According to an athlete we interviewed, for some very young athletes it can be difficult to knowhow to balance life and training. Either they think too much on training or are unable to focuson it because of the other things that are going on in their lives. This kind of life balance issomething that CAR is striving to establish and a lot of the supports structures at CAR aims to

    accomplish this.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    25/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 25

    A.2.2. ResidenceMost athletes at CAR also live on the facilities in the residential area. 180 residents stay at CARsimultaneously. The residential area is a five-floor facility where the beginners are staying on thebottom floor and the elite athletes are staying on the top floor. The fourth floor is dedicated to

    couple rooms. Elite and beginners are separated because they have different schedules and needdifferent levels of concentration and socialization, though they could also be mixed to provideyounger athletes with role models and motivation. Different sports can also have very differentschedules and are also often separated, for example since the swimmers are often up most earlythey have rooms in the beginning of the corridor.

    The task of organizing who stays with whom is a wide-ranging process that involvespsychological matching of personas, matching of schedules for different sports and levels ofathletes. The task is to make the athletes able to relax and removing distractions and difficultrelations that can disturb the concentration on the main task. Meals, laundry and such everyday

    activities are all managed for the athletes. What remain to spend effort on except the training arethe studies.

    CAR has 1-3 tutors at the residence 24/7. Mostly they work with athletes under the age of 18.Tutors enforce sleeping hours, make sure that the halls are silent in the evening, make note ofathletes that sneak out at night, keep check on grades and can bring people to the hospital incase of emergency.

    They meet and discuss with medical personnel, psychologists and educators to work out aholistic view on any problems that the athletes might have. This is because problems for athletes

    can originate in one area and affect the others. Problems with studies, medical problems,psychological problems or problems in training can influence each other and create symptoms inthe other areas.

    The tutors seem to have some problems with information management. It is difficult to keep incontact with and explain everything to so many resident athletes as well as staff. At the sametime as there is a lot of things to explain it is important to prevent information overload and nothave the athletes having to think about and learn a lot of everyday routines. So how can thetutors give information without occupying the athletes minds with it?

    A.2.3. Daily scheduleDifferent disciplines have different levels of training. The synchronized swimming team trains

    whole days with long sessions that can go on well into the evening. A sport like Taekwondotrains less. A normal day form a Taekwondo athlete can be as follows:

    06:00Wake up 07:0008:00 Training 08:0013:00 Study locally, remotely or in Barcelona 13:0015:00 Long lunch 15:0017:00 Meet psychologist, medical staff, mechanics or nutritionist. 18:0020:00 Training

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    26/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 26

    20:0021:00 Dinner 21:0000:00 Free time and homework

    As can be seen, freely disposable time is only 3 hours a day and this also includes any homeworkthat the athlete might have. Also injured athletes have to take part in or at least be present intraining. This keeps them within the group, maintains discipline and motivates the other athletes.

    A.2.4. EducationThe long-term perspective of CAR is reflected in its education. The focus is on the post-careerlife of athletes and on viewing them as a complete person, not just an athlete. They areencouraged to think about their life-project. Athletes can choose their own level of educationand how to balance sports, studies, work and life. Some athletes have to work to earn money andCAR cooperates with local companies to make it possible to combine a working life withtraining and competitions. CAR has used online education systems and it is common that

    athletes take distance courses at the university.

    Several factors influence education: Time,presence,flexibilityand the coach. The education needs timeto be completed, it needs the athlete to be able to be presentfor lectures, both the education andtraining need to beflexibleenough to be able to make compromises for each other and the coachneed to give the athletes the necessary conditions for education.

    Technology could influence several of these, such as freeing up time or creating remotepresence. Although some things, such as the time necessary to process information and createunderstanding or things such as having time to socialize with family and friends is difficult to

    make more effective with technology. Especially considering that this time spent is also anecessary part of the life of an athlete, a time where they are able to relax the body and the mindto be able to continue training the next day or week. In sports it is common to have a definedtask that needs to be accomplished and achieved in the most effective way possible, but both ineducation and in socializing you dont always have tasks so well defined and the purpose oftechnology aid in these must be understood in other terms than making things more efficient.One could instead think of making things more engaging, fun, motivating and less stressfulthrough technology.

    CAR has tried out online education with distance courses at universities, but it has been difficult

    to manage them. Students of a young age need tutors together with the online courses to be ableto learn the material. The distance courses are mostly studied by the athletes as individuals,although sometimes they for ad-hoc groups on their own initiative. Perhaps it is possible toexperiment with new group formations where tutors and ad-hoc groups help each other to excelat self-learning.

    A.2.5. LeisureThe weekends are the only time for socializing since the schedule during the weekdays is sopacked. Weekends are spent with friends from university studies or friends from back home.People, who come from far away, perhaps even other countries, form social groups with others

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    27/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 27

    in a similar situation at CAR. People also stay in contact with their friends on Facebook andSkype.

    Some people mostly socialize within the group from their particular sport although it hasbecome more common to socialize with people from other sports. Some sports have big age

    differences though, for example the gymnasts are very young compared to many other sports.

    It is often difficult to find time for having hobbies, as is evident from the daily schedule,although some have organized a guitar course led by one of the athletes at CAR. The free timeavailable during the weekdays is mostly used for relaxing.

    CAR organizes an annual party for everyone. They also have volleyball tournaments or otherkinds of playful activities. It is common for a team to have an internal Christmas dinner and end-of-season dinner.

    A.2.6. NutritionThe nutritionist meets the athletes regularly to collect anthropometric data about them in orderto construct proper diets. The diets vary with seasons and vary depending on training intensity.Everything is tailored to the individual and the situation they are in. From this information thenutritionist makes a diary for the athlete with a menu either for making food at home or to eat atthe CAR lunch restaurant that provide a selection of meals for athletes every day.

    During the interview, the nutritionist especially stressed that her purpose is to create good habitswhen it comes to food and especially avoid measuring everything in terms of for examplecalories. She doesnt like to work with numbers, since if the athletes develop good habits andhave a balanced diet, they dont need to count every calorie. The reason for this is partly to keep

    some privacy for the athletes and not be a food police, but also to keep the athletes away fromthe numbers game. An athlete that believes they have to calculate every calorie start self-policing themselves and can develop an unhealthy relation to food where they are constantlystressed about eating too much or too little. They can start occupying their mind with food andcalories, start to micro-manage their food intake and create obsessions. In the worst-casescenario it can lead to eating disorders.

    For the same reason the nutritionist did not want the athletes to have a mobile app to manage

    the diet, but preferred pen and paper. Papers can be left in the room, while the mobile is carriedin the pocket all the time. With the paper in the room, the athletes are not always remindedabout food and can concentrate on training and studies that are the important things.

    This perspective can be a lesson for when designing information systems. The purpose of asystem should not always be to know and be reminded of everything all the time, but thepurpose can be to create a relaxed and balanced relation to the issue the system is dealing with.

    The accessibility and pervasiveness that ICT can create can also be a downside, especially in anenvironment where multiple systems exists simultaneously.

    This creates somewhat of a paradox when it comes to ICT systems: Knowledge and informationis material things that occupy time and space. In order to use a piece of information, one has to

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    28/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 28

    know that the information is accessible. To know that the information is there is to occupy themind with it. In an athletes life, information and knowledge has to be managed but withoutbeing noticed, since cognitive efforts have to be dedicated to focusing on training.

    A.3. Sport specific insightsA.3.1. Trampoline

    Trampoline is one of the sports that already use video today. There is a running video camerashowing the trampoline and the space above it where the athlete is jumping and it is sent to asmall display about 20 meters away. After an athlete has done a series of jumps, they go over tothe display, rewind the video and watch it over again, sometimes in slow motion. The video isnot stored any more than this. Sometimes the athletes even record the small screen with ahandheld video camera to store the video for later use.

    The coach would like to have video available everywhere in the network of CAR so that it can bereviewed at all times, although she acknowledges that it could make the athletes less able to relaxand think about other things than how it went in training that day if they can review their own

    video even in the evenings. Perhaps the coach should at least manage the access to the videos.

    When asked if it would make sense to have the video during training displayed with projectionon the wall instead of the small screen she stresses that in that case the projection cant be in the

    visual field of the performer since they use the wall as a point of reference and projection wouldmake them loose the fixed point of reference.

    An idea came up to instrument the trampoline itself and the surrounding space if various ways tomeasure impact of landing, position and weight distribution of landing and height of jumps. Thistype of information could be time-synced to the video and plotted on the same display.

    A.3.2. TaekwondoThe Taekwondo gym has a fisheye camera running constantly during training in one corner ofthe room. This video is displayed on a fairly large screen with a ten second delay. The athletesuse this when sparring if they gained a point or made a mistake that allowed the opponent toscore. Then they briefly glance over at the screen to see what really happened. This use of videois a good example of how a very simple interface, which is this case do not involve any

    interaction with the system, can fit perfectly in the flow of a training session which do not haveto be interrupted at all to review the video.

    Taekwondo have no need to constantly review a sparring session on video as for example theteam in synchronized swimming has to review their every movement after a session. If video issaved it is from real fights in competitions and not from training sessions. In Taekwondo,

    winning and loosing is influenced by much more that the correct movement of one fighter.Mental capacities and physical dynamism is more important than precise economies of motion.

    The style has to be adopted depending on the opponent and there is not really any right orwrong. The motions also change between training and real fights where adrenaline, focus and

    intensity reach higher levels.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    29/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 29

    When a Taekwondo athlete was interview she mentioned that being able to record and sendvideo would be useful to keep in contact with the coach when one is at a competition or if thecoach is away from CAR. The medical personnel could also review it if one is injured during acompetition. However there could be some privacy concerns with recorded video and she felt it

    was best to keep it within the team and not share it with all of CAR.

    In the interview it was also mentioned that it would be beneficial to be able to measure theoptimal distance to the opponent and see if the kicks are executed at this distance or too near ortoo far. However, where the optimal distance is varies depending on the speed and strength ofthat fighter in that moment as well as the opponents capabilities.

    A.3.3. Interlude: computerized judgments in sportsTaekwondo uses an electronic system for measuring hits during fights. The body plate isinstrumented with sensors that connect to a Bluetooth device that sends data of force of impact

    to a computer. If the impact is higher than a certain threshold, one gets a score. This technologywas introduced fairly recently but is not standard in all competitions.

    The motivation for introducing this device was to make competitions fairer. Before it had beenup to the perception of judges to see if a correct hit was made or not. It was also introduced tomake the sport easier to understand for spectators and to create transparency in the scoring.

    However, as an unintended consequence, the device changed how the sport is practiced. Itbrought with it new rules for when a hit is counted, such as the threshold on impact, and this ledto new ways of fighting being successful that was able to adapt to how the device worked. It

    even changed the body type that was most advantageous. Today a long, skinny and fast fighterhas an advantage over a stronger, more compact fighter.

    Before judging was not as straightforward. Judges were to give point for kicks deliveredaccurately and powerfully. But as Ed H. Chi writes in Introducing Wearable Force Sensors inMartial Arts:

    Although inconsistent and poorly understood, the original standard of a hit being deliveredaccurately and powerfully had been used for a long time and a culture of understanding had been

    built around it. Players and judges made adjustments based on their personal interpretations of therules and match situations; inconsistencies became somewhat a part of the game.

    [Judges] modify their criterion for a point according to the weight division, gender, and type ofkicking technique used. There is no easy way to standardize judges opinions on which kicks aredelivered accurately and powerfully. The resulting inconsistency in judging has eroded some

    peoples confidence and trust, and it was one of the major reasons we developed SensorHogu.24

    The lesson from this is that a technological intervention into a sport is rarely a neutral form ofmeasurement. It becomes a part of the system of the sport itself and if it remains a constant itmeans that all the other factors are the variables that will adapt to this new technology. Thustechnology can create new dynamics in sports. A purist might see this as a downside that kills the

    24Chi, E. H. Introducing Wearable Force Sensors in Martial Arts. Pervasive Computing, IEEE 4, no. 3 (2005): 4753.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    30/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 30

    soul of the sport but it can equally be seen as a feature that can be used to influence thedynamics of a sport to make it more spectator-friendly, more intense and competitive, or helpthe athletes to reach new levels.

    New technology also involves social and organizational changes. New rules need to be put into

    place and quality needs to be assured. Since a new technology can have this effect it is importantthat it gains trust from the practitioners within the sport, from athletes to federations. As Chiexplains regarding their development of the sensor for Taekwondo:

    Even in the large Taekwondo community, word-of-mouth reputation is extremely important togaining the trust of players and judges. For example, our handset grip is based on industriallydesigned joystick grips that reduce fatigue during prolonged use. Judges really appreciated these, assome of the earlier electronic scoring systems used cylindrical plastic handles. Also, playersappreciated that our new chest protectors have the same look-and-feel as their normal gear, withfew modifications25.

    In baseball, this trust was clearly breached when a new camera was introduced to evaluate theperformance of the umpires that judge whether a pitch is within the designated strike zone ornot. The new camera was supposed to give an exact judgment on this and if the decisions of theumpires differed from that of the camera, they got a penalty score that could eventually lead tothem being fired.

    Umpires had to change their strike zones to conform to QuesTecs zones, which forced pitchers to

    deliver pitches to the new zones and modify their mix of pitches. In turn, hitters had to adjust tonew strike zones and pitching styles. These effects resulted in extremely poor social acceptance ofthe technology.26

    The situation went so far that Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher Curt Schilling smashed one of thecameras during a game claiming that the umpires were changing their strike zones to match themachine.27

    When does a technology start to ruin the spirit of a sport? Blindly developing sports

    technology without thinking how it affects players behavior, judges scoring choices, and

    spectator perceptions is a clear recipe for disaster.

    A.3.4. GymnasticsThe gymnastic performance is somewhat difficult to instrument since it is harder to define theproperties of a well-executed performance as aesthetic as rhythmic gymnastics compared to forexample the height of a trampoline jump. Rhythmic gymnastics is not about performing higheror faster but about expressing certain aesthetic values with grace and ease. One possibility is toinstead instrument the floor so detect position and weight distribution. However, there might bejust a few occasions where this type of exact measurements could be useful.

    25Chi, E. H. Introducing Wearable Force Sensors in Martial Arts. Pervasive Computing, IEEE 4, no. 3 (2005): 4753.

    26Murray Chass, Baseball and Umpires Settle Grading Dispute, in New York Times, 2004, December 24.27 SportsIllustrated, This pictures worth $15,000: Dbacks Schilling fined for destroying QuesTec cam-era, in Sports Illustrated, 2003, June 03.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    31/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 31

    The rhythmic gymnastics team uses a fairly low-tech setup. The coach plays music from aportable cd player to which one of the gymnasts performs. At the same time several others arepracticing their performances at the side and are receiving feedback from the coach now andthen. After they have practiced one element of their routine, they walk over to a table and enterinformation on a spreadsheet about what they have practiced on and their self-estimated score oftheir performance.

    This procedure could surely be made more efficient with for example an iPad, which would alsoallow easier structuring and recalling of the digital information as opposed to the one written onpaper spreadsheets. However, there might be more to this process than simply a way of enteringinformation that the coach will later use to track progress. The very act of entering theinformation is also a moment of thought and reflection on the performance. It is an exercise inself-criticism and reflexivity. Using pen and paper can have several advantages for this purposeover entering information in a digital system. The inscription becomes more situated in the

    moment, in that room. The paper is on that table, in the room, next to other items. It has acertain presence compared to digital information that enters a database located somewhere else.Perhaps the pen and paper allows the athlete to mentally stay in the room and in the momentinstead of entering an abstract sphere of information systems.28

    That the information is materialized on the paper and nowhere else can be a way to create trustin the information system and therefor allow for a more honest self-reflection.

    A.3.5. TennisThe tennis coach has made several modifications to the rackets in order to use them as training

    tools. This has been done using off the shelf or customized add-ons. There are several thingsthat can be instrumented further. The swing of the racket is important and measuring speed andimpact off the ball when it is hit or measuring the trajectory of the swing could be useful. Theball itself could also be measured in several ways. Speed when passing the net or positioning

    when it hits the court is two examples. In table tennis triangulating the sound of the ball hittingthe table has solved the positioning problem. A similar solution could work in tennis as well.

    A.3.6. SynchroSynchronized swimming is one of the most physically demanding sports at CAR and also theone that trains the most with long and late sessions where the athletes has to eat, drink and takesupplements to be able to cope. The choreographies used for competition push the limit of themetabolic capabilities of the body and if one performer in a group performance gets a little bittired they make mistakes and immediately fall out of sync. Because of this there are manyopportunities to measure bodily functions of the performers to be able to detect when during aperformance that certain performers fall behind.

    The team also captures video during sessions that they review immediately after a performanceby just plugging a cable from the camera to a screen. A second video camera is also used by an

    28For an overview of tangibility and embeddedness in interaction design see E. Hornecker and J. Buur, Getting agrip on tangible interaction: a framework on physical space and social interaction, in Proceedings of the SIGCHIConference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2006, 437446.

  • 7/28/2019 D2.1.4 Second EXPERIMEDIA Methodology v1.0

    32/44

    EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination level: PU

    Copyright FDF and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2013 32

    assistant and is transferred to a computer where she takes sc