Probes Rikard Harr January 2011 © Rikard Harr 20113 Outline The beginning An example of a Probe procedure Strengths and shortcomings of the approach.

Probes

Rikard HarrJanuary 2011

© Rikard Harr 2011 3

Outline

• The beginning• An example of a Probe procedure• Strengths and shortcomings of the approach• Probes for informing design• Further development of Probes (Bernhaupt et. al,

2008) • Technology Probes (Hutchinson et. al, 2003) • “Misuse” of Probes (Boehner et. al, 2007) • Managing relations• Group task or discussion

© Rikard Harr 2011 4

The beginning

What is a cultural Probe?• “A probe is an instrument that is deployed to find out about

the unknown – to hopefully return with useful or interesting data” (Hutchinson et. al 2003)

• “[…] designed objects, physical packets containing open-ended, provocative and oblique tasks to support early participants engagement with the design process” (Boehner et. al 2007)

Motivation• Need for new methods for new use contexts• Research on technologies reflects dubious stereotypes• Understanding local culture is important (Gaver et al. 1999)• Wanted to capture needs and desires of tomorrow (Gaver et

al 1999)• User-testing involves expression and interpretation, instead

of concealing it, Probes embrace it (Gaver et al. 2004)

© Rikard Harr 2011 5

A Probes procedure• Hand out Probe packages

– Make general use of oblique wording and evocative images to open a space of possibilities (Gaver et al 1999)

– Provocation of users for getting inspiration • Postcards

– Images on front, questions on back e.g. “What place does art have in your life?”

– Sent to researchers every now and then• Maps

– With an inquiry to explore the elders attitude to their environment, e.g. “where have you been in the world?”

• Camera– With listed picture requests on the back e.g. “what will you wear

today?”• Photo album and media diary

– Photo album; “use 6 to 10 pictures to tell us your story”– Media diary; asked to take notes on what, with whom and when

they were watching TV/ listening to radio and incoming/outgoing calls

© Rikard Harr 2011 6

Probe packages

• Camera• Postcards• Maps• Friends and family map• A dream recorder

© Rikard Harr 2011 7

Strength of the approach

• Unbiased, honest and in-situ data• Gives a deep sense of familiarity with the people

that might use the designs • ”It is puposefully designed to inspire, reveal, and

capture the forces that shape an individual and his or her life at home, work or on the move” (Harper 2003, cited in Bernhaupt et al 2008)

• Probe returns help designers verbalize design issues

• Instead of lists of facts we get stories about participants

• To understand these stories we need to interpret them, we need to see the volunteers through ourselves

• Voilá, new perspectives are provided

© Rikard Harr 2011 8

Shortcomings of the approach• Difficult to compare or analyze returns

– E.g. Two photographs of the spiritual centre of the home– What is the truth?

• Ethnography through mail• Do not easily inform concrete designs

• The result is inspiration, not comprehensive information

• Low levels of Probe returns

© Rikard Harr 2011 9

Informing design

• Sometimes straightforward• Often, returns are only one influence of many• Seldom give clear guidance to the design process

– ”In the Bijlmer, our ideas respond to the paradox of a strong community in a dangerous area: We have proposed building a network of computer displays with which the elderly could help inhabitants communicate their values and attitudes about the culture” (Gaver et al 1999)

© Rikard Harr 2011 10

Bernhaupt et al (2008)

• Trends in the Living Room and Beyond• Aim: to inform new kinds of iTV services and

interaction concepts• Method: Investigate current trends in the living room

and beyond• Outcome: Developed new interaction concepts and

techniques• Developed and tested two variations of the cultural

probes method• Creative cultural probing (CCP)

– Provides creative stimuli to users, creative cards• Playful cultural probing (PCP)

– Uses playful elements to develop games in order to investigate certain research topics

– Modified a card game by including research-related query cards– Also added modeling clay to help answer design-oriented

questions

© Rikard Harr 2011 11

Hutchinson et al 2003

• Technology probes: Inspiring Design for and with Families

• Aim: to design and understand the potential for new technologies that support communication among diverse, distributed, multi-generational families (Hutchinson et al 2003)

• Method: Implement technology and see how it is used and then reflect on this use for getting inspiration for future designs

• Combining the social science goal of collecting information about use in a real-world setting, the engineering goal of field-testing the technology, and the design goal of inspiring users and designers to think of new kinds of technology to support their needs

• Conducted ethnographic interviews before and after implementation, automatic data-gathering, workshops

© Rikard Harr 2011 12

Hutchinson et al 2003Tech Probe Prototype

Functionality As simple as possible May have many layers of functionality

Flexibility Should be very flexible so that users can shape their own use

More focused use

Usability Not about usability, faults can be used

Primary concern and design is expected to change

Logging Frequent collection of data

Not a primary goal

Design phase Introduced early Appear later in the process and are improved iteratively

© Rikard Harr 2011 13

“Misuse” of Probes

• Some use of Probes have been criticized by Gaver et al (2004)

• “Taking full advantage of the Probes’ potential”

Distinction between intended use and real use• A method with different characteristics from one

case to another => a reproducible method• The open-ended and provocative nature =>

modified for getting more expected results• Instead of gathering input for reflection,

inspiration etc. => data collection approach• Instead of supporting an on-going design

conversation => direct move from data gathering to design

• Is this a problem?

© Rikard Harr 2011 14

Managing relations

• Gaver et al (1999) used postcards ”because of their connotations as an informal, friendly mode of communication”

• ”Using official-looking questionnaires or formal meetings seemed likely to cast us in the role of doctors, diagnosing user problems and prescribing technological cures” (Gaver et al 1999)

• Designing the Probes in a suitable way, not to classy

• Various forms of distances and gaps– Officialdom– Geographical– Cultural– Age

© Rikard Harr 2011 15

Group task

• Use the experience that you have from gathering data, the litterature that you have read on this course and outside it for discussing how to create fruitful relations with respondents

• Create a list of five principles that a researcher should follow when conducting a specific AUR-approach or in general for creating a beneficial relation with respondents

© Rikard Harr 2011 16

Outline

• The beginning• An example of a Probe procedure• Strengths and shortcomings of the approach• Probes for informing design• Further development of Probes (Bernhaupt et. al,

2008) • Technology Probes (Hutchinson et. al, 2003) • Misuse of Probes• Managing relations• Group task or discussion