Steve Howard, Jennie Carroll and Frank Vetere The University of Melbourne John Murphy and Jane Peck Cambridge Technology Partners/Novell Young People,

Steve Howard, Jennie Carroll and Frank VetereThe University of Melbourne

John Murphy and Jane PeckCambridge Technology Partners/Novell

Young People, Mobile Technology and the Task

Artefact Cycle

Overview

Background CoF Stage 1 2 and 3

Story so far Appropriation

Creating and Using Contextual Scenarios Creating the Scenarios Francesca example Process model versions

Questions: What do young people want from

information and communication technology?

Why do they appropriate some technologies but reject others?

What roles do mobile devices play in their lives as they move from childhood toward the adult world?

Overview ‘Customers of the Future’

Scenario-based envisionment approach that consists of a set of rules and a procedure for its use.

Process is based on improvisational actors ‘acting out’ scenarios

Using ‘props’ provided by the researchers

Rather than surrogate users walking through the scenarios

Aim

Stage 3- So what?

Disappropriation

TECHNOLOGY-AS-DESIGNED

TECHNOLOGY-IN-USE

Task-Artefact Cycle

Development Process

Develop

Analyse

Evaluate

Non-appropriation

possibilities

Reinforcers

Attractors

Appropriation Process

Appropriation Criteria

requirements

Figure 2 Appropriation and the Task Artefact Cycle

Appropriated/Persistent Use

Stage 3- The problem

Technology ? Situations of use

Identification of artefact, need or situation effects

Stage 3 Our solution

Scenario writing

Personlisation Prop choice

Fleshing out PerformanceIntroduce Constraint

Identification of artefact, need or situation effects

Processes Data

Scenario

Scene

Blank prop

Rich prop Constraint

‘Theatre’

Product ideas

Unsatisfied needs

Etc

Most of ‘the crew’

The Scenario

Scenario writing

Personlisation Prop choice

Fleshing out PerformanceIntroduce Constraint

Identification of artefact, need or situation effects

Raw data

Scenario

Scene

Blank prop

Rich prop Constraint

‘Theatre’

Product ideas

Unsatisfied needs

Etc

- Format (text, video, reality…)- Complexity- Form/detail (literal, skeletal…)- “Specific, positive, bare, constraint free and malleable”

Setting

Where?

Global Purpose

Why?

Primary actor Who?

Primary Plot

How and When?

Prop

What with?

Orienting

Theme

Secondary actors Who else?

Secondary Plot

How and When?

Reflection

Heuristic

Creating the Scenarios

Successfully juggle the competing demands (cancel shift, collect assignment, see GP, join friends this evening, avoid mother)

Francesca has a chest infection and is sitting on the tram traveling to her GP. Its 4pm on Friday afternoon. Expecting to be at her GP’s for some time, she starts to worry. She should be at work at the moment, and has not been able to contact her boss to tell her that she is ill. She has left a message on an answer machine but is not sure that her boss has received the message. She is due to join friends tonight at the Pink Dragon, but now is not sure she’ll get there in time if seeing her GP takes too long. Because of this she hopes her friends will stay there until she arrives, otherwise she will spend the evening alone. Also, one of her friends is expecting her to bring along a copy of her University assignment, which she was to collect from her tutor this afternoon but she did not manage to get to University either. On the bright side, her mother does not know where she is and so she escapes an interrogation for last night’s 4am homecoming!

Sample Scenario

Category

Element Instance

Theme Fragmentation, Power, IdentitySocial management, Leisure use, Safety and security, Information gathering, Lifestyle organiser, Critical mass

FragmentationSocial managementLifestyle organiser

Who? Gender, Age, Culture, Experience with technology, Knowledge of the situation, Interpersonal knowledge

1st yr univ. students

How and when?

Situation state, Activities, Temporal constraints, Outcomes and Goals

Goal- satisfy competing goals

Who else?

Gender, Age, Culture, Experience with technology, Access to compatible technology, Knowledge of the situation, Interpersonal knowledge

Parents, doctor, lecturer, friends

How and when?

Situation state, External Events, Activities, Temporal constraints, Outcomes and Goals

Within the next x mins

Why? Shopping, Entertainment (group), Leisure (solo), Rest and sleep, Work, Education, Transit, Social Interchange, Security

Submit assignment, organise friends to meet tonight, talk with parent, doctor

Where? Internal vs. external, Location (Physical, Social, Environmental, Technological)

Waiting on public transport in transit to doctor or univ. depending on timing

What with?

Implement, Accessory, Handheld, Tablet Watch, yellow box

Check ‘Constraint’ based scheduling and social mngt.

Traditional use of scenarios removed from the situatedness of

activity ‘walked through’ not sensitive to complex and

unpredictable contextual influences.

Proposal: using participatory design techniques to supplement the scenarios

Help users or their representatives take an active role while assessing and envisioning scenarios through ‘acting out’ sessions.

Scenario Issues

Inspired by and seek to extend the ongoing work of the GO project at Helsinki University of Technology

Exploring a wireless infrastructure in the campus area of Helsinki University of Technology. This infrastructure provides a test bed for investigating mobile (‘nomadic’) Internet use of the future.

Blending ethnographically oriented observations with active user participation (Iacucci et al, 2000).

‘Role Playing’ and ‘Situated and Participative Enactment of Scenarios’ (SPES)

Scenario Issues

GO researchers used surrogate users as actors in the enactment sessions and recognised that this was problematic.

The form factors chosen arbitrarily and frequently users were asked to imagine Implements (e.g. IT enhanced pens), Accessories (e.g. rings, clothing,

broaches) Handhelds (e.g. palm devices, mobile

phones) Tablets (e.g. wireless A4 size LCD

displays). The GO project is yet to articulate its

enactment process

Extensions to GO

Personalisation

Scenario writing

Personlisation Prop choice

Fleshing out PerformanceIntroduce Constraint

Identification of artefact, need or situation effects

Raw data

Scenario

Scene

Blank prop

Rich prop Constraint

‘Theatre’

Product ideas

Unsatisfied needs

Etc

- Transforms a scenario into a scene- Produces a ‘primed actor’- Added meaning and significance- Taking ownership

The ‘Prop’

Scenario writing

Personlisation Prop choice

Fleshing out PerformanceIntroduce Constraint

Identification of artefact, need or situation effects

Raw data

Scenario

Scene

Blank prop

Rich prop Constraint

‘Theatre’

Product ideas

Unsatisfied needs

Etc

- Creating a ‘motivated’ or ‘endowed’ object- Quantity and complexity of endowments- Who chooses (researcher, actor, director)- None, one or many props- Top down vs bottom up

- Quantity- Free, directed- One, many- No Fi, Lo Fi, Hi Fi, Real- Now or later?

The ‘Props’

The Performance

Scenario writing

Personlisation Prop choice

Fleshing out PerformanceIntroduce Constraint

Identification of artefact, need or situation effects

Raw data

Scenario

Scene

Blank prop

Rich prop Constraint

‘Theatre’

Product ideas

Unsatisfied needs

Etc

- Theatre vs in situ- Individual vs troupe

‘Fudging’ the situation

Acting Out In Situ

‘Reaching Out’

Cascading Constraints

Scenario writing

Personlisation Prop choice

Fleshing out PerformanceIntroduce Constraint

Identification of artefact, need or situation effects

Raw data

Scenario

Scene

Blank prop

Rich prop Constraint

‘Theatre’

Product ideas

Unsatisfied needs

Etc

- Top down vs bottom up- Quantity and complexity of constraints- Origin and expression of constraint- Who chooses the constraint (researcher/designer, actor, director)- When- None one or many constraints

Cascading

Constraints

Where?Change location (physical, social, environment, technology)

Why?Change overall rationale

How and When?Do it faster

Make the situation transient

Make the goal vital

Who else?Crowd with others

Make others hostile, supportive or ignorant

Make other same or different to selfHow and When?Increase frequency of incoming events

(see How and When above)

What with?Change prop (Implement, Accessory, Handheld, Tablet)

Working/not working

How did you know:What can I do?How do I do it?What has happened?Did it work?

What did you need:DataPeopleProcessing

Where?From tram -> library, or café, or bedroom

Why?N/A

How and When?Ass deadline 1day -> 5 mins

Deadline flexible -> firm

Consequence trivial-> critical

Who else?Alone -> Crowd

Others tolerant -> objecting (to voice interaction)

How and When?Minimal external events -> frequent requiring multitasking

(see How and When above)

What with?Change prop from accessory -> handheld -> tablet

Working/not working

Cascading

Constraints

How did you know:What can I do?How do I do it?What has happened?Did it work?

What did you need:DataPeopleProcessing

Francesca

Stage Three- Overall

Technology

Situations of use

Identification of artefact, need or situation effects

?Acting Out

Contextual Scenarios‘Endowing the object’

‘Motivating the objective’

Selected Issues Informing innovation with rich data on current situation

Informing innovation with trends in technology Identifying the ‘blindness’ in performance and scenario

Cascading constraints Props Scenario Actor

Producing a ‘primed actor’ ‘Enforcing the context’, both induced and in-situ

Role and value of a retrospective review Follow through?