Technology Probes echnology Probes echnology Probes

TTTTechnology Probesechnology Probesechnology Probesechnology Probes for the design of a communication systems for the design of a communication systems for the design of a communication systems for the design of a communication systems

for seniorsfor seniorsfor seniorsfor seniors

“The biggest disease of our time is loneliness.” Christine, 66 years old.

Yann Riche, Ph.D. Candidate

Monday, 28 August 2006

The field of Human Computer Interaction (HCI) is composed of many bodies of research including sociology, psychology, design and engineering. This diversity reflects of the complexity of human computer interactions and underlines the need for HCI researchers to tackle HCI problems from different perspectives. While realizing more than one study for a given space requires a great amount of resources, cross fields methods can be designed to study Human Computer Interaction from different viewpoints.

Technology Probes are one of such methodologies. Developed during the interLiving Project, it aims at studying users’ interaction with a system through a sociology, psychology, engineering and design perspective. However, as the methodology is still needs refinements, more work is required to precisely define Technology Probes. Their role and impact in the design or research process need to be refined, Alternative areas of deployment need to be investigated.

This report presents the current research being undertaken by Yann Riche on Technology Probes. It presents an in depth review of the literature on the topic as well as a review of the field of design in which the methodology is to be applied. It then provides description and results of two studies that explored communications for elderly, probes and technology probes. Particular domains of investigations as well as a first refinement of the probes and technology probes concepts are suggested.

Supervisors

Dr. Stephen Viller (University of Queensland, Australia)

Dr. Wendy Mackay (INRIA Futurs, France)

1.1.1.1. IIIINTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 5555

1.1. Problems Definitions and Motivations....................................................................5 1.1.1. Technology Probes...............................................................................................................5 1.1.2. Communication appliances for the elderly...........................................................................5

1.2. Research Questions......................................................................................................................6 1.2.1. Technology Probes...............................................................................................................6 1.2.2. Communication appliances for the elderly...........................................................................7

1.3. Research Methodology..............................................................................................................7

2.2.2.2. LLLLITERATURE ITERATURE ITERATURE ITERATURE RRRREVIEWEVIEWEVIEWEVIEW ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 9999

2.1. Probes........................................................................................................................................................9 2.1.1. Probes as research and design tools .....................................................................................9 2.1.2. Cultural Probes.....................................................................................................................9 2.1.3. Other probes .......................................................................................................................10 2.1.4. Technology Probes.............................................................................................................11

2.2. Communication appliances for the elderly .....................................................13 2.2.1. Assisting and monitoring the elderly..................................................................................13 2.2.2. Assistive solutions..............................................................................................................14 2.2.3. Monitoring solutions ..........................................................................................................15 2.2.4. Improving Elderly Well Being ...........................................................................................17 2.2.5. Social Networks and Elderly..............................................................................................18

3.3.3.3. WWWWORK PROGRESSORK PROGRESSORK PROGRESSORK PROGRESS............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................20202020

3.1. User study........................................................................................................................................ 20 3.1.1. PeerCare .............................................................................................................................20 3.1.2. Intertwined Support Networks ...........................................................................................21 3.1.3. Flow of support ..................................................................................................................22 3.1.4. Key moments of interaction ...............................................................................................22 3.1.5. Reporting social networks ..................................................................................................22

3.2. Probes....................................................................................................................................................23 3.2.1. Design ................................................................................................................................23 3.2.2. Development, deployment and return of the probes...........................................................24 3.2.3. Analysis of probe data........................................................................................................25 3.2.4. Draft Probe Concept Analysis ............................................................................................25

3.3. Technology probes.................................................................................................................... 26 3.3.1. Design and development ....................................................................................................26 3.3.2. Technical changes to the original prototype.......................................................................27 3.3.3. Deployment ........................................................................................................................28 3.3.4. Results and analysis ...........................................................................................................28

4.4.4.4. SSSSCHEDULE AND CHEDULE AND CHEDULE AND CHEDULE AND FFFFUTURE UTURE UTURE UTURE WWWWORKORKORKORK ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................30303030

4.1. Schedule..............................................................................................................................................30 4.1.1. Realized to date ..................................................................................................................30 4.1.2. Plan from April 2006 to March 2008 .................................................................................30

4.2. Ongoing and Future Work ..............................................................................................30 4.2.1. User study ..........................................................................................................................30 4.2.2. Technology probes exploration ..........................................................................................31 4.2.3. Evaluation of design...........................................................................................................31

5.5.5.5. CCCCONCLUSIONONCLUSIONONCLUSIONONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................33333333

6.6.6.6. PPPPUBLICATIONSUBLICATIONSUBLICATIONSUBLICATIONS ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................35353535

7.7.7.7. RRRREFERENCESEFERENCESEFERENCESEFERENCES............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................36363636

Yann Riche Ph.D. Confirmation Report 28/08/2006

3 / 48

8.8.8.8. AAAAPPENDICESPPENDICESPPENDICESPPENDICES ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 40404040


4

1.1.1.1. IIIINTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTION

1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. ProblemProblemProblemProblemssss Definition Definition Definition Definitionssss and Motivations and Motivations and Motivations and Motivations

1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. TechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnology Probes Probes Probes Probes

The design of interactive systems involves several different fields of research: sociology, psychology, engineering and design. Each of these field posses its own techniques to grasp and evaluate the “real world” related to users. Each focuses on a particular aspect of the interaction taking place between humans and machines. Despite their particular contributions to the field of Human Computer Interaction, most techniques from each field fails to address all three main goals of research (also called “three horns”) as described in McGrath (McGrath, 1982): Generality over Actors, Precision of Measurement of Behaviour, System Character of Context.

The principle of triangulation, described by Wendy Mackay (W. E. Mackay, 1998), consists in using three concurrent techniques to realize a user study. This multi-disciplinary approach reinforces both the design and the scientific values of the study. However, the realization of three user studies usually implies a very long, expensive, resource consuming work. This represents a huge obstacle to the use of triangulation, thus forcing researchers to approach only one or two of the aspects of the interaction, failing to address the others.

The interLiving project was a three years EU funded project conducted in France, Denmark and the United States. It aimed to create communication technologies for inter-generational families living in different households. While using Mackay’s principle of triangulation by studying users with different perspectives, this participatory design project also developed a novel technique to gather data about the user: technology probes (Hutchinson et al., 2003). Derived from cultural probes (W. Gaver, Dunne et al., 1999), they have been designed, tested and evaluated in a project designing and evaluating technologies in real settings. This technique has proved its ability to capture insightful data on users’ interaction in many aspects. It has also showed to be a very promising tool for researchers in the different fields of HCI. However, there is little knowledge about probes as a HCI research tool. Both technology and cultural probes are hard to concretely define, evaluate and use in a research context. Moreover, while they have proved very efficient for participatory design with families, technology probes present a very high potential for user studies in other contexts.

A technology probe is a robust, simple to use device. It allows a rich and new interaction between a computer-based system and its protagonists while gathering data. It raises user’s interest and curiosity as well as stimulating their imagination and creativity (thus addressing some of the designers needs for inspiration and becoming a huge support for participatory design). It also gathers users’ behaviour with the record of as many variables as possible / foreseeable (thus addressing some of the need of psychologist for controlled data). It captures physical, narrative and interaction context and provide a way to explore patterns of use (sociologist are very fond of patterns, I am told). It allows researchers to set up, test and evaluate a technology in “real” settings (thus allowing engineers to field test some technologies). Technology probes allow researchers to also discover and reflect on problems linked with the shift of technology from laboratory settings into real settings. All these potential contributions make technology probes a suitable method to address McGrath’s “three horns” dilemma up front.

To build a better understanding of technology probes, their benefits and limitations, and provide a broader knowledge of the methodology, this project will study the use of technology probes in the context of a study exploring the design of communication appliances for elderly.

1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1.2. Communication appliances for the elderlyCommunication appliances for the elderlyCommunication appliances for the elderlyCommunication appliances for the elderly

All across western countries, the proportion of elderly people is growing fast. In Europe 22% of people are aged 65 or more and by 2050, this percentage is expected to reach 34% (World


5 / 48

Population Prospects: The 2004 Revision and World Urbanization Prospects: The 2003

Revision, 2005) (See Figure 1). This demographic change is already a challenge for governments, and society in a larger sense. Traditional ways of caring for our older ones are becoming less appropriate as people live longer and healthier. In the same time, society and family structures are undergoing severe changes. Already governments and institutions encounter difficulties providing appropriate care for seniors, with a shortage of trained personnel and support structures.

To overcome a foreseeable struggle, institutions and researchers are seeking alternatives to existing care solutions. Many of these solutions focus on providing support for the elderly to stay at home longer and more independently. This project adopts this approach by seeking ways of using technology to help the elderly to “age in place”.

Most research projects aiming at supporting the elderly to age in place are focused on assistive technology and/or monitoring technologies. This project tries to introduce an alternative to these solutions by using innovative communication devices as a mean to enhance social connectedness of elderly.

1.2.1.2.1.2.1.2. Research Research Research Research QuestionsQuestionsQuestionsQuestions

This project aims at studying and analysing the design and use of technology probes in a user centred or participatory design approach. To realize this, it will review the concept of technology probes and provide an in depth analysis of the design process of probes and technology probes from previous studies. It will also study the impact of each methodology on design processes and outcomes. To better understand the problem at hand, this project will particularly focus on technology probes designed to study the design of communication appliances for the elderly. I will then attempt to generalize findings by studying the impact the research focus (communication appliances for the elderly) on the design and implementation of the technology probes methodology.

1.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1. Technology ProbesTechnology ProbesTechnology ProbesTechnology Probes

Technology probes (Hutchinson et al., 2003) are a recent research method for user centred designs. However, research projects have used the technology probe concept in many different ways (Fitton et al., 2004; Markopoulos et al., 2006). The aim of this project is to refine the concept of technology probes and provide a better understanding of the design, deployment and use of this particular methodology.

A technology probe is a piece of software and hardware (some technology probes can only be software, like WMTrace (Chapuis et al., 2006)). It allows the researcher to:

• collect data from the real world environment of a user, • collect data of the use of a particular technology by intended users, • share concepts between researchers and users, • provide users with a first hand experience on these concepts, • evaluate technology requirements for real life deployment, and

Figure 1: World's population age repartition in 2002

and 2050 (projections)


6

• test a given technology in situ.

Therefore the design of technology probe intends to respond to four main goals:

• Observation of context • Observation of contextual user experience with a concept/technology • Evaluation of a technology in real life settings • Provision of a tool for design dialog between users and designers, providing inspiration

to both designers and users.

These goals are usually separately addressed by various techniques within a design process. Classic field-observation methods include ethnography (Blomberg, 1995; Crabtree, 1998; Hughes et al., 1993; Hughes et al., 1994; Hughes et al., 1995) and contextual inquiry (Hom, 1996; Wixon et al., 1990). Evaluation of technology in real life settings usually takes place in later phases of a project through the deployment of a working prototype. Methods to enhance design dialog between users and designers include scenarios (Carroll et al., 1992), personas (Grudin et al., 2002) and probes (Crabtree et al., 2003; W. Gaver et al., 2004; W. Gaver, Dunne et al., 1999). However, each technique has advantages and disadvantages. Similarly technology probes as a methodology are likely to embed some compromises.

Questions arising form this research are the following:

• How can we define a technology probe?

• What are its key characteristics?

• What is its role and impact on a study? What are the benefits and the drawbacks?

• In what way the subject to be studied affects the design of the technology probe?

1.2.2.1.2.2.1.2.2.1.2.2. Communication appliances for the elderlyCommunication appliances for the elderlyCommunication appliances for the elderlyCommunication appliances for the elderly

In order to undergo the study of technology probes, we will at first restrict our study to the design of a communication device to suit the needs of elderly wishing to age in place. As this methodology has already been used for the study of family communications, the change in design context is appropriate to build upon existing knowledge. Research questions for the design of a communication appliance for the elderly are:

• How can innovative communication devices improve elderly quality of life and increase independence?

• How to evaluate the designed communication device in situ?

1.3.1.3.1.3.1.3. Research MethodologyResearch MethodologyResearch MethodologyResearch Methodology

The research methodology is twofold: a methodology to study Technology Probes and a methodology to research the design of communication appliance for the elderly. The design of a communication appliance for the elderly will serve as a pilot project to evaluate concepts and methods developed for technology probes.

Methodology to study the concept of technology probes includes:

• Review of the relevant literature, including grounding work concerning other probes and technology probes deployments in the literature.

• Analysis of existing probes (technology probes and others) to define a relevant concept space for the use of the methodology in our context.

• Validation of this concept space through the design of a technology probe for the pilot user study.

• Reflective analysis of the design, development and deployment of technology probes. • Study the interaction between the design context in which a technology probe is to be

deployed and the design of the technology probe itself.


7 / 48

For the pilot project, the target users are people aged 60 years and older. The first phase of the study requires gaining strong insights from the target users. A user centred study will be used to better understand people’s values for healthy ageing. The second phase of the project is the design and development of a communication device to suit the findings of the previous study. The third phase of the project is the deployment and evaluation of the communication device in a real world environment.

The user study is comprised of four techniques directed towards a participatory design approach. The first technique used is a contextual interview using the critical incident technique. A semi-structured interview will be used at participants’ home in an attempt to grasp first insights on their life, as well as their needs and desires. The second technique is to use low fidelity probes (W. Gaver, Dunne et al., 1999; Hutchinson et al., 2003; Westerlund et al., 2003) as a way of letting users subjectively pass information to researchers. The third technique is the use of focus groups or group meeting, intended to gain insights on people life as a social entity and analyse collectively areas of interest. The fourth technique is the design and deployment of technology probes (Hutchinson et al., 2003). Grounded Theory methodology (Strauss et al., 1998) and Exploratory Data Analysis as well as Covariance Analysis are the proposed data analysis methods.

The use of technology probes as a method to study users will give us the opportunity to reflect on the steps used to design a technology probe and the key characteristics of a technology probe. From this analysis, we will attempt to study how the particular focus of our study affects the design of the technology probes and how refine the concept of technology probes.

The design of the communication device itself is intended to be done in a participatory design manner. Participants’ involvement in design sessions will allow them to actively participate in the development of the communication concept. The brainstorming and video brainstorming techniques will enhance the ideas generation and the exploration of the concepts related to different areas of communication.

The evaluation of the designed device is planned to be take place in situ. The device will be deployed in participants’ homes and their usage recorded. The details of the evaluation will follow the quasi-experimentation model (Cook et al., 1979) by designing a study that can be realized in real life context.


8

2.2.2.2. LLLLITERATURE ITERATURE ITERATURE ITERATURE RRRREVIEWEVIEWEVIEWEVIEW

2.1.2.1.2.1.2.1. ProbesProbesProbesProbes

The probe concept, largely credited to William Gaver et al (W. Gaver, Dunne et al., 1999), has been a widely used concept even before Gaver’s definition. Probes regroup categories of methods including self-reporting material and automatic data gathering material. Such techniques have been used for a long time like self photography (Ziller, 1990) in (Hulkko et al., 2004) and diaries (De Longis et al., 1992) in (Hulkko et al., 2004). However their potential in the design of interactive systems has largely been neglected until Gaver’s use of subjective photography and other techniques.

Since the advent of Cultural Probes, many studies in the field of HCI have been interested in using probes for research and/or design. The following section explains this in more details.

2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1. Probes as research and design toolsProbes as research and design toolsProbes as research and design toolsProbes as research and design tools

Probes are one of many user centred design techniques and can embed different goals and foci. Each technique can be used, separately or collaboratively, in a user centred design study in order to gain insights into the life of users. However, it is important to note that according to Mackay and Fayard (W. E. Mackay et al., 1997) that the use of one of these techniques could only show a particular aspect of a design or research space with only a particular focus. It is highly recommended that a user study should contain many techniques in order to “triangulate” the design space and gain different perspective and foci on a design or research space. This principle is nicely demonstrated in the Interactive Thread tool (W. E. Mackay, 2004) that embeds 12 light user-centred design techniques.

This section will review different projects involving probes in different forms in order to gain a better understanding of the methodology and its implementations in the literature. As probes are to be used within a user study including other methods and techniques, the review will try to provide the other techniques used in conjunction with the probes to help understand the broader context in which they are used and how this context influences their design, use and deployment.

2.1.2.2.1.2.2.1.2.2.1.2. Cultural Cultural Cultural Cultural ProbesProbesProbesProbes

Cultural Probes (CP) were first introduced in the Projected Realities project by Gaver et al. in 1999 (W. W. Gaver et al., 1998; Hofmeester et al., 1999) (See Figure 2). The aim of this project was to provide senior communities around Europe with a way to increase their presence within their neighbouring communities. Drawing upon the artistic Situationist perspective, they designed artefacts that were aimed at letting users capture their worlds in a strange and provocative way as well as provide feedback on the information collected.

“One novel idea the design centres came up with was to give the users packages with

materials such as maps, postcards, photo albums and disposable cameras. Each item

was accompanied by an assignment and a request to send it back by mail. The

packages also included media diaries, in which the users were asked to record TV and

radio programmes they watched.” (Hofmeester et al., 1999, p.44)

The aims of cultural probes are “to provoke inspirational responses from elderly people in

diverse communities” (W. Gaver, Dunne et al., 1999, p.22) and “to elicit inspirational responses

from people—not comprehensive information about them, but fragmentary clues about their

lives and thoughts” (W. Gaver et al., 2004, p.53). They were not designed to provide information to the scientific process of research, but rather to provide inspiration for designers to innovate. They also provided interesting opportunities to create a dialog between designers and users (W. Gaver, Dunne et al., 1999).


9 / 48

In (W. Gaver & Dunne, 1999), Gaver et al. discuss the use of Cultural Probes with elderly in the Projected Reality project in the city of Bijlmer, Netherlands. In this context the CP package included maps of the area shaped like unfolded envelopes with questions like “if Bijlmer were a body…” for which participants could use stickers with limbs and internal organs to illustrate different part of their environments. It also included postcards with questions such as “tell us a piece of advice” and a repackaged disposable camera with photo suggestions such as: “something beautiful” and “something ugly”. Eventually every CP package included a photo album with a request to use 6 to 10 photos to tell the designers a story.

In the Projected Reality project, deployment of CP packages was preceded by “a socio-economic and demographic portrait of each site, based on factual research” (Hofmeester et al., 1999) created by on-site coordinators while designers remained in their labs. The portraits were complemented by “pre-existing conceptual interests, our visits to the sites, anecdotes and data about the areas from the local coordinators, and readings from the popular and specialist press”(W. Gaver, Dunne et al., 1999). In (W. Gaver & Dunne, 1999), Gaver describes that probe data was used by designers to generate design concepts that were then refined and illustrated to be submitted to elderly for feedback.

However intriguing, at this point Cultural Probes remain a methodology that is difficult to reuse as little information is given on how the probes were created, designed and developed. Hemmings et al (Hemmings et al., 2002) provide a better understanding by describing part of the design process involved in the creation, development and refinement of the probes in the context of the Equator project to study the design of innovative technology in the home.

Hemmings formally describes the probes design process as the following: Planning, Recruiting Participants, Selecting Volunteers, Assembling Domestic Probes, Deploying Domestic, Probes Retrieving and Analysing Probes, and Speculative Design. Overall the design of probes seems a difficult process in itself, involving an important design culture and strong design skills. As described later, Hemmings et al. have used similar probes in a different context (care settings) for different purposes (inform rather than inspire) and the probes were only derivations of the domestic and cultural probes packages.

Hulkko et al. (Hulkko et al., 2004) also provides an interesting perspective on probes, sorting probes in four categories: diaries, self-photography, projective tools and experience sampling. However accurate, this categorization fails to acknowledge the complete diversity of probes that can be designed and does not provide a mean to analyse and design probes.

It is important to note here that Gaver makes clear that Cultural Probes should not be used for collecting data (W. Gaver et al., 2004). He uses the term Domestic Probes for the probes developed to gather inspiration for the design of home

technologies (Hemmings et al., 2002). It seems that the context of use and the goal of the probes shape not only their names, but their design as well. Depending on the design space in which they are to be deployed as well as their expected outcomes, each probe has to reflect the research or design context it is designated for.

2.1.3.2.1.3.2.1.3.2.1.3. Other probesOther probesOther probesOther probes

Despite its real benefit in design scenarios, the notion of cultural probes also provides alternatives for usual ethnography techniques. Hemmings et al. (Crabtree et al., 2003; Hemmings et al., 2002) have used Cultural Probes to provide researchers with data on people’s activities in a sensitive setting, a hostel for former psychiatric patients. In this environment, where some patients suffer from different mental disorders (i.e. paranoia), ethnographic

Figure 2: Gaver et al’s original

probes package (W. Gaver &

Dunne, 1999)


10

observations are highly inappropriate if not potentially harmful. In (Graham et al., 2005), Graham et al. describe the process in which the deployment of the probes took place. They describe how the design of the probes, but also their introduction and the setting in which they were deployed, allowed for the capture of meaningful objects, places, activities and work organisations relevant to the ethnographic perspective of the user study. These probes provided little “inspiration” but insightful “information”.

Forlizzi et al. (Forlizzi et al., 2000) in their study of wearable computing for sports activities used a participatory design methodology involving different groups of users with different characteristics at each stage of the design. They first organised a Participatory Design Session with athletes in an attempt to “both gather data and evaluate existing product concepts in the

same session.” They then distributed “self documentation exercises” composed of diaries and disposable cameras to people exercising moderately. Self documentation exercises, or probes, were a way to “get information about the perceptions; beliefs and habitual activities of target

users, by having them document and describe what they find important.” The last phase of the user study involved face to face interviews with people starting exercising regularly. Self documentation exercises, in this case, are a way to gather contextual information from the target audience and create a design dialog. In this terms they are close to the previously mentioned Cooperative Systems Engineering Group’s approach (Lancaster University) that used probes to ethnographically inform the design of technology for sensitive care settings (Crabtree et al., 2003; Hemmings et al., 2002).

In the ELDer project (Forlizzi et al., 2001; Hirsch et al., 2000), Forlizzi et al. studied the design of technology to support ageing with elderly people as primary stakeholders. To realise this study they conducted on site interviews, observations and deployed similar “self documentation

exercises” “to provide an unrestricted view of what is important to elders and of how they

conduct their lives” (Hirsch et al., 2000, p.73). The findings of this study revealed the role played by non professional caregivers in the support of ageing people. It also pointed out the moral and emotional support played by caregivers and the importance of social relations to the well being of the elderly. These finding are extremely interesting for the second focus of this project which is to study the design of communication appliances for elderly, however the design of the probes, their intended roles and outcomes are not documented in the available literature.

The interLiving Project (Beaudouin-Lafon et al., 2001) provides a detailed account of the design and deployment of communication probes in the report of two user studies conducted in Sweden and France. The aim of these studies was to explore the design of intergenerational communication devices for remote households. Describing each probe and its goals in detail, it then explains the different deployments and results of the probes in the two contexts providing a sound base for the analysis and evaluation of the impact of probes in the design process.

Many other studies have deployed probes either in order to gain inspiration from users like Blythe’s 3 wishes (Blythe et al., 2002), to explore a design space like Paulos and Jenkins urban probes (Paulos et al., 2005), to create a dialog between users and researchers while collecting stories and examples (Cohene et al., 2005) or to collect intimate information from participants (Vetere et al., 2005) (See Figure 3).

2.1.4.2.1.4.2.1.4.2.1.4. Technology ProbesTechnology ProbesTechnology ProbesTechnology Probes

The interLiving project deliverables (Beaudouin-Lafon, Bederson, Conversy, Eiderbäck et al., 2002) provide a substantially detailed account of the design, deployment and analysis of the

Figure 3: Vetere et al.’s probe

package (Vetere et al., 2005)


11 / 48

probes. The technology probes were initially built as seeding technologies “to trigger ideas for

the latter stages of … [the] design process” (Beaudouin-Lafon, Bederson, Conversy, Eiderbäck et al., 2002, p.8). However, as this concept seemed to constrain too much the design space that would be addressed in the project, technology probes were designed to produce “input to solve

a particular design” by capturing reactions to inform different aspects of family life. This project also claims that the technology probe bridges the gap between cultural probes and participatory design by getting user to think about the design of the technology seeded in their houses.

In this project, three technology probes were designed, two of which were developed and deployed in households. The first probe was Message Probe (Hutchinson et al., 2003) (see Figure 4), a zoomable, persistent, synchronous and asynchronous shared notes system. It allows writing electronic messages simultaneously, reviewing and organising previous messages, and zooming in on a particular message for better interaction. It uses an embedded tablet interface with stylus to mimic the sticky note interaction occurring in real life. Its design was inspired from many sources: the user study with families, the Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) research that has studied shared whiteboards and Instant Messaging (IM) systems. The second probe is VideoProbe (Conversy et al., 2003), an image sharing device that provides ways of sending pictures of everyday life to remote family members and creating a shared photo-album.

Interliving researchers outline the difficulty of developing and deploying real technology for research purposes. As technology is to be deployed in households, aesthetics are an important factor in order for equipment to blend in effectively into people’s settings. More, most households actually do not possess idle space that can be used to place the technology probes, or when this space is available, it is not suitable for the intended purpose. Form factor can therefore be an important aspect of designing and developing technology probes, especially in home settings. Technical issues arise also from communication between probes and likely servers as broadband Internet connection is a difficult service to setup, and is neither fully reliable nor available everywhere.

Results from the deployments and analysis of the probes are hard to find. The interLiving deliverables (Beaudouin-Lafon, Bederson, Conversy, Druin et al., 2002) provides a detailed account of the deployment of the Message Probe but mainly covers the technical and use issues with the probe. It suggests that a classification of messages was established without detailing it. Similar problems arise from the report of the videoProbe deployment. The lack of details concerning type of data and ways of analysing it is a problem when considering re-using the methodology. The analysis that has been done around the interLiving project seems to have been mainly qualitative, where the use of technology might allow more systematic data collection for quantitative analysis.

Fitton et al. (Fitton et al., 2004) have described the design, deployment and use of a messaging system called Hermes. Hermes is a message sharing system that was developed at Lancaster University and deployed within the university (a later iteration, SPAM, was also deployed in researchers’ homes). It allowed participants to send messages to door-displays within the university using emails, MMS and SMS. Throughout the deployment, use of the system and messages were recorded for further analysis. This project used data from a real life deployment to use both qualitative and quantitative data analysis.

Figure 4: MessageProbe interface (Beaudouin-

Lafon, Bederson, Conversy, Druin et al., 2002)


12

However, it differs from the technology probe in that the deployment of the technology is more a prototype deployment than a research tool to be discarded afterwards. Moreover the deployment of the system is not used to enhance the dialog between users and designers in a participatory design fashion. Issues raised by this project concern essentially the logging and analysis. Technical issues about logging concern the format of the log, its dimensions (what to log). File size, data backup, device ability to perform task and logging in the same time, network bandwidth are issues that are very problematic when dealing with logging of information. As interactions become richer (e.g. images with text instead of text) these problems become more important as the volume of data increases.

Markopoulos et al. (Markopoulos et al., 2006) have used the technology probe concept in two implementations: the Orange Probe and the 7 Seconds of Fame. The first probe is a semi transparent mirror with a camera hidden in it, recording still frames of people’s interaction with the mirror in a public space. The 7 seconds of fame probe is a booth installed in a student’s home for a period of two weeks allowing users to record 7 seconds footage on topics such as “what message would you like to address to Georges W. Bush?” This implementation of technology probes is closer to Gaver’s original intention to use probes as a source of inspiration and provocation of users through subjective, intimate material. It does not seem to intend to use the data for observation or participatory design.

In this project, I propose to extend the interLiving work on technology probes by providing a detailed account of the design, deployment and analysis of technology probes. I will explore the requirements for technology probes and the impact of the different aspects of probes on their efficiency regarding the different given goals: inspiration, field observation and field evaluation.

2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2. Communication appliances for the elderlyCommunication appliances for the elderlyCommunication appliances for the elderlyCommunication appliances for the elderly

In order to narrow the scope of this project, I will be focusing on studying technology probes as a methodology in the design of communication appliances for the elderly. This restriction is appropriate in that it allows a full design process to take place while thoroughly analysing the technology probes and their impacts on the various design stages. This focus is also close to the interLiving focus that explored the design of home communications, but for intergenerational family households. It therefore allows building upon its knowledge and experiences.

The following section will review literature on assistive and/or monitoring technology for the elderly. It will then give an overview of projects providing alternative approaches to the assistive and monitoring solutions: proactive health and social connectedness. At last relevant literature in other fields will be explored to gain a broader knowledge of the potential role communication technology can play in elderly well being. A description of each particular approach, their strengths and weakness is then provided.

2.2.1.2.2.1.2.2.1.2.2.1. Assisting and monitoring Assisting and monitoring Assisting and monitoring Assisting and monitoring the the the the elderlyelderlyelderlyelderly

The research related to ageing in the field of Human Computer Interaction has been extensively focused towards providing assistive or monitoring technologies to overcome the issues induced by ageing. Assistive technology aims at overcoming the many disabilities appearing in the ageing process: sensorial impairment (e.g. sight, hearing), physical impairments (e.g. strength, coordination) and cognitive impairments (e.g. memory losses, dementia) (See Figure 5). Monitoring technologies provide caregivers with data from the care recipient and include activity sensors, fall sensors, and video monitoring. These systems are a mean to help the caregiver by providing remote data and/or filtered data, alarms and health assessments of an elderly.

Despite the serious need for assistive and monitoring solutions, alternative solutions should be provided for independent people with no critical health concern. Existing assistive and monitoring solutions are merely a response

Figure 5. Examples

of elderly assistive

technology


13 / 48

to an identified concern, and thus they do not provide preventive solutions to accidents or other aged related issues. Both monitoring and assistive technologies have serious flaws that have yet to be addressed (Fisk, 1997; Forlizzi et al., 2001).

On the other hand, monitoring technologies are systems capturing data on a given subject (in this case, an elderly) to make it available to another person (nursing staff for example). The transfer of information is unilateral and the person being monitored has no or little power over and awareness of what information is passed and how. The concept of surveillance (literally care coming from above) reinforced by monitoring devices can find alternatives in bilateral information passing: communication.

My approach in this project is to build upon the communication appliance concept (Hutchinson et al., 2003; W. Mackay et al., 2005) to provide elderly with new and innovative means of communicating with their friends and/or relatives.

2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2. AssistivAssistivAssistivAssistive solutionse solutionse solutionse solutions

Assistive technology accounts for a large part of research on technology for elderly. Throughout their work, Morris et al. (Intel, 2004; Morris et al., 2003) have been exploring how ubiquitous computing can help elderly people suffering from dementia to age in place. In (Morris et al., 2003), they provide four prototypes of devices to help elderly and/or their caregivers manage their cognitive decline. Informed by interviews and field observations, these designs offer a broad range of purposes at different stages of dementia to accommodate particular problems. Two of these are assistive technology, aimed at supporting an elder’s disability: A system to ease face and name recognition and a system to assist in daily routines. A third prototype intended for elderly with severe cognitive impairment, is a monitoring device allowing caregivers (e.g. spouse, children, professional caregiver) to be alerted in case of falls of the patient.

Many other systems to assist elderly have been developed over the years, most of which are focused on cognitive impairments. Tran and Mynatt (Tran et al., 2002) have developed the Cook’s Collage, a task reminder for elderly with memory deficit to assist them in cooking tasks. The system records user’s actions and prompts him/her with the next step to be undertaken. Similarly, the COACH system (in (Martha E. Pollack, 2004)) provides the cues to help cognitively impaired elders wash their hands without missing or mixing any steps of the procedure. Autominder (M. E. Pollack et al., 2003) is an ambitious system aimed at providing cues and reminders not on any particular tasks, but on any task. It relies on Artificial Intelligence systems to analyse user’s behaviour and uses this data to infer a need for a cue in a recognized task.

Along with these cognitive assistive technologies, other technologies have been developed to overcome various other disabilities. Sensorial disabilities (particularly hearing and sight impairments) and decline in physical abilities (particularly strength and coordination) are also common amongst ageing people.

To allow people with walking impairments Shklovski et al. have developed a robot designed to support the physical activity in walking as well as provide directions (Shklovski et al., 2004). Similarly, Care-O-Bot (B Graf, 2001) is a robot providing walking assistance for the frail elderly by assisting them in walking task and embedding an obstacle avoidance system. Care-O-bot is also capable to fetch and carry objects. Despite the intended audience, the system has been extensively tested in public environments like museums (Birgit Graf et al., 2001) but little or no research has been done to evaluate it with elderly people in a real home.

Despite their necessity, assistive solutions often stigmatize their users as being disabled and therefore are poorly accepted by the elderly (Forlizzi et al., 2001). It is also important to underline that in many western countries people can expect to remain reasonably healthy and independent until the age of 75. Most assistive technology then fails to address the needs and desires of healthy elderly in terms of support and desire for social connectedness. However,


14

most assistive devices characterize a common need for technology developed for elderly: being able to cope with disabilities induced by the ageing process. Such disabilities have to be addressed in the perspective of a reliable and universal communication appliance. However, in this research project, the primary interest is communication, and the target population is restricted to people having limited physical impairments and mild or no cognitive impairment.

2.2.3.2.2.3.2.2.3.2.2.3. Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring solutionssolutionssolutionssolutions

Many monitoring systems have been developed in recent years to help the elderly age in place. Their goals usually differ from assistive technologies in that they are designed to support the caregivers instead of the elderly. Monitoring system are composed of a subject (a person subject being observed), a warden (a person to whom observed data is reported), a set of input devices (e.g. camera, pressure sensor) producing input data, an output device providing output data. Monitoring for the elderly takes many forms including robots, smart homes and more subtle and less intrusive solutions like the Digital Family Portrait (Mynatt et al., 2001). The common aim of monitoring systems is to be able to let elderly frail people age in place while providing a close care by means of monitoring and communication technologies. This section outlines projects in both areas or robot and home based monitoring, and then review alternative monitoring solutions.

a) Robots

Carnegie Mellon’s Nursebot (Baltus et al., 2000; M. E. Pollack et al., 2002), is a domestic robot intended as an assistive device for cognitive impairments, a safety reinforcement device for elderly at home, an observation device recording relevant information for caregivers, a telecare device allowing medical caregivers to remotely assess patient’s health, and a device facilitating social interaction.

The less recent JPL Robot (Fiorini et al., 1997) provides medical staff with a mobile robot with manipulator arm to allow care staff to remotely perform basic interventions.

A few studies have reported a real benefit for users, medical staff or government from introduction of robots to support elderly living. Paro (Wada et al., 2005) is a robot seal for Animal Assisted Therapy for cognitively impaired elderly. A year long deployment of three implementations of Paro in a hospital reported a significant benefit among 13 participants with various stages of dementia.

However in many other projects the issue of acceptability itself has rarely been addressed. While some studies suggest that elderly participants responded favourably to the introduction of a robot in their environment (Hans et al., 2002; M. E. Pollack et al., 2002; Wada et al., 2005), many other studies relate that acceptance of robots is low (Haigh et al., 2002) and uncover ethical and morale issues related to their deployment (Haigh et al., 2002). One can reasonably consider that while the favourable participants’ response to the introduction of robots is encouraging, it is hardly an indicator of a larger population’s response. Despite public enthusiasm towards the inclusion of robots, this concern towards their acceptability and their high cost makes their introduction in elderly life in the near future unlikely.

b) Smart homes and telecare

An impressive number of smart homes have also been developed over the past decade. Rialle et al. (Rialle et al., 2001) designed a smart health home designed to monitor elder’s health. It provides medical staff with a summary of vital signs and raises alarms to signal a potential threat. The Australian CSIRO (L. S. Wilson et al., 2000) has developed a radio connected vital signs monitor to assess elderly health in their homes.

In the UK, British Telecom, the Anchor Trust and the Housing Corporation developed, implemented and deployed a trial intelligent home service (Sixsmith, 2000). The system was composed of between 9 and 12 low cost sensors (including infrared motion detectors, contact


15 / 48

sensors and temperature sensors), a home unit to centralize sensor data and communicate it to the control unit, and a control centre to gather and interpret the data. The control centre was able to recognise alerts and send subsequent alarms to either carer or client.

Field trials and deployment of smart home technology have had mixed results. Family caregivers have been generally positive about the experience (Rowan et al., 2005; Scharnberg, 2006; Sixsmith, 2000) where elderly have had more nuanced opinions, from enthusiasm: “It is a

wonderful idea. I live on my own. My family is in Yorkshire. The feeling of security and peace of

mind it gives you is wonderful.” (Sixsmith, 2000); to refusal: “I had to fire her [his daughter] from being able to look in on me.”(Scharnberg, 2006). However Sixsmith (Sixsmith, 2000) and Whitten et al. (Whitten et al., 1998) deployment and evaluation of smart home monitoring systems have provided overall positive feedback from both caregivers and elderly.

Nevertheless, important issues remain in smart home, telecare and monitoring solutions in general. Fisk (Fisk, 1997) explores these issues and has proposed a framework to make telecare technology more acceptable. Sixsmith’s study (Sixsmith, 2000) also uncovered several concerns from elderly including issues of loss of human contact and cost of smart home systems. Whitten et al.’s evaluation (Whitten et al., 1998) revealed other issues dealing with ethics, privacy and acceptability. Many participants fitted with a telecare system reported finding no real benefit in such a system. Some participants explicitly considered the system provided as intrusive. One particularly important point raised by Whitten et al. is the difference in appreciation between people with limited mobility and people with satisfactory mobility. While people with limited mobility reported seeing a real benefit in the system, people with higher mobility were overall not interested in the system, seeing no real benefit.

c) Other monitoring

Some less intrusive approaches have been undertaken like Mynatt and Rowan Digital Family Portrait (DFP) (Mynatt et al., 2001; Rowan et al., 2005) (See Figure 6). DFP was initially designed to provide peace of mind for elderly family members while providing communication triggers for linked parties (Mynatt et al., 2001). The DFP consist in a display showing the photo of a distant person, surrounded by a frame of symbols. Each symbol’s size represents a daily state of activity of the distant person. The frame displays 28 symbols, allowing keeping track of the person’s activity over 28 days. Activity of the distant person is inferred through the data collected by sensors fitted in the house.

“Rather than glancing out the window from time to time to see if

“things seem O.K. at Mom's house,” by noting that Mom has

picked up the morning newspaper, the family member would

glance at the digital family portrait to be reassured that “life is

proceeding as usual at Mom's.” In this way, the digital family

portrait is meant to be intentionally engaging and provide some of

the back-story that goes missing when people are geographically

distant. This back-story lowers the startup threshold of a

conversation by providing a context in which new conversations

can be started” (Mynatt et al., 2001, p.335)

This design represents an interesting way to provide awareness of the remote person in both households. However later stages in the project saw the disappearance of the DFP placed in the elderly home, removing awareness of his/her distant relative (Rowan et al., 2005). Whereas the initial bilateral design provided a mean to increase social connectedness, the unilateral solution adopted by the project is closer to a monitoring system, providing the distant person with information about his/her parent activities.

The important issues brought by monitoring systems, especially ethical, moral and privacy, reinforce the need to seek a more human, social and acceptable way of providing safety at home

Figure 6. Digital Family

Portrait Display


16

to the elderly. Banahan (Banahan, 2004) describes the different issues of telecare and monitoring. According to his study with the TeleCare system in the United Kingdom:

“Supervision of elderly people in their homes using appropriate appliances and agent

technologies is not elderly care. Although, methods of remote supervision may prove

useful in the right circumstances, elderly care can only be provided by care

professionals who develop a close personal relationship with the people in their care.

Elderly care requires human contact. The TeleCARE approach is quite intrusive in that

it compromises the elderly person’s privacy. The elderly, as a group, are very

technology averse. They feel alienated, and to some extent frightened, by advances in

network technologies. They do not feel so inclined to re-train, if this proves necessary.”

(Banahan, 2004)

The concern about loss of human contact is present in elderly responses from monitoring technologies. As Daniel, a patient visited by a robot deployed at John Hopkins Hospital puts it:

"I don't object to it, […] I think person-to-person is better than person-to-machine.

When the chips are down, I want the doctor." (Stein, 2005)

Reciprocity of care and reinforcement of social (or even human) contacts are essential to avoid stigmatization and help elders keep an active social involvement. Instead of being a care recipient, the elderly should be empowered to provide reciprocal support.

Overall, monitoring approaches encounter many ethical, moral, technical and social issues. The main issue this project is trying to overcome is that they are too often not suitable for the majority of elderly, but targeted towards frail elderly for which monitoring is the only solution to stay at home due to important health concerns.

Complementarily to monitoring solution, this project is studying how the elderly in a larger sense (people 60 years of age and more) can benefit from innovative communication systems. Extensive user study is intended to help address acceptability, privacy and some moral issues arising from some actual designs.

2.2.4.2.2.4.2.2.4.2.2.4. Improving Elderly Well BeingImproving Elderly Well BeingImproving Elderly Well BeingImproving Elderly Well Being

To provide elders with an alternative to assistive and/or monitoring solutions, this project explores the design of communication appliances targeted towards older users and its potential impact on their well being.

This section will review literature relevant to the subject of social connectedness. After this, literature relevant to the role and impact of social relations upon people and elderly in particular is discussed.

Many research projects (including projects on monitoring services) have emphasized elders’ need and desire for more social connectedness, enhancing and broadening elderly social networks. Forlizzi et al. (Forlizzi et al., 2001; Hirsch et al., 2000) conducted a four month user study in a community centre in the United States. They observed how critical the social connectedness of the elderly was critical to their successful ageing:

“People who contribute to caregiving for an elder are not limited to medical personnel.

Due to the expanded definition of care and the importance of quality of life in this

definition, family, friends, acquaintances, and service people all play a significant role

in eldercare. An elder s quality of life is dependant on a rich set of social relationships

among a variety of individuals.” (Hirsch et al., 2000, p.74)

Projects such as The Hug (DiSalvo et al., 2003) have explored the design of communication devices targeted for elderly. The Hug provides a tangible interface for oral communication between elderly and their close relatives.

Other projects like Kaye et al.’s Intimate Objects (Kaye et al., 2005) and Vetere et al. (Vetere et al., 2005) have explored similar issues concerning couples and romantic relationships. While it


17 / 48

seems that high level communication such as voice is widely accepted as an active communication (in the Hug or simply the phone), both projects developed low level communication devices to convey simple meanings such as presence or touch.

The Interliving Project (Hutchinson et al., 2003) explored similar concerns by investigating the use of technology to bridge the gap between distant family households. The interLiving project used participatory design techniques to design technology with families, for families. Building upon their design sessions, InterLiving researchers have developed the concept of communication appliances defined as:

“simple-to-use, single-function devices that let people communicate, passively or

actively, via some medium, with one or more remotely-located friends or family.”(W.

Mackay et al., 2005)

The concept of communication appliance also partially answers the need for privacy upon which monitoring systems might stumble. Users sharing information are friends and family, or have close relations. The need for privacy within these groups, though still an important need, is lessen when compared to other social groups.

Building upon the Interliving project, this project explores the design of communications devices along different parameters such as active/passive communication, synchronous/asynchronous communication and high level/low level communication in order to better address user’s need in terms of context awareness, but also acceptability and privacy.

Bilateral passive communication provides shared awareness between users of a communication appliance (W. Mackay et al., 2005), thus easing the exchange of care between them. We expect that people will make use of the provided awareness to understand patterns of everyday life of other people. Disruption in such pattern, if not planned, could indicate an issue such as a health problem. Humans are experts in analysing patterns and their disruption, they are able to adapt to any situation and gather extra data that might be required to take an informed decision. Monitoring systems often rely on artificial intelligence systems and sensors (D. Wilson, 2004) to gain an understanding of everyday activities and detect disruptions in the pattern. However, they rely on models for representing human activities that cannot be entirely trusted, because they rely on a definite and limited number of information input.

2.2.5.2.2.5.2.2.5.2.2.5. Social NetworkSocial NetworkSocial NetworkSocial Networkssss and Elderly and Elderly and Elderly and Elderly

While the need is acknowledged for enhancement of the social networks of the elderly, research in HCI as well as sociology and epidemiology have studied their role and impact on elderly health and well being.

Giles et al. (Giles et al., 2005) have conducted an epidemiological study on the influence of social networks over the life expectancy of older adults. Covariate analysis of the social networks and the demographic, health, and lifestyle variables showed that people with larger networks of friends were significantly protected against mortality where the impact of children and relatives was not significant. This study shows the potential role social relations play in well being, but also the life expectancy of elderly adults.

Van Groenou’s study of proximate networks (Groenou, 1995) brings a similar perspective by helping understand the nature and role of the social networks of the elderly, especially of key supporters (people geographically, socially and physically apt to provide support). The results showed that around 53% of 4029 elderly participants had no potential key supporter in their social networks.

Tilburg et al. (Tilburg et al., 1995) bring a similar point, arguing that social relationships play a significant role in elderly lives. They define two kinds of support exchanged within the network: instrumental support in which “material goods can be transferred or help can be provided”, and emotional support that includes “conversations in which one person shows understanding for the other person's situation”. The study examines the exchange of both emotional and


18

instrumental support for 4059 elderly. The results showed that people living with a partner have more relationships and more support exchanges than people living on their own. It also showed that people living in institutions had a lower exchange of support with their personal networks.

My project explores how communication technology will support the role of family and friends in caring for the elderly. To realize this study, it employs a similar approach to the ELDer project (Forlizzi et al., 2001; Hirsch et al., 2000) by looking at elderly as primary stakeholder of our research. Moreover it encourages elderly participants to be involved in the design process throughout the study.

Giles et al.’s study (Giles et al., 2005) has showed that dense social networks could potentially increase their life expectancy. This encourages HCI researchers to explore how innovative communication systems could support elderly activity within their social networks and thus potentially improve their life expectancy.

Van Groenou’s work (Groenou, 1995) allows one to foresee potential benefit from alternative communication technologies to help reduce the impact of geographical distance and provide means to increase frequency of contact. The aim of the design process is to allow remote members of these networks to regain involvement in the support for the elderly.

Tilburg et al.’s studies (Tilburg et al., 1995) supports assumptions that people living alone are more at risk and therefore could largely benefit from a way of improving social connectedness. It also supports the fact that elderly living in institutions are more likely to suffer from lack of social relations.


19 / 48

3.3.3.3. WWWWORK PROGRESSORK PROGRESSORK PROGRESSORK PROGRESS

During the first user study, 18 interviews were conducted with elderly women aged 66 to 89. 4 group meetings were organised with various participants. 6 probes kits were also deployed and 5 were returned by users. A technology probe (Hutchinson et al., 2003) was also developed and deployed for a period of two weeks in two different homes.

The technology probe was built upon the mirrorSpace concept developed by Roussel et al (Roussel et al., 2004): a two way video communication using proximity and blur to reinforce privacy. The deployment of the technology probe failed due to technical issues with communications. However images and proximity readings where recorded over a period of two weeks, providing in situ data to be analysed. The analysis of this data is still in progress. The technology probe was also presented at two different groups of users and allowed to collect feedback upon its potential impact and inherent issues.

3.1.3.1.3.1.3.1. User studyUser studyUser studyUser study

The user study is an opportunity to re-use known techniques such as interviews, probes (W. Gaver et al., 2004; W. Gaver, Dunne et al., 1999) and focus groups in order to see how they are suitable to the problem at hand and how they need to be adapted to fit this project’s goals. Recruitment of participants is a crucial step in user studies but is nevertheless poorly documented across HCI publications. I will provide detailed information about the recruitment process undertaken in the final thesis.

The user study provides first hand data on elderly values for well being, communication use and purpose and everyday struggles, both in France and in Australia. The analysis of the qualitative data brings new ideas and concepts on how to design and use technology to help older people to ‘age in place’.

3.1.1.3.1.1.3.1.1.3.1.1. PeerCarePeerCarePeerCarePeerCare

“[…] elder’s quality of life depends on a rich set of social relationships with a variety

of individuals. These individuals can all be defined as caregivers at one time or

another.” (Forlizzi et al., 2001)

PeerCare (Riche et al., 2005) is born from preliminary interviews and an unexpected observation: Four women living close by have met opportunistically during an elderly club meeting. Realizing that they were living close by, they started to meet frequently and developed a strong friendship. Through interviews, we discovered that these women had developed a strong peer support network using intercoms, telephones, Post-its™ and casual interaction to care for each other. They call themselves “La Bande des Quatres” which means “The Gang Of Four” in English.

Examples of the support network emerged from interviews: Béatrice, who is 73 years old, has recently been victim of a stroke. One day, around 9AM as she was getting ready for a doctor’s appointment, she fell on the floor hit by a stroke. She was only discovered around 3PM by her friends and conducted to the hospital. Béatrice has now recovered, but still has sequels. In order to help her in the first few days of her return, her friends came every day to give a hand with tasks she had difficulties with (e.g. close blinds). In order to avoid a similar situation to happen again, Béatrice rings Hélène everyday around 8AM to signal her that she is awake and healthy. After 3 tones, she hangs up, not trying to engage a conversation. In the case of the phone ringing a fourth time, Hélène takes the call, this way she can respond

Figure 7: Interview with one of our

key participants


20

if Béatrice is calling for help or this is a call from someone else.

This example is a very characteristic of strategies developed amongst these friends to care for each other. However, other examples that were not triggered by an incident but developed over time were also uncovered. The four women have daily contacts with each other, to “keep in touch”. They use intercoms to talk with each other on their way out, like for shopping. They meet for common activities and daily chores and routines, such as taking the trash to the bin and going to elderly clubs. Through these interactions, they stay aware of everyone’s general state: health, moral, mental. When no interaction has occurred between two members of the group during the day, they usually gather news from other members. For example if Gertrude has not met Béatrice today, she will opportunistically ask Hélène for news.

Through these routines and interactions, the members of the gang of four develop and maintain strong group awareness. This awareness allows them to perceive patterns of behaviour and react pertinently in case of a pattern disruption. For example, if Béatrice is not ready to take her trash every Tuesday around 9AM, Hélène gets worried and knocks on Béatrice‘s door to check that everything is ok.

I call this concept PeerCare: a peer-to-peer approach to reciprocal care through social interactions. This approach has two main advantages: the friendship is the core of these women’s relationship and the mutuality of the support that happens along it. People feel involved in friendship, not support. The support relation happens through daily routines, conversations and “keep in touch” discussions. Medical appointments, moods and issues are discussed openly and shared. People cease the private information they find relevant to the group so that they can be offered relevant support when necessary; privacy is reinforced by people themselves.

3.1.2.3.1.2.3.1.2.3.1.2. Intertwined Support NetworksIntertwined Support NetworksIntertwined Support NetworksIntertwined Support Networks

These interviews also allowed to identify many PeerCare networks intertwined in people’s daily life. Françoise helped with housekeeping for Emilie for 20 years. Over the years, their friendship has grown and they now are a mutual support for each other and spend 3 days a week together. However, each reported also having strong ties to one or more other person. Emilie for example spends one or two hours every day with a nearby friend that she describes as “very reliable” and “very nice”. Françoise reported similar interactions, but with people living further away from her, friends living in different places in France with whom she spends extensive time on the phone.

The PeerCare network of most interviewees seems composed of various other networks, not necessarily connected. Ties with different parts of the network can differ in intensity (empathy) and frequency (number of contacts a week). Gertrude for example has a complex network that include friends from the “Bande des Quatre” living in her neighbourhood, her son living close by, her friends from where she used to live, other neighbours and family dispersed in France. She exchanges frequent calls with friends living in the region she used to live in: With some she has weekly phone calls, with other she exchanges letters every month or so. This complex network contributes to provide moral and or physical support to a single person with different intensity and at different time. When some part of the network is unavailable (on holiday, in hospital, busy with other things, etc.), she can always rely on alternatives, even though the efficiency of the care support might be altered.

The different networks also have opportunities to collaborate in certain situations that require a common effort towards a certain goal. Such a task could be to organize a surprise party for the person in the centre of the network. The interesting points are situations where they collaborate to ensure health and provide care to this person. For example if the elderly has not returned from holidays, a friend might ask the neighbours if they are aware in any delay. Similarly, Gertrude reported that as she had news from Béatrice from a third person, she did not feel the


21 / 48

need to disturb Béatrice to ask for news. This project is now investigating situations in which this collaboration happens and their manifestations.

3.1.3.3.1.3.3.1.3.3.1.3. Flow of supportFlow of supportFlow of supportFlow of support

The PeerCare concept was restricted to mutual care amongst elders. However, the study uncovered the existence of other care support around elders: family, shopkeepers, associations, postman, house help, etc. An interviewee reported having fallen on her way to the market. Despite the pain in her leg, she continued her shopping. A shopkeeper she has known for a few years noticed her state and offered to resume the shopping for her and drive her back to her home for her to rest and call a doctor.

Despite the value of these networks for the well being of the elderly, this study is first focusing on the elder’s mutual care as I believe it has much potential both in terms of care and socialization.

Interviews uncovered that people among a PeerCare group tend to shift from informal care to focused care, depending on the state of the group. Béatrice, for example, after her stroke, was very fragile, less mobile and more dependant. It was a challenge to accomplish certain tasks, such as wheeling the blinds up. That is the reason why her friends used to come to help her every morning, until she was able to do it herself. When she was more fragile and dependent, her friends from the Bande des Quatres cared for her and supported her condition. However, when the situation returned to a more normal state, this attention faded to a more normal interaction. It is important to note that Béatrice never fully recovered from this incident and is still subject of “special attentions” and care.

Balance between independence and care is negotiated depending of the state of each in the group. If one is endangered, her independence will be sacrificed to provide a better care. All participants reported that independence and privacy are very important. A system providing care all the time is not appropriate. However as this project focuses on informal communication systems and PeerCare, it is important to ensure that it supports care behaviours.

Often, family is the first entity people reported counting on when needing help. Gertrude argued that it was their role. On the other hand she reported the need to respect their private life. They should not be too close so that she respects their life, at the same time they should be always available for help and be the most reactive.

3.1.4.3.1.4.3.1.4.3.1.4. Key moments of interactionKey moments of interactionKey moments of interactionKey moments of interaction

Interviews with elderly women uncovered that their week was very structured and organised. Activities included visits to friends, games, club activities, shopping and housekeeping. Interactions with peers occur mostly within routines and activities. Interviews showed that many informal interactions take place early in the morning, before outside activities start. Many participants reported meeting, calling, talking to neighbours or friends before going out. Béatrice’s example of ringing her friend is one example. Similarly Christine exchanges a few words with her neighbour most mornings, as do Irène and Josiane, who also are neighbours. Noémie and Marie, who live in sheltered housing, go down the hallway and exchange a few words. Other moments of this nature are present during the day: around lunchtime and around 4PM. However, the morning moment seems to be the most important one in the day.

3.1.5.3.1.5.3.1.5.3.1.5. Reporting social networksReporting social networksReporting social networksReporting social networks

Everyone has a social network, within which lies a mutual care network. However in the case of the elderly, this social network is often smaller and more focused towards mutual care. The study is currently being modified to incorporate new probes to map the social networks of the participants and identify members of the PeerCare network within it. The aim is to compare the networks and mutual care networks between healthy adults and elderly living at home.


22

To do so, a domestic probe was designed to allow them to self-report their social networks. Interviewees had difficulties to describe their social network. Usually, while telling a story, they might remember someone they forgot to talk about. This way they used narrative cues to recall people in their network, but also geographical cues (people you know from certain places you used to live in or to go), time cues (people you met since you moved here) and relationship cues (people that are family, friends, etc.) The probe designed reflects this variety of recalling solutions. It asks people to map the people while answering to questions such as: “Who did you meet yesterday?” (time), “Who lives at walking distance from where you live?” (geography), “Have you listed your close friends?” (relationship). The narrative recall occurs during the interviews, with the interviewer collecting additional data.

3.2.3.2.3.2.3.2. ProbesProbesProbesProbes

In order to better understand the nature of probes, how to design them and their benefits and drawbacks, this project will analyse existing probes in the literature. It will then experiment with designing, developing, deploying and analysing probes capturing their use, purpose. It will eventually expose the use probes in my research context.

3.2.1.3.2.1.3.2.1.3.2.1. DesignDesignDesignDesign

The probes kit was inspired by both the original cultural probes kit (W. Gaver, Dunne et al., 1999) and the communication probes from interLiving (Beaudouin-Lafon et al., 2001). At first, two probes were selected from previous probes study to be reused: a repackaged disposable camera and postcards. A brainstorming session with HCI colleagues at in|situ| was then organised to define questions to be asked to the participants for both probes. Probes were designed to gather intimate home data, in ways similar to the probes deployed by Crabtree et al. (Crabtree et al., 2003) but also wanted to leave room to gather inspirational information from users (W. Gaver et al., 2004). Their designs reflect these mixed intentions by asking direct straight forward questions and some more open to interpretations. Six (6) postcards were designed with a particular question. Each was illustrated to provoke participants to “fill the void” left in the illustration. Questions asked were the following (see Appendix 2 p. 42 or Figure 8 for postcards illustrations):

Who do you count on in case of a problem? (1) Who count on you in times of need? (2) What is the last gift you have received? (3) Please, tell me a story with your neighbours. (4) Describe me the room in which you feel comfortable. (5) Who would you invite to have tea? (6)

Disposable cameras were repackaged with suggestions of photos written on them. Participants were handed in the kit with a brief description of the task and a booklet to write comments on photos or general comments. The suggestions for photos were the following:

A photo of you. You favourite device. The most difficult device to use. Something that bothers you. Something that makes you dream. Somebody’s favourite object. What you would like to change. A place were you would like to talk to someone but cannot. What you see from the window. Something while you are bored. Something irritating. An object you like to show. The first person you see today (precise date). Something intriguing.


23 / 48

An object that changes (phase 1). An object that changes (phase 2). An object that changes (phase 3). What you show to others. What you would like to show to other people. What you do not like to show to other people. With the remaining photos, take a picture of places, people, objects that you would like to show us.

The outcomes of the first three probes and the interviews inspired the design of a third probe aimed at allowing people to map their social networks. It is constituted of a target with concentric circles (see Appendix 3 p.43 for details) on which participants are asked to place their friends, relatives, neighbours and other people they want to put there. The more frequent the participant see the person, the closer it should be drawn on the target. For each person drawn on the target, the participant is asked to fill in a little form asking more details about the person and their relationship. The inspiration for this probe also came from Forlizzi et al. in their designs to map elderly caregivers for the ELDer project (Forlizzi et al., 2001). The probe was handed in with instructions to think about relationships in different ways: temporal, geographic and empathic as described in section 3.1.5 above.

3.2.2.3.2.2.3.2.2.3.2.2. DevelopmentDevelopmentDevelopmentDevelopment,,,, deployment deployment deployment deployment and return of the probes and return of the probes and return of the probes and return of the probes

Cameras were bought from supermarkets and repackaged by removing existing package, printing out new package and sticking it on the camera. Repackaging these cameras proved easy, but could be improved. The quality of the paper and the technique to glue the resulting package on the plastic disposable camera might be improved to give it a more aesthetic appeal.

Postcards were designed by Michael Delongas (www.decadere.com) and printed on photo paper for a better finish. Questions and address were printed on the back in a hand script font and each was stamped to be returned easily. Postcards could have been hand-written instead of printed with script fonts in order to improve affinity between participants and probes, in an attempt to improve dialog between researchers and participants.

In the first study, probe kits contained only disposable cameras and postcards with a brief instruction sheet. Three participants participated in this study. The postcards were to be sent back via normal mail and the camera to be picked up when the exercise was completed. The probe kit was distributed at the beginning of June 2005 and the following week postcards started to be sent back at the laboratory. Within three weeks 14 out of 18 postcards had been sent back and by the end of July (after participants’ holidays) every camera had been picked up and film developed. The postcard asking for a story with neighbours (4) wasn’t answered by any of the participants (one was returned explaining that the participant did not understand the meaning to give to the word “story”). The other two missing cards were one about who counts on you in times of need (2) and who would you invite to have tea (6). Photos from the disposable camera were scanned and then handed back to the participants.

Before the beginning of the second study, in January 2006, participants in the first study were asked to use the newly designed probe to map their social networks. By that time, one of the

Figure 8. Cultural Probes Package


24

participants had withdrawn from the study so only two probes were handed in. The filled probes were collected when participants were visited during the deployment of the technology probes (see below).

In the second study, probe kits were handed to three participants, however only two were returned. This kit included the two probes described above as well as the newly created probe (See Figure 8). The data of this study is still under analysis. The value of the data to be used as qualitative data is being argued. However I believe it has a strong value as inspirational data and to engage users in a design process.

3.2.3.3.2.3.3.2.3.3.2.3. Analysis of probe dataAnalysis of probe dataAnalysis of probe dataAnalysis of probe data

In the first study, the postcards returned were filled with short sentences answering the question in a straight forward way. Data from the probes allowed us to uncover potential areas of studies and research. It also provided us with potential applications for technologies (See Figure 9). Reactions to the given questions were not consistent throughout the group and postcards replies reflected different views, priorities and principles. This can only reflect the complexity of designing for a larger audience and the danger of making choices about what people want. The disposable camera photos provided mixed results. The instructions for the probes did not mention that the shooting of photos was to be centred on “home”. Therefore some photos were taken on holidays and presented less interest than photos taken within homes.

Figure 9: Inspiration: the changing object

In the second study, participants were instructed to focus on areas around the home and were provided with a more comprehensive set of instructions included in a little booklet (Appendix 3). Results provided more information with details, especially underlining equipment that is used in the house to communicate. However, the instructions did not provide enough opportunity for self reflection, which could have been really beneficial in this study. The rest of the data is still being analysed. However, first observations suggest that the last probe provided dense and precise information as expected in most cases.

Overall, the probes provided inspiration but little data. It is likely that the merge of two intentions in a probe is confusing. Instructions for the use of the probes should have been more focused towards areas of interest: home communications and people. However, it illustrates the necessary tradeoffs between information and inspiration and the need for a compromise between the two approaches.

3.2.4.3.2.4.3.2.4.3.2.4. Draft Probe Concept AnalysisDraft Probe Concept AnalysisDraft Probe Concept AnalysisDraft Probe Concept Analysis

From the review of the literature and this first experience with probes, a draft analysis of the probes as a research tool was developed.

A probe should have a focus in order to be able to collect relevant data. The probe is to be applied to a particular design space and must be adapted to this design space to maximize its chances to fulfil its purpose. Focus can be broad, especially in initial explorations (home technologies), or narrow (friendship and home communications amongst seniors).


25 / 48

Probes can embed four main purposes: inspire design (Beaudouin-Lafon et al., 2001; W. Gaver, Dunne et al., 1999), inform design (Crabtree et al., 2003; Hemmings et al., 2002), support dialog between researchers / designers and participants (Beaudouin-Lafon et al., 2001; Cohene et al., 2005) or explore a design concept (Hulkko et al., 2004). However, as illustrated on Figure 9, a probe often embeds more than one purpose.

The nature of the probe data will affect many aspects of the methodology. The nature of the probe data has many dimensions: factual data or hypothetical data, objective

data or subjective data, and direct data (within the context of events to be reported) or memory recollections (after the event to be reported). There are not always set distinctions within each particular dimension, but rather a continuum in which the probe lies. Some of the nature of

the data escapes the designer / researcher as the probe is delivered to the participants, as participants can always change the rules in which the probes are to be applied. For example, a paper diary could be used to record events as they occur (direct data) and the writer is telling the story of what happens (factual data) and gives his/her opinion (subjective data). However a probe can also restrict the nature of the data to a certain extent.

Participants’ cost for using the probes varies from one probe to another. Skill and time required to collect data as well as privacy are three major factors that will influence the participation of users in the probe study. The probe should be suited to fit people’s skills and need for privacy. The motivation for completing the work will also affect the results and the time spent collecting data. Motivation is hard to define, but can be enhanced within the probe. Making a probe task fun is more likely to motivate participants to collect data than making the probe boring. The degree of control of the designers on the task to be undertaken also has a great impact on participant’s motivation.

Analysis cost is also a factor when designing probes. Certain analyses are deep and need more skills and resources. For example analysis of diaries for information can be a long and difficult process, but provide very precise data. Moreover, when designing for certain tasks, researchers want to be able to analyse the data in a certain way. To make that possible, data also needs to be captured a certain way.

Building upon this analysis, the next section will provide a similar analysis of technology probes.

3.3.3.3.3.3.3.3. Technology probesTechnology probesTechnology probesTechnology probes

This project intends to provide refine the concept of technology probes and to analyse the role of technology probes in the research process as well as its impact on the overall study. It provides techniques and steps used to realize a technology probe. It evaluates its impact and importance in the design process and analyses its dependency on the design context.

To date, one technology probe has been designed, developed and deployed. This section will detail the different phases leading to the deployment and its results.

3.3.1.3.3.1.3.3.1.3.3.1. DesignDesignDesignDesign and development and development and development and development

This first technology probe for this project was chosen to provoke participants to bather feedback about concepts foreign to them. It was also designed to allow researchers to identify issues in introducing PeerCare (see 3.1.1 p.20 for definition and origin) devices in elderly homes and draw upon participants’ experience to inspire future designs of technologies.

Figure 10: Probes’ purpose


26

In order to ease the development and deployment of the device, the concept of communication using mirrorSpace (Beaudouin-Lafon, Bederson, Conversy, Druin et al., 2002) was used. MirrorSpace is a communication appliance (see p.18 for definition) that provides shared video to each user. “MirrorSpace relies on the mirror metaphor. Live video streams from all the

places it connects are superimposed on a single display on each site so that people see their

own reflection combined with the ones of the remote persons.” (Roussel et al., 2004) On addition to that multiple mirror metaphor, mirrorSpace uses proximity as a medium to negotiate privacy: The further from the device a person gets, the more blurry his/her image will be on the mirror (see Figure 11).

Figure 11: distance as a medium to negotiate privacy

A prototype of this device had already been implemented using the videoSpace toolkit (Roussel, 2001) for the interLiving project. It has proven highly robust and reliable in both laboratory and design expositions settings. The privacy enforcement this mediation provides as well as its ease of use made this concept a viable one to be considered as technology probe for this project.

The mirrorSpace as technology probe provides the elderly with a first hand experience with always-on, intimate, active and passive communications. It provides a mean for researchers to exchange on this concept with users and to identify issues related to using video for always-on communications.

3.3.2.3.3.2.3.3.2.3.3.2. Technical changes to Technical changes to Technical changes to Technical changes to the original prototypethe original prototypethe original prototypethe original prototype

The first analysis of the existing high level prototype of MirrorSpace underlined its inability to perform the operations necessary for this study. First of all, no logging function was available to allow researchers to collect data of use of the device. Secondly the prototype relied on reliable network protocols (TCP) that worked extremely well in Local Area Networks (LAN) but would have induced increasing delays if deployed on a Wide Area Network (WAN). Eventually, access to engineering and design skills required to reproduce the prototypes were not available. The decision to re-implement the mirrorSpace was then made using Apple Power PC Mac mini computers for their compact size, silence and flexibility, 15” DELL LCD monitors, Phidgets™ interfaceKits and ultrasonic telemeters.

The software for the probe was entirely re-written to allow the use of a central server (to reduce necessary computations on each individual probe) and to use a non reliable protocol (UDP). A new functional prototype quickly appeared in the lab, but field tests in researchers’ home soon uncovered many issues:

Firewalls are the basic defense on WAN networks against intrusions. They are also a major issue when designing communicating software. Firewalls had to be set up at each probes’ connection and on the central server running in the lab.


27 / 48

Reliability of signal was not easily achieved on WAN networks, transfer rates between homes and server took very different values depending on time of the day, geographical situation and Internet provider.

Reliability of software is hard to achieve and requires extensive time and iterations. The mirrorSpace was notably fitted with a motion detection algorithm to allow the capture of meaningful movies and avoid the constant capture of video. The reliability of this feature in low lights setting with commercial webcams proved challenging.

After successful tests of the whole system in the researchers’ home, the design of the packaging to hide cables and provide an aesthetically acceptable device started. It soon became apparent that the resources and skills required to reach the level achieved in the interLiving project were missing. After a few iterations, the design of a basic painted wooden box became the chosen compromise (See Figure 12).

Figure 12: Prototypes for the mirrorSpace casing

3.3.3.3.3.3.3.3.3.3.3.3. DeploymentDeploymentDeploymentDeployment

Two participants from the previous study were chosen to participate in the technology probe deployment. During the development of the probe, negotiations took place with Internet Services Providers (ISP) to connect the two households to the Internet. This process proved highly difficult and took 4 months to be completed. Many technical and service issues arose from this deployment, resulting in very poor data collection. Some details are given in Appendix 4.

3.3.4.3.3.4.3.3.4.3.3.4. ResultsResultsResultsResults and analysis and analysis and analysis and analysis

As researchers had to come more often than expected to intervene on the equipment during the two weeks deployment, the participants’ reaction went from curiosity to annoyance. The technology probe was only fully functional for a period of one and a half day over a two weeks period. However, the design of the probe allowed us to collect data in people’s homes, even though the communication was not established.

The literature review and experience designing, developing, and deploying a technology probe led to the following analysis of technology probes:

Technology probes are in fact really close to existing probes. They, however, embed more than one purpose in their designs. They also allow to passively collect data, without requiring a particular action from participants. This adds an important dimension to the nature of data and allows the collection of biased, yet objective data. The nature of the data can also allow qualitative analysis, but also potentially quantitative analysis of data. Using logs over a long period of time, one can use exploratory data analysis and quantitative analysis to uncover findings in the data.

Moreover, technology probes allow designers and researchers to field test technologies (as proven by the failure of the previously mentioned deployment) and explore in more depth the


28

confrontation of participants with concepts. Other concepts can be explored than what other probes allow, like in our design the intent to provide always-on communication.

Eventually, because technology probes are closer to the type of products that are to be developed, they encourage users to build upon them to participate in participatory design sessions. They also empower participants with expert knowledge of the use of a particular concept and can improve people’s confidence in their control of technology (Beaudouin-Lafon, Bederson, Conversy, Druin et al., 2002).

Nevertheless, a major difference distinguishes probes (such as Cultural Probes) and Technology Probes. On one hand, Cultural Probes (and alike) provide a mean for participants to actively and willingly provide subjective data to the researchers. The researchers are the acknowledge recipients of the generated material. On the other hand, Technology Probes gather data as participants experiment with a design concept. The data collected by the technology probe is not generated as a way for participants to discuss with researchers, but is rather used by researchers to illustrate findings and discuss them with participants.


29 / 48

4.4.4.4. SSSSCHEDULE AND CHEDULE AND CHEDULE AND CHEDULE AND FFFFUTURE UTURE UTURE UTURE WWWWORKORKORKORK

4.1.4.1.4.1.4.1. ScheduleScheduleScheduleSchedule

4.1.1.4.1.1.4.1.1.4.1.1. Realized to date Realized to date Realized to date Realized to date

Review of the literature

User study in France (to be continued)

• 18 interviews • 4 focus group / workshops • Deployment of 3 cultural probes, 1 having been developed during the

course of the study • Development and deployment of a technology probe in two

households

4.1.2.4.1.2.4.1.2.4.1.2. Plan from April 2006 to March 2008Plan from April 2006 to March 2008Plan from April 2006 to March 2008Plan from April 2006 to March 2008

April to September 2006

User study in Australia, including: • Interviews • focus group / workshops • Development and deployment of cultural probes • Development and deployment of technology probes

September 2006 to March 2007

Prototype development and evaluation in France.

April to September 2007

Prototype development and evaluation in Australia.

September 2007 to March 2008

Thesis writing.

4.2.4.2.4.2.4.2. Ongoing and Ongoing and Ongoing and Ongoing and Future Future Future Future WorkWorkWorkWork

This section provides information about the ongoing work in my research. It also provides the next steps of my project in the different areas of interest (communication appliances for seniors and technology probes).

4.2.1.4.2.1.4.2.1.4.2.1. User studyUser studyUser studyUser study

Building upon the first user study, a second user study is being organised in Australia to identify cultural differences in the way seniors communicate, share and exchange. This study will evaluate the concept of PeerCare in Australia and try to concretise the concept in design ideas.

For that study, a set of new probes are being developed following the analysis given previously (p.25). The aim is to create new probes while making their intent explicit, and providing arguments for their designs, deployments and analysis. Interviews conducted in Australia will be focused around the aspect of communication, care, social networks, values for well being and healthy ageing. A technology probe is also being developed. The initial idea is to play with familiar objects (such as clocks) and augmenting them to provide an always on active and passive communication mean. I intend to explore a different communication space from the previously deployed mirrorSpace (always on blurred video, no sound) using one bit

Nov 2004

April 2006

Sept 2006

April 2007

Sept 2007

March 2008


30

communication and communication history. However, I intend to organise a workshop to review the design ideas with participants before it is fully developed. Following the user study, a working prototype of a design is to be designed and implemented according to the findings of the user study and possibly participatory design workshops.

The ethical review committee’s approval has been granted under the reference 2006-11.

4.2.2.4.2.2.4.2.2.4.2.2. Technology probes explorationTechnology probes explorationTechnology probes explorationTechnology probes exploration

A study is currently being conducted to explore the use of technology probes to collect subjective data from the participants (similarly to the Cultural Probes approach). In collaboration with Matthew Simpson, we are investigating the physical interaction occurring in informal spaces and its potential for collaboration. This study will take place at the IDRD (Interaction Design Research Division) lab for a period of 4 weeks. The technology probe consists a recording device situated in the coffee room on level 3 of the Axon building and a web server. The device records movies (only image, no sound) when motion occurs in front of the fitted camera. A feedback display is provided for participants to see what is being filmed. Participants can asked for their image to not be recorded by pressing a button fitted on the side of the screen. When the button is pressed, adequate feedback is provided on the screen and the probe ignores the recording for the next X minutes (we are using 5 minutes for the moment, but this value is yet to be decided).

Figure 13: The probe prototype (left ). Video feedback when recording (center). Video feedback

when not recording (right).

Each video is then sent to a particular web server located within the ITEE network and embedded into a website in which participants can review the videos, comment and tag them, add relevant files to explain their activities. On this website, they can also request a video to be discarded, in which case the content of the video is erased, but the presence of the video still appears as a blank interaction period stating the time of the interaction and when it occurred. Web pages prototypes are given in Appendix 5 and Appendix 6.

The aim of this study is to explore how a technology probe can embed no design concept, but be used similarly to a cultural probe to provide subjective data from the participants (the comments and discussions on the website). We focus particularly on how to design a technology probe to fit a particular research context, to gather meaningful data and to maximise its efficiency.

This study has been approved by ITEE’s ethical review committee under the number 2006-10. Information sheet for the project and ethical review form are provided in Appendix 7 (separate files appended at the end of this file).

4.2.3.4.2.3.4.2.3.4.2.3. Evaluation of designEvaluation of designEvaluation of designEvaluation of design

The user study (including probes) and design sessions with seniors in both France and Australia are expected to provide designs ideas and concepts. These are to be implemented in a working prototype of a communication device for seniors. The evaluation of this device is expected to provide extensive quantitative and qualitative data about the way this design has been conducted, the outcome of the design and the impact of the device on users’ habits and well being. The evaluation of such device in the context for which it has been designed is still


31 / 48

experimental. I intend to draw upon the concept of quasi-experiments (Cook et al., 1979) to evaluate the design outcomes with users in their environments.


32

5.5.5.5. CCCCONCLUSIONONCLUSIONONCLUSIONONCLUSION

This report reviewed the different research questions my Ph.D. thesis will address. Building upon the technology probes approach developed in the interLiving project, it described how further studies to refine the methodology is necessary. To realise that, this project focuses on the design of a communication system for elderly using participatory design and user centred design methods including technology probes. Interviews, cultural probes, focus groups and design workshops are the other techniques used in this project to inform the design.

The first and second user study in France gathered design foci and requirements, including the PeerCare approach, and helped gained initial insights on the research space. The experience using cultural probes coupled with the literature review, allowed the formation of guidelines to design, deploy and analyse the cultural probes for research. The technology probe study also allowed a better understanding of the benefits and drawbacks of the methodology, including logging capabilities, development and deployment issues. The relationship between preliminary user study and technology probes is analysed as the design process evolves. Thus it also provided an opportunity to compare the role and nature of technology and cultural probes.

The recent technology probe study in the IDRD lab (labelled the zebra study) will provide a better understanding of the technology probe methodology in a dramatically different context (exploration of research method vs. exploration of domestic communication appliances). This will allow a better understanding of its benefits and limitations.

The Australian user study will broaden the understanding of the design of communication appliances for elderly. It will also provide another opportunity to use the technology probe methodology in this particular research space. Further work will also be undertaken to provide a working prototype of a final design for which an evaluation protocol will be designed to measure the impact of the device on elderly well being.


33 / 48

Research questiResearch questiResearch questiResearch questionsonsonsons Thesis addressesThesis addressesThesis addressesThesis addresses

Technology Probes

How can we define a technology probe?

What are its key characteristics?

What is its role and impact on a study? What are the benefits and the drawbacks?

In what way the subject to be studied affects the design of the technology probe?

Methods Literature review. Technology probe design, implementation, deployment and analysis in different contexts. Reflection upon the design decisions leading to a particular technology probe, focusing particularly on the other methodologies used alongside it and the impact of the research context on the probes.

Initial Outcomes Draft framework to describe, justify and analyse the cultural probes methodology in a research context. Initial analysis of the nature and role of technology probes.

Planned outcomes Refinement of the technology probe concept. Working examples and case studies of technology probes use.

Communication appliances for elderly

How can innovative communication devices improve elderly quality of life and increase independence?

Methods Literature review. Initial user study including interviews and probes. Exploration of values for well being and the role of social network for elderly well being.

Initial Outcomes

Elderly with denser social networks live better. PeerCare is a valid concept for providing and receiving care. PeerCare communications can take many forms, including ambient communication and different degrees of synchronicity and richness. Fluidity is a key aspect of a support process as people require different levels of support depending on their need. Social networks can potentially collaborate to provide adequate support.

Planned Outcomes Design concepts for a communication device for elderly implemented in a working prototype.

How to evaluate the designed communication device in situ?

Methods Literature review. Experience with technology probes.

Planned Outcomes

Protocol for evaluating the design.


34

6.6.6.6. PPPPUBLICATIONSUBLICATIONSUBLICATIONSUBLICATIONS

Mackay, W., Riche, Y. and Labrune, J.-B., Communication Appliances: Shared Awareness for Intimate Social Networks. in ACM SIGCHI 2005 Workshop on Awareness Systems: Known

results, theory, concepts and future challenges, (Portland, OR, US, 2005).

Riche, Y. and Mackay, W., PeerCare : Challenging the monitoring approach to care for the elderly. in British HCI 2005 Workshop on HCI and the Older Population, (Edinburg, UK, 2005).

The poster associated with the paper PeerCare : Challenging the monitoring approach to care

for the elderly (Riche et al., 2005) can be found in Appendix 1.


35 / 48

7.7.7.7. RRRREFERENCESEFERENCESEFERENCESEFERENCES

Baltus, G., Fox, D., Gemperle, F., Goetz, J., Hirsch, T., Magaritis, D., et al. (2000). Towards personal service robots for the elderly. In Workshop on Interactive Robotics and Entertainment (WIRE). Pittsburgh, PA, USA: Carnegie Mellon University.

Banahan, E. (2004). The Social/Non-Technical Challenges in Developing Technology to Support Elderly Care ”The TeleCARE Experience”. In L. M. Camarinha-Matos (Ed.), 1st International

Workshop on Tele-Care and Collaborative Virtual Communities in Elderly Care (TELECARE). Porto, Portugal.

Beaudouin-Lafon, M., Bederson, B. B., Conversy, S., Druin, A., Eiderbäck, B., Evans, H., et al. (2002). interLiving Deliverable 1.2 & 2.2, Co-design and new technologies with family users.

Beaudouin-Lafon, M., Bederson, B. B., Conversy, S., Eiderbäck, B., & Hutchinson, H. (2002). Technology Probes for Families (interLiving Deliverable No. D2.1): interLiving.

Beaudouin-Lafon, M., Druin, A., Harvard, Å., Lindquist, S., Mackay, W., Plaisant, C., et al. (2001). Cooperative Design with Families: interLiving.

Blomberg, J. (1995). Ethnography: aligning field studies of work and system design. In M. AF & G. N (Eds.), Perspectives on HCI: Diverse approaches (pp. 175-197). London: Academic Press.

Blythe, M. A., Monk, A., & Park, J. (2002). Technology Biographies: Field Study Techniques For Home Use Product Development. In CHI2002 Extended abstracts (pp. 658-659). Minneapolis, Minnesota, US: ACM.

Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (1992). Getting around the task-artifact cycle: how to make claims and design by scenario. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst., 10(2), 181-212.

Chapuis, O., & Langet, M. (2006). WMTrace. Cohene, T., Baecker, R., & Marziali, E. (2005). Designing Interactive Life Story Multimedia for a Family

Affected by Alzheimer’s Disease: A Case Study. In CHI2005 Extended Abstracts - Poster

Session (pp. 1300-1303). Portland, Oregon, US: ACM. Conversy, S., phane, Roussel, N., Hansen, H., Evans, H., Beaudouin-Lafon, M., et al. (2003). Sharing

daily-life images with videoProbe. Caen, France: ACM Press. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field

Settings. Crabtree, A. (1998). Ethnography in Participatory Design. In R. Chatfield, S. Kuhn & M. Muller (Eds.),

Participatory Design Conference 1998 (pp. 14). Seattle, Washington, USA: Computer Professionals Social Responsibility.

Crabtree, A., Hemmings, T., Rodden, T., Cheverest, K., Clarke, K., Dewsbury, G., et al. (2003). Designing With Care: Adapting Cultural Probes to Inform Design in Sensitive Settings. In the

2004 Australasian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction (OZCHI2004) (pp. 4-13). Brisbane, Australia: Ergonomics Society of Australia.

De Longis, A., Hemphill, K. J., & Lehman, D. R. (1992). A structured diary methodology for the study of daily events. In B. e. al (Ed.), Methodological issues in Applied psychology (pp. 83-109). New York: Plenium Press.

DiSalvo, C., Gemperle, F., Forlizzi, J., & Montgomery, E. (2003). The hug: an exploration of robotic form for intimate communication. In IEEE Robot and Human Interactive Communication: IEEE.

Fiorini, P., Ali, K., & Seraji, H. (1997). Health Care Robotics: A Progress Report. In IEEE International

Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 1271-1276). Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA: IEEE.

Fisk, M. J. (1997). Telecare equipment in the home: Issues of intrusiveness and control. Journal of

Telemedicine and Telecare, 3(1), 30-32. Fitton, D., Cheverest, K., Rouncefield, M., Dix, A., & Crabtree, A. (2004). Probing Technology with

Technology Probes. In Equator Workshop on Record and Replay Technologies. London, UK: Equator IRC.

Forlizzi, J., Hirsch, T., Hyder, E., & Goetz, J. (2001). Designing Pleasurable Technology for Elders. In INCLUDE, International Conference on Inclusive Design and Communications. London, England.

Forlizzi, J., & McCormack, M. (2000). Case Study: User Research to Inform the Design and Development of Integrated Wearable Computers and Web-Based Services. In DIS2000. Brooklyn, New York, US: ACM.

Gaver, W., Boucher, A., Pennington, S., & Walker, B. (2004). Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty. interactions, 11(5), 53--56.


36

Gaver, W., & Dunne, A. (1999). Projected realities: conceptual design for cultural effect. In Proceedings

of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 600--607). Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States: ACM Press.

Gaver, W., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Design: Cultural probes. interactions, 6(1), 21--29. Gaver, W. W., & Dunne, A. (1998). Projected realities: conceptual design for cultural effect. In

Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 600--607). Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States: ACM Press.

Giles, L. C., Glonek, G. F. V., Luszcz, M. A., & Andrews, G. R. (2005). Effects of social networks on 10 year survival in very old Australians: the Australian longitudinal study of aging. Journal of

Epidemiology and Community Health, 59, 574-579. Graf, B. (2001). Reactive navigation of an intelligent robotic walking aid. In 10th IEEE International

Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 353-358). Bordeaux, Paris, France.

Graf, B., & Hägele, M. (2001). Dependable Interaction with an Intelligent Home Care Robot. In ICRA-

Workshop on Technical Challenge for Dependable Robots in Human Environments. Graham, C., Cheverest, K., & Rouncefield, M. (2005). Whose Probe is it Anyway? In Workshop on

Appropriate Methods for Design in Complex and Sensitive Settings, OzCHI2005. Groenou, M. B. v. (1995). The proximate network. In C. P. M. Knipscheer, J. d. J. Gierveld, T. G. v.

Tilburg & P. A. Dykstra (Eds.), Living arrangements and social networks of older adults (pp. 115-129): VU University Press.

Grudin, J., & Pruitt, J. (2002). Personas, participatory design and product development: An infrastructure for engagement. In Participatory Design Conference 2002 (pp. 144-161). Pabl Alto.

Haigh, K. Z., & Yanco, H. A. (2002). Automation as Caregiver: A Survey Of Issues and Technologies. In AAAI Workshop Automation as Caregiver (pp. 39-53).

Hans, M., Graf, B., & Schraft, R. D. (2002). Robotic Home Assistant Care-O-bot: Past - Present - Future. In IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 380-385). Berlin, Germany: IEEE.

Hemmings, T., Crabtree, A., Rodden, T., Clarke, K., & Rouncefield, M. (2002). Probing the Probes. In 7th Biennial Participatory Design Conference (pp. 42-50). Malmo, Sweden: Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility.

Hirsch, T., Forlizzi, J., Hyder, E., Goetz, J., Kurtz, C., & Stroback, J. (2000). The ELDer project : social, emotional, and environmental factors in the design of eldercare technologies. In CM Conference

on Universal Usability (pp. 72-79). Arlington, Virginia, United States: ACM Press New York, NY, USA.

Hofmeester, K., Dunne, A., Gaver, W., Susani, M., & Pacenti, E. (1999). A modern role for the village elders. In CHI '99 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 43--44). Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: ACM Press.

Hom, J. (1996). Contextual Inquiry. Retrieved 02/09/2003, 2003, from http://jthom.best.vwh.net/usability/context.htm

Hughes, J., King, V., Randall, D., & Sharrock, W. (1993). Ethnography for System Design: A Guide [Working Paper]. In: COMIC-LANCS-2-4.

Hughes, J., King, V., Rodden, T., & Andersen, H. (1994). Moving Out from the Control Room: Ethnography in System Design. In CSCW 1994 (pp. 429 - 439). Chapel Hill: ACM Press.

Hughes, J., King, V., Rodden, T., & Andersen, H. (1995, April 1995). The Role of Ethnography in Interactive Systems Design. Interactions, 56-65.

Hulkko, S., Mattelmäki, T., Virtanen, K., & Keinonen, T. (2004). Mobile Probes. In NordiCHI 2004 (pp. 43-51). Tampere, Finland: ACM.

Hutchinson, H., Mackay, W., Westerlund, B., Bederson, B. B., Druin, A., Plaisant, C., et al. (2003). Technology probes: inspiring design for and with families. In Proceedings of the conference on

Human factors in computing systems (pp. 17-24). Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA: ACM Press. Intel. (2004). Exploratory Research. Retrieved November 2004, 2004, from

http://www.intel.com/research/prohealth/ Kaye, J., Levitt Mariah, K., Nevins, J., Golden, J., & Schmidt, V. (2005). Communicating intimacy one

bit at a time. In CHI '05 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 1529-1532). Portland, OR, USA: ACM Press.

Mackay, W., Riche, Y., & Labrune, J.-B. (2005). Communication Appliances: Shared Awareness for Intimate Social Networks. In ACM SIGCHI 2005 Workshop on Awareness Systems: Known

results, theory, concepts and future challenges. Portland, OR, US. Mackay, W. E. (1998). Triangulation within and across HCI disciplines.


37 / 48

Mackay, W. E. (2004). The interactive thread: exploring methods for multi-disciplinary design. Cambridge, MA, USA: ACM Press.

Mackay, W. E., & Fayard, A.-L. (1997). HCI, natural science and design: a framework for triangulation

across disciplines. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: ACM Press. Markopoulos, P., Bongers, B., Van Alphen, E., Dekker, J., Van Dijk, W., Messemaker, S., et al. (2006).

The PhotoMirror appliance: affective awareness in the hallway. Personal Ubiquitous Comput.,

10(2), 128-135. McGrath, J. E. (1982). Dilematics: The Study of Research Choices and Dilemmas. In J. E. McGrath

(Ed.), Judgment Calls In Research (pp. 69-102): Sage Publications INC. Morris, M., Lundell, J., Dishman, E., & Needham, B. (2003). New Perspectives on Ubiquitous

Computing from Ethnographic Study of Elders with Cognitive Decline. In A. K. D. e. al. (Ed.), UBICOMP2003 (pp. 227--242). Seattle, Washington: Springer Verlag.

Mynatt, E. D., Rowan, J., Craighill, S., & Jacobs, A. (2001). Digital family portraits: supporting peace of mind for extended family members. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors

in computing systems (pp. 333--340). Seattle, Washington, United States: ACM Press. Paulos, E., & Jenkins, T. (2005). Urban Probes: Encountering Our Emerging Urban Atmospheres. In

ACM SIGCHI (pp. 341-350). Portland, Oregon, US: ACM. Assistive Technology for Aging Population, (2004). Pollack, M. E., Brown, L., Colbry, D., McCarthy, C. E., Orosz, C., Peintner, B., et al. (2003).

Autominder: An intelligent cognitive orthotic system for people with memory impairment. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 44(3-4), 273-282.

Pollack, M. E., Brown, L., Colbry, D., Orosz, C., Peintner, B., Ramakrishnan, S., et al. (2002). Pearl: A mobile robotic assistant for the elderly. In AAAI Workshop on Automation as Caregiver.

Rialle, V., Nourry, N., & Hervé, T. (2001). An Experimental Health Smart Home and Its Distributed Internet-based Information and Communication System: First Steps of a Research Project. In V. P. e. al. (Ed.), MEDINFO 2001 (pp. 1479-1483). London, UK: IOS Press.

Riche, Y., & Mackay, W. (2005). PeerCare : Challenging the monitoring approach to care for the elderly. In British HCI 2005 Workshop on HCI and the Older Population. Edinburg, UK.

Roussel, N. (2001). Exploring new uses of video with videoSpace. In R. Little & L. Nigay (Eds.), EHCI'01, the 8th IFIP International Conference on Engineering for Human-Computer

Interaction (pp. 73-90): Springer. Roussel, N., Evans, H., & Hansen, H. (2004). MirrorSpace: using proximity as an interface to video-

mediated communication. In A. Ferscha & F. Mattern (Eds.), Pervasive 2004, the second

international conference on Pervasive Computing (Vol. 3001, pp. 345-350): Springer. Rowan, J., & Mynatt, E. D. (2005). Digital Family Portrait Field Trial: Support for Aging in Place.

Portland, Oregon, USA: ACM Press. Scharnberg, K. (2006). Family Watch : Distant Children Can Keep An Eye On Elderly Parents. Retrieved

3rd May 2006, 2006 Shklovski, I., Chung, Y.-C., & Adams, R. (2004). Robotic walker interface: designing for the elderly.

Vienna, Austria: ACM Press. Sixsmith, A. J. (2000). An evaluation of an intelligent home monitoring system. Journal of Telemedicine

and Telecare, 6(2), 63-72. Stein, R. (2005). Video robots redefine bedside manner. Retrieved 20-07-2005, 2005, from

http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2005/07/17/stat/doc42d307f01115e460218531.txt Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research (2nd ed.): Sage Publications. Tilburg, T. v., Groenou, M. B. v., & Thomése, F. (1995). Flow of Support. In C. P. M. Knipscheer, J. d. J.

Gierveld, T. G. v. Tilburg & P. A. Dykstra (Eds.), Living arrangements and social networks of

older adults (pp. 131-154): VU University Press. Tran, Q. T., & Mynatt, E. D. (2002). Cook’s Collage: Two Exploratory Designs. In New Technologies for

Families Workshop, Conference on Human Factors in Computer Systems. Vetere, F., Gibbs, M. R., Kjeldskov, J., Howard, S., Mueller, F. F., Pedell, S., et al. (2005). Mediating

intimacy: designing technologies to support strong-tie relationships. Portland, Oregon, USA: ACM Press.

Wada, K., Shibata, T., Saito, T., Sakamoto, K., & Tanie, K. (2005). Psychological and Social Effects of One Year Robot Assisted Activity on Elderly People at a Health Service Facility for the Aged. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Barcelona, Spain: IEEE.

Westerlund, B., Lindqvist, S., Mackay, W., & Sundblad, Y. (2003). Co-design methods for designing with and for families. In European Academy of Design Conference, Techné: The design wisdom. Barcelona.


38

Whitten, P., Collins, B., & Mair, F. (1998). Nurse and patient reactions to a developmental home telecare system. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 4(3), 152-160.

Wilson, D. (2004). Simultaneous Tracking & Activity Recognition (STAR) Using Many Anonymous,

Binary Sensors. Unpublished Proposal, Carnegie Mellon University. Wilson, L. S., Gill, R. W., Sharp, I. F., Joseph, J., Heitmann, S. A., Chen, C. F., et al. (2000). Building the

Hospital Without Walls: a CSIRO Home Telecare Initiative. Telemedecine Journal, 6(2), 275-281.

Wixon, D., Holtzblatt, K., & Knox, S. (1990). Contextual design: an emergent view of system design. Seattle, Washington, United States: ACM Press.

World Population Prospects: The 2004 Revision and World Urbanization Prospects: The 2003 Revision. (2005). Retrieved April 27th, 2005, 2005, from http://esa.un.org/unpp

Ziller, R. C. (1990). Photographing the self. Methods for observing personal orientations: Sage publications, Inc.


39 / 48

8.8.8.8. AAAAPPENDIPPENDIPPENDIPPENDICECECECESSSS

Appendix 1 : Poster for the British HCI 2005 Workshop on HCI and the Older Population 41

Appendix 2: Probes Postcards illustrations 42

Appendix 3: Probes Kit Booklet Distributed in the French User Study 43

Appendix 4: Issues in the deployment of mirrorSpace in participants’ homes 46

Appendix 5: Weekly View of the zebra study website 47

Appendix 6: Video View of the zebra study website 48

Appendix 7: Information Sheet, Inform Consent form and Ethical Review Form for the zebra study and the communication appliances study 49


40

Appendix 1 : Poster for the British HCI 2005 Workshop on HCI and the Older Population


41 / 48

Appendix 2: Probes Postcards illustrations

6

1 2

4

3 5


42

Appendix 3: Probes Kit Booklet Distributed in the French User Study

Activité 1 : Photos

A l’aide le l’appareil photo fourni dans le paquet, prenez des photos centrées sur votre maison et ses environs proches (jardin, pas de porte, etc.). Nous vous fournissons une série de 16 sujets à photographier dans votre maison. Vous n’avez pas à les faire dans l’ordre, mais essayer tant que possible d’en faire le maximum. Pour chaque photo, écrivez quelques mots pour nous l’expliquer : Une photo de vous.

Votre appareil préféré.

Votre appareil le plus difficile à utiliser.

Quelque chose qui vous gène.

Quelque chose qui vous fait rêver.

L'objet préféré de quelqu'un d'autre.

Ce que vous aimeriez changer.

Un endroit où vous aimeriez parler avec quelqu'un mais ne pouvez pas.

Ce que vous voyez par la fenêtre.

Quelque chose alors que vous vous ennuyez.

Quelque chose d'irritant.

Un objet que vous aimez bien montrer.

La première personne que vous rencontrez aujourd'hui (Date: __ / __ / ____ ).

Quelque chose d'intriguant.

Un objet qui change Etape 1.



Ce que vous montrez aux autres.

Ce que vous aimeriez montrer.

Ce que vous n’aimez pas montrer.

Pour les photos restantes, prenez chez vous les objets, lieux, situations, personnes dont vous aimeriez nous parler.


43 / 48

Activité 2 : Cartes Postales

Sur chaque carte postale se trouve une question à laquelle nous vous demandons de répondre en quelques phrases, en nous racontant l’histoire associée en une trentaine de mots.

Activité 3 : Placez vos contacts Sur la cible page suivante, veuillez lister vos connaissances en les plaçant selon le schéma suivant: au plus près du centre les personnes qui vous voyez souvent, les personnes que vous voyez moins souvent sur le cercle suivant, les personnes que vous voyez encore moins souvent sur le suivant, etc. Pour ce faire, dessinez un rond sur le cercle et notez-y le nom de la personne, puis sur la liste page qui suit, notez les détails sur la personne que vous venez de placer. Pour être aussi exhaustif que possible, essayez les techniques suivantes: Hier Qui ai-je rencontré? A qui ai-je téléphoné, de qui ai-je reçu des appels? Qui m'a écrit? La semaine dernière Qui ai-je rencontré? A qui ai-je téléphoné, de qui ai-je reçu des appels? Qui m'a écrit? Le mois dernier Qui ai-je rencontré? A qui ai-je téléphoné, de qui ai-je reçu des appels? Qui m'a écrit? Quels amis ou connaissances habitent: - Près de chez moi, à portée de marche? - Un peu plus loin, à porté de voiture, je peux aller chez eux dans l'heure? - Plus loin encore, il me faut longtemps pour m'y rendre. Ai-je bien placé mes amis proches? Ai-je bien placé les voisins avec qui j'entretiens un relation de confiance? Ai-je bien placé les membres de ma famille à qui je pense souvent? Avec qui je communique souvent?


44

Tous les Tous Jours les ans

Nom : Prénom :

Age approximatif : ans

A quelle catégorie pensez vous que cette personne appartient ? � Ami � Famille � Voisin � Connaissance � Autre :

Comment pourriez-vous vous rendre chez cette personne ? � à pied � à vélo � en voiture � en train � en avion

A quel moment l’avez vous rencontré ?

Comment communiquez vous ?

En quelques mots décrivez nous votre relation :


45 / 48

Appendix 4: Issues in the deployment of mirrorSpace in participants’ homes

Due to the particular aspects home studies, pre-test at the participants’ home were not available and we had to rely on tests realized in researchers’ homes. During the deployment, many unexpected problems occurred. The ISP provided new equipment with which researchers were not familiar with, adding set up time and mistakes. This new equipment was faulty; one of the power supplies was jamming FM radio frequencies and had to be replaced during a weekend. Overall the complete deployment failed due to network communication failures. Data transfer between the two users or between users and a server at the lab were highly unstable, very unreliable and resulted in serious drops in quality of communication. Despite many efforts and the intervention of ISP’s technician, the source of the disturbance could not be identified.


46

Appendix 5: Weekly View of the zebra study website


47 / 48

Appendix 6: Video View of the zebra study website


48

Appendix 7: Information Sheet, Inform Consent form and Ethical Review Form for the zebra study and the communication appliances study

Technology Probes echnology Probes echnology Probes

Documents