|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
![]() We describe a new method for use in the process of co-designing technologies with users called technology probes. Technology probes are simple, flexible, adaptable technologies with three interdisciplinary goals: the social science goal of understanding the needs and desires of users in a real-world setting, the engineering goal of field-testing the technology, and the design goal of inspiring users and researchers to think about new technologies. We present the results of designing and deploying two technology probes, the messageProbe and the videoProbe, with diverse families in France, Sweden, and the U.S. We conclude with our plans for creating new technologies for and with families based on our experiences. ![]() Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references. 4 Druin, A. (2002). The Role of Children in the Design of New Technology. Behaviour and Information Technology, 21(1), pp. 1--25. 5 Dunne, A. & Raby, F. (2001) Design Noir: The Secret Life of Electronic Objects. Switzerland: Birkhauser. 6 Gaver, W. (2002). Designing for Homo Ludens. i3 Magazine, June (2002), pp. 2--5. 8 Hemmings, T., Crabtree, A., Rodden, T., Clarke, K. & Rouncefield, K. (2002). Probing the Probes. Proc. of PDC 2002. CPSR, pp. 42--50. 10 Huizinga, J. (1950). Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture. Boston: The Beacon Press. 11 Hutchinson, H., Plaisant, C. & Druin, A. (2002). Case Study: A Message Board as a Technology Probe for Family Communication and Coordination. Position Paper, Workshop on New Technologies for Families, CHI '02, http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/interliving/chi02. 12 Interbind (2002), http://www.interbind.com. 13 Interliving (2002), http://interliving.kth.se. 14 Java Shared Data Toolkit (2002), http:// java.sun.com/products/java-media/jsdt/index.html. 16 Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V. & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet Paradox Revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), pp. 49--74. 18 Mackay, W. (1990). Users and Customizable Software: A Co-Adaptive Phenomenon. Ph.D. Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 22 Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone. New York: Simon & Schuster. 25 Shellenbarger, S. (2001). Work & Family: Americans Are Split on Impact of Technology on the Family. The Wall Street Journal, January 10, 2001. 26 Voida, A. & Mynatt, E. (2002). Grounding Design in Values. Position Paper, Workshop on New Technologies for Families, CHI '02, http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/interliving/chi02. 27 Westerlund, B. & Lindquist, S. (2002). Aesthetic Perspectives on Participatory Design in the InterLiving Project. Position Paper, Workshop on New Technologies for Families, CHI '02, http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/interliving/chi02. 28 Westerlund, B., Lindquist, S. & Sundblad, Y. (2001). Cooperative Design of Communication Support for and with Families in Stockholm - Communication Maps, Communication Probes and Low-Tech Prototypes. Proc. of Equator IRC Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing in Domestic Environments. ![]() ![]()
Primary Classification:
Additional Classification:
General Terms:
Keywords:
![]()
|