Social Theory as a Thinking Tool
for Empathic Design
Carolien Postma, Kristina Lauche,
Figure 1a
Pieter Jan Stappers
Showing a personal SMS message to a friend
is a way of communicating trust and friend-
ship. See Alex S. Taylor and Richard Harper,
“The Gift of the Gab?: A Design-oriented
Sociology of Young People’s Use of Mobiles,”
Computer Supported Cooperative Work 12:3,
(2003): 267-96.
Introduction
Figure 1b
Recent societal issues and socio-technological developments,
When faced with buying wine in the super-
including the mass adoption of real-time social media services,1 have
market, we often choose the bottle of wine
made “the social” (i.e., the relationality inherent in human existence)
from a nearly empty shelf, assuming it’s the
an essential topic for design. Despite the fundamentally social nature
best one. See Thomas Erickson and Wendy A.
Kellogg, “Social Translucence: An Approach
of life, most existing models intended to generate perspectives of
to Designing Systems that Support Social
users in design still focus on the individual. To support designers
Processes,” ACM Transactions on Computer-
in doing empathic design, we set out to find a possible conceptual
Human Interaction 7:1 (2000): 59-83.
framework that could serve as a “thinking tool” of the social. A
model that sensitizes designers toward both relationality and
Figure 1c
individuality in building creative understanding of users for
In a people study about baby care (see
section 5), dads with new-born children
design. In this paper, we review a number of possible frameworks
who were breast-fed, said they felt that
and describe our experiences in applying these frameworks in new
their bond with the child was rather remote,
product development (NPD) practice.
because they didn’t have any role in the
a
b
breast feeding. In case of bottle-feeding,
moms and dads would often feed the child in
turns, or even together.
Figure 1d
Sometimes my dad gives me a ride to the bus
station. When we are in a hurry, I jump into
the back seat of the car. My dad doesn’t like
that: He says it makes him feel as if he’s a
c
d
taxi driver.
Figure 1e
The table arrangement in a restaurant influ-
ences how guests will interact during dinner
and with whom. See William W. Gaver,
“Affordances for Interaction: The Social is
Material for Design,” Ecological Psychology
8:2 (1996): 111-29.
e
f
Figure 1f
In a previous people study, a senior couple
explained that every week, their friends would
put six eggs up for raffle during their dancing
classes. It was an exciting event, and all the
people would bring their empty egg boxes,
just in case...
© 2011 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
30
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
In this paper we use “the social” to denote the idea that
1 Contagious, “Most Contagious 2009,”
human activity is fundamental y social, as opposed to individual.
Contagious, www.contagiousmagazine.
Figure 1 presents six cases from daily life. A closer look at these
com (accessed December 19, 2009).
cases reveals that the social plays an important role in each of these
2 David Benyon, Phil Turner and
six cases, and that the social is more than just another flavor of
Susan Turner, “Designing Interactive
Systems: People, Activities, Contexts,
context: The social permeates our lives. This idea has been at the
Technologies” (Harlow: Pearson
core of computer-supported cooperative work but is only peripheral
Education Ltd, 2005).
in design and design research.2 The suggestion has been made in
3 Examples are: Richard Buchanan, “Design
the design research literature that design teams need to establish
Research and the New Learning,” Design
creative understanding of the social to develop products and
Issues 17:4 (Autumn, 1999): 3-23; Alison
Black, “Empathic Design, User Focused
services that delight users.3 However, most frameworks of user
Strategies for Innovation,” Proceedings
experience in design place the individual at the center and merely
of New Product Development, IBC
hint at the social, leaving design teams rather empty-handed,
Conferences, (1998): 1-8; and Jane Fulton
or at least ill-informed. Therefore, a theoretical framework is
Suri and Matthew Marsh, “Scenario
needed to sensitize designers toward the social in designing for
Building as an Ergonomics Method in
Consumer Product Design,”Applied
user experience.4
Ergonomics 31 (2000): 151-7.
Our work is situated in the context of empathic design in NPD
4 Katja Battarbee and Ilpo Koskinen,
practice.5 Empathic design approaches often suggest that members
“Co-experience: Product Experience as
of a design team (who may or may not be educated in design) adopt
Social Interaction,” Product Experience,
the role of people researchers and directly interact with users to
ed. Hendrik N. J. Schifferstein and
ensure that the user perspective is included in design. However,
Paul Hekkert (San Diego: Elsevier Ltd,
2008), 461.
in NPD practice, this interaction is not always feasible because
5 Jane Fulton Suri, “Empathic Design:
people research is often outsourced or conducted by experienced
Informed and Inspired by Other People’s
people researchers. Alternatively, design teams might be engaged
Experience,” Empathic Design, User
in analyzing and structuring the user experience data that have
Experience in Product Design, ed. Ilpo
been gathered in people research.6 Such an approach means that
Koskinen, Katja Battarbee and Tuuli
Mattelmäki (Edita: IT Press, 2003), 51;
designers need conceptual tools that enable them to think about
Ilpo Koskinen and Katja Battarbee,
the social without having to become social scientists themselves. To
“Introduction to User Experience and
guide multi-disciplinary design teams in making sense of user data
Empathic Design,” Empathic Design,
for design, we searched for a thinking tool of the social. We dove into
User Experience in Product Design, ed.
social theory, aiming not to develop a new model of the social, but
Ilpo Koskinen, Katja Battarbee and Tuuli
Mattelmäki (Edita: IT Press, 2003), 37;
to find a theoretical framework that design teams in practice could
and Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders and Uday
use as a thinking tool of the social in analyzing and structuring user
Dandavate, “Design for Experiencing:
experience data.
New Tools,” Proceedings of the First
The paper proceeds in three parts. First, we explain the
International Conference on Design
context of our search and identify search criteria. Second, we review
and Emotion (Delft: Delft University of
five types of existing frameworks: special effect theories, relational
Technology, 1999): 87-91.
6 Carolien E. Postma, Kristina Lauche
frameworks, catalogues, metaphors, and scaffolds of context. In the
and Pieter Jan Stappers, “Trialogues:
third part, we focus on activity theory as having the best fit with
A Framework for Bridging the Gap
design teams’ needs, and show how we used it within an empathic
Between People Research and Design,”
design project in industry.
Proceedings of Designing Pleasurable
Products and Interfaces (2009): 25-34.
7 Fulton Suri, “Empathic Design:
Criteria for Assessing Frameworks for Empathic Design in Practice
Informed and Inspired by Other People’s
Empathic design is a relatively new branch of user-centered
Experience,” 51; Koskinen and Battarbee,
design approaches that support design teams in building creative
“Introduction to User Experience and
understanding of users and their everyday lives for NPD.7 The
Empathic Design,” 37; Sanders and
approach is considered most valuable in the fuzzy front end of
Dandavate, “Design for experiencing:
New Tools,” 87-91.
NPD, when product opportunities need to be identified and product
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
31
concepts developed.8 Empathic design uses a variety of methods
8 Koskinen and Battarbee, “Introduction
and techniques, including design probes,9 generative techniques,10
to User Experience and Empathic
context-mapping,11 and experience prototyping.12 These methods
Design,” 37.
9 Tuuli Mattelmäki, Design Probes,
and techniques are typically design-led (as opposed to research-
Doctoral Thesis (Helsinki: University
led) in that they focus on understanding and transforming users’
of Art and Design Helsinki, 2006).
experiences.13 The idea is not to find the ultimate truth about people
10 Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders, “Generative
and their environment, but to build an understanding that enables
tools for codesigning,” in Collaborative
designers to propose possible new futures.14
Design, ed. Stephen A. R. Scrivener,
Based on a literature review, Postma, Zwartkruis-Pelgrim,
Linden J. Ball and Andree Woodstock
(London): Springer-Verlag, 2000), 3.
Daemen, and Du identified four principles of empathic design:
11 Froukje Sleeswijk Visser and others,
1. Addressing people’s rationality and their emotions in
“Contextmapping: Experiences from
product use in a balanced way by combining observations
Practice,” CoDesign 1:2 (2005): 119-49.
of people’s actions with interpretations of their thoughts,
12 Marion Buchenau and Jane Fulton Suri,
feelings, and dreams.
“Experience Prototyping,” in Proceedings
of Designing Interactive Systems (New
2. Making empathic inferences about prospective users, their
York: ACM Press, 2000): 424-33.
thoughts, feelings, and dreams, and their possible futures of
13 Katja Battarbee, Co-experience, Doctoral
product use.
Thesis (Helsinki: University of Art
3. Involving users as partners in NPD, so that researchers
and Design, 2004); Marc Steen, The
and designers can continually develop and check their
Fragility of Human-Centered Design,
creative understanding in dialogue with users.
Doctoral Thesis (Delft: Delft University of
Technology, 2008).
4. Engaging the design team members as multi-disciplinary
14 Esko Kurvinen, Prototyping Social Action,
experts in people research, thus encouraging researchers
Doctoral Thesis (Helsinki: University of
and designers to join forces in designing and conducting
Art and Design Helsinki, 2007).
people research to ensure that the users’ perspectives are
15 Carolien E. Postma and others, “Doing
included in NPD.15
Empathic Design: Experiences from
Industry” (under review, 2011).
16 Jane Fulton Suri, “The Experience
The first two principals have implications for the qualities of the
Evolution: Developments in Design
intended thinking tool of the social. The third and fourth principles
Practice,” The Design Journal 6:2
determine the context in which the thinking tool of the social will
(2003): 39-48; Peter Wright and John
be used. In NPD practice, direct interaction between users and all
McCarthy, “Empathy and Experience in
members of a design team is often not feasible. People research is
HCI,” in Proceedings of Human Factors
in Computing Systems (New York:
often either outsourced or conducted by experts who may not be
ACM Press, 2008): 637-46; Froukje
part of the design team; or it happens long before a design team is
Sleeswijk Visser, Remko Van der Lugt
formed. As a result of these approaches, the user experience data
and Pieter Jan Stappers, “Sharing User
need to be conveyed to the design team. The “rich” and “personal”—
Experiences in the Product Innovation
qualities of user data that are required for building creative
Process: Participatory Design Needs
Participatory Communication,” Creativity
understanding—are often lost in this process.16
and Innovation Management 16:1 (2007):
A possible solution to sharing rich user data in design research
35-45.
practice is to engage the design team in analyzing and structuring
17 Postma, Lauche and Stappers,
the data after they have been pre-structured and pre-analyzed by the
“Trialogues: A Framework for Bbridging
people researchers. By reading, interpreting, and explaining users’
the Gap Between People Research and
stories, team members make the data their own and build creative
Design,” 25-34.
18 Hugh Beyer and Karen Holtzblatt,
understanding of users’ experiences.17 To facilitate this process for
Contextual Design: Defining Customer-
designers, we searched for a conceptual framework as a thinking
centered Systems. (San Francisco):
tool of the social.
Morgan Kaufmann, 1998).
Five criteria formed the starting point of our search. The
19 Veesa Jääskö and Tuuli Mattelmäki,
first criterion was informed by empathic design’s objective that
“Observing and Probing,” in Proceedings
of Designing Pleasurable Products
understanding users’ experiences should drive the development of
32
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
people-centered products and services. Sensitizing design teams to
the social is not enough, however; designers also need to obtain a
Footnote 19 continued
sense of how their designs relate to the social in envisioning possible
and Interfaces (2003), 126-31; Froukje
futures of product use and in developing products and services that
Sleeswijk Visser, Bringing the everyday
life of people into design, Doctoral
fit into people’s social lives. Therefore, the framework needs to
Thesis (Delft: Delft University of
address the social in relation to the materiality of product use.
Technology, 2009).
The second criterion was informed by the constraints of
20 Benjamin B. Bederson and Ben
empathic design in NPD practice, in which not every design team
Shneiderman, The Craft of Information
Visualization: Readings and Reflections
member is experienced in people research. Because we potentially
(San Francisco): Morgan Kaufmann, 2003);
want to engage all team members in analyzing and structuring
Ben Shneiderman, “Foreword,” in Human-
user data, the framework should provide experienced people
computer Interaction and Management
researchers with (new) perspectives of the social, while also offering
Information Systems: Foundations.
designers “handles” for the social. Such “handles” include Beyer &
Advances in Management Innovation
Systems, Volume 5, ed. Ping Zhang, Ben
Holtzblatt’s work models in the contextual design approach.18 They
Shneiderman and Dennis F. Galletta
provide a limited set of concrete themes or perspectives along which
(Armonk): M. E. Sharpe, Inc., 2006), ix.
findings from people research can be organized. However, their
21 Postma, Lauche and Stappers, “Trialogues:
models fall short as a thinking tool of the social in empathic design
A Framework for Bridging the Gap
because contextual design mainly focuses on examining the rational
Between People Research and Design,”
25-34; Sleeswijk Visser, Bringing the
domain.19 Moreover, contextual design does not offer a theoretical
Everyday Life of People Into Design.
framework that designers (and researchers) may use as a thinking
22 Michael A. Hogg and Graham M.
tool in interpreting and explaining social practices.
Vaughan, Social Psychology, fourth
Three further criteria were taken from Bederson and
edition (London: Pearson Prentice
Shneiderman’s classification of theories and frameworks.20 They
Hall: 2005).
23 Ibid.
identify five categories: (1) descriptive frameworks that identify key
24 Hall (1966) introduced the term
concepts; (2) explanatory frameworks that explain relationships and
“proxemics” to refer to the study of
processes; (3) predictive frameworks that help predict performance
how people unconsciously structure their
of people, organizations, or economies; (4) prescriptive frameworks
immediate surroundings. One type of
that provide guidelines based on best practice; and (5) generative
spatial organization is “informal space,”
or “interpersonal distance.” Interpersonal
frameworks that support generating new ideas by providing ways of
distance is one way people use to
seeing what is missing and what needs to be done. The thinking tool
establish and maintain a desired level of
we propose requires a framework that is descriptive of the social and
involvement in social interaction, e.g., in
material, explanatory of relationships and processes, and generative
greeting, caressing or conversing. Hall
in terms of facilitating the identification of patterns and trends in
distinguished four distance zones, ranging
from very close to the individual to further
user data and of opportunities for NPD. The framework also might
away: An intimate zone, a personal zone,
be prescriptive in that it suggests ways of studying user experience
a social zone, and a public zone. Which
data; however, these ways should not interfere with designers’
zone people adopt depends on the context
established practices and cultures to such a degree that they keep
of the social encounter; the setting, social
designers from using the framework.21
relationship and environmental conditions.
In some situations, people are not able
to adopt their preferred social distance,
Examination of Possible Frameworks
for example, in an elevator or crowded
On the basis of the criteria identified, we examined frameworks in
train, which may lead to discomfort.
the literature and tried out candidate frameworks in NPD projects
See John R. Aiello, “Human Spatial
in industry. We began our search in social psychology and environ-
Behavior,” in Handbook of Environmental
Psychology, ed. Daniel Stokols and
mental psychology literature and then expanded the search to
Irwin Altman (New York: John Wiley &
the human-computer interaction (HCI) and computer-supported
Sons, 1987), 359; and Robert B. Bechtel,
cooperative work (CSCW) literature, where social frameworks
Environment and behavior: An introduc-
are commonly used in studying collaborative work. Frameworks
tion (Thousand Oaks): Pearson Prentice
Hall, 1997).
that, in terms of the criteria, appeared to be useful as a thinking
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
33
Table 1 Overview of the criteria that evolved in the search process.
Group
List of Criteria
1. The framework needs to address the social in relation to the material;
2. The framework needs to provide experienced people researchers with (new) perspectives of the
social, and offer designers handles to the social in analyzing and structuring user experience data;
Relational frameworks
2.1. The framework needs to provide handles of the social in terms of variables or ingredients that design
teams may use as anchor points in reading and interpreting user data;
3. The framework needs to point out key concepts of the social and material that design teams need to
pay attention to in building creative understanding of users’ experiences;
Special effect theories
3.1 The framework needs to be holistic in scope to support design teams in building broad understanding
of users’ experiences in the early phases of NPD;
4. The framework needs to offer design teams ways of interpreting and explaining user experience data
by revealing relationships and processes of the social and material;
5. The framework needs to facilitate seeing patterns and trends in user data, supporting design teams
in generating user insights and identifying opportunities for design.
Metaphors of the social
5.1 The framework needs to support teams in taking user experience data to a higher level of
understanding for identifying themes, patterns and trends in the data;
Metaphors of the social
6. The framework needs to offer multiple levels of description and explanation to support analysis of
user experience data in different phases of an empathic design process;
Catalogues of the social
7. The framework needs to be generally applicable to support design teams in transforming as well as
understanding users’ experiences;
Metaphors of the social
8. The framework should allow for use in a half-day session;
tool of the social in empathic design were tried out together with
Footnote 24 continued
multi-disciplinary design teams in industry. The researchers’ and
Tajfel and Turner (1979) introduced
the teams’ experiences in applying these frameworks led to new
Social Identity Theory, a theory of social
change that has been very influential in
criteria, which in turn focused the search process.
social psychology. The theory focuses on
The frameworks included in our study can be categorized
how social context affects self-concept
into five groups: (1) special effect theories, (2) relational frameworks,
and social behavior. People describe
(3) catalogues of the social, (4) metaphors of the social, and (5)
themselves differently and sometimes
scaffolds of context. An overview of the groups and our findings in
also behave differently in different
social contexts, for example, in front of
terms of new search criteria is presented in Table 1 and discussed
colleagues at work, or with family at
in the following paragraphs. The sequence in which the groups are
home. Social identity theorists distin-
discussed more or less delineates our search process.
guish two different classes of identity:
personal identity and social identity.
Special Effect Theories
Personal identity is the individual’s self-
The first category covers special effect theories that highlight one
concept derived from his/her attitudes,
memories, behaviors and emotions.
or a few concepts regarding behavior in social or material contexts.
Social identity is the individual’s
We found many of these theories in environmental psychology and
self-concept derived from perceived
in social psychology, ranging from mini-theories, which apply to
membership of social groups. People
specific phenomena, to more general theories, which apply to classes
have as many personal identities as
of behavior.22 An example of a mini-theory is the Ringelmann effect,
they have interpersonal relationships
that they feel engaged in. And they
which holds that an individual’s effort in a task decreases when
have as many social identities as
group size increases.23 Two examples of more general theories are
groups they feel they belong to. The
proxemics and social identity theory.24
34
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
Footnote 24 continued
In HCI and design, special effect theories have been
personal or social identity that is most
successfully used to envision how products and services might
salient at a given time shapes our
affect social practices and to confirm findings from people
concept of self and corresponding
research.25 In a design project about teens’ cliques, for example, the
behavior. See Hogg and Vaughan,
Social Psychology, fourth edition.
people researchers consulted literature about group structures to
25 Benyon, Turner and Turner, “Designing
determine whether they had overlooked roles in teens’ cliques.26
Interactive Systems: People, Activities,
In a project about baby care, the people researchers used literature
Contexts, Technologies.”
about parenting styles to develop criteria for segmentation of
26 Carolien E. Postma and Pieter Jan
families. However, we found that special effects theories were not
Stappers (2006), “A Vision on Social
particularly helpful thinking tools of the social in developing a
Interactions as the Basis for Design,”
CoDesign, 2:3, 139-55.
broad understanding of users’ experiences as a starting point for
27 Situated action studies the relation
identifying opportunities for product and service development,
between acting individuals and their
because they only address part of human behavior in context. This
changing environment. The term “situ-
finding led to a new search criterion: The framework should be holistic
ated action” was first introduced by Lucy
in scope to support design teams in building broad understanding of users’
Suchman in her book “Plans and Situated
Actions” (1987) to stress the emergent,
experiences in the early phases of NPD (criterion 3.1).
improvisatory character of people’s activi-
ties. The book is a critical response to the
Relational Frameworks
information-processing paradigm, which
Relational frameworks describe the nature of the relationships
models people as cognitive systems
between people and their environment. They are generic frameworks
that pursue action after having set goals
and having developed plans. Suchman,
in the sense of conceptual approaches or theoretical perspectives.
taking an ethnomethodological stance,
Three examples of relational frameworks are situated action,27
argued that the structure of activity is
behavior settings theory,28 and Gibson’s theory of affordances.29
not planned, but evolves in response to
In addition, actor network theory and Battarbee & Koskinen’s
real-world situations that are inherently
framework of co-experience may be seen as falling into this
dynamic. Suchman does recognize the
category.30
existence of plans, but merely as one
of several resources within the situa-
For social scientists, relational frameworks have provided
tion that may shape an activity. Goals,
new perspectives on studying and interpreting human behavior.
she argues, are defined in retrospect.
Stressing the improvisational nature of human action, situated action
Suchman uses the example of canoe-
invited researchers to study the moment-by-moment organization
ing in explaining the idea of Situated
of an activity in real settings. Behavior settings theory introduced
Action: “In planning a series of rapids in
a canoe, one is very likely to sit above
the idea of environmental units that direct human behavior and
the falls and plan one’s descent. (…) But,
prompted researchers to identify and study relations between extra-
however detailed, the plan stops short
individual patterns of behavior and settings that are specified in
of the actual business of getting your
time and place. The concept of affordances provided a lens to look
canoe through the falls. When it really
at relations between properties of an environment and individuals’
comes down to the details of responding
to currents and handling a canoe, you
history, abilities, and intentions.
effectively abandon the plan and fall
For designers, however, these relational frameworks are
back on whatever embodied skills are
generally more difficult to apply because they typically do not offer
available to you.” See Lucy A. Suchman,
“handles” of the social. They provide only very limited guidance as
Plans and situated actions: The problem
to what aspects of behavior and environment should be considered
of human machine communication
in studying social phenomena because the frameworks do not
(New York): Cambridge University Press,
1987); and Bonnie Nardi, “Studying
specify variables or ingredients of the social. That designers seek
Context: A Comparison of Activity Theory,
this guidance is nicely illustrated by the shift of meaning of Gibson’s
Situated Action Models and Distributed
concept of affordances in HCI and design, where an operational
Cognition,” Context and Consciousness:
redefinition has evolved that sees affordances as “opportunities
Activity Theory and human-computer
for action suggested by an object,” which is far removed from its
interaction, ed. Bonnie A. Nardi
(Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996), 69.
original meaning. We therefore concluded that the thinking tool of
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
35
the social should provide “handles” of the social, which are the variables
28 Behavior Settings theory focuses on the
or ingredients that design teams may use as anchors in reading and
relationship between extra-individual
interpreting user data (criterion 2.1).
behavior and environmental units.
From detailed field observations Barker
(1968) found that human behavior is
Catalogues of the Social
not randomly distributed across time
“Catalogues” in this case means the maps of people’s behavior in
and space; “the inhabitants of identical
their social and material contexts. Such maps often are developed on
ecological units exhibit a characteristic
the basis of personal experience and/or empirical research. Seminal
overall extra-individual pattern of
work in this regard is the concept of pattern language proposed by
behavior,” he argued (Barker, 1968). In
a school class, for example, teacher
Alexander, Ishikawa, and Silverstein.31 The book offers a typology
and students behave “school class.”
of solutions that architects might incorporate in the development
In the supermarket people, including
of towns and buildings. The typology is presented as a system
the teacher of the school class, behave
of patterns that describe relationships between people and their
“supermarket.” And during a meeting of
surroundings and that were developed based on years of experience
the teachers of the school, the teachers
behave “staff meeting.” Barker called
with building and planning. Each pattern, in essence, reports a
the physical-behavioral units “behavior
problem, the context in which the problem occurs, and a solution to
settings.” Behavior settings are “stable,
the problem. For example, in the context of designing a family home,
extra-individual units with great coercive
Alexander et al. suggest that architects may address the problem of
power over the behavior that occurs
creating quiet and private spaces for parents by designing the family
within them.” See Roger G. Barker,
home in such a way that the continuum of spaces where children live
Ecological Psychology: Concepts and
methods for studying the environment
and play does not include the parents’ realm.32
of human behavior (Stanford: Stanford
In HCI and CSCW, social scientists have seized the idea of a
University Press, 1968).
pattern language as a way to structure and document ethnographic
29 Gibson proposed an ecological
field data and to produce guidelines for design that transcend the
approach to perception. In his book
particularities of the data, but that are still grounded in the real
‘The Ecological Approach to Perception’
(1979), he described a new paradigm for
world.33 Crabtree, Hemmings, and Rodden, for example, have
understanding human activity in context,
developed a framework for identifying patterns of social action and
focusing not on the actor and (part of)
technology use in domestic settings.34 Martin, Rodden, Rouncefield,
his/her environment as independent
Summerville, and Viller have used patterns from ethnographic user
things, but rather on the relations
research to inform the development of computer systems.35
between actor and environment. He
For our goal of developing patterns for considering the
introduced the term “affordances” to
mean the full set of potential actions
social in empathic design, we had neither decades of experience
that an environment holds in store for a
from practice nor extensive field data to rely on. In addition,
particular actor. For example, a ladder
because patterns are context-specific, they might not be helpful in
affords an adult to climb up and down,
envisioning radically new situations of product and service use in
but it does not afford a baby to climb up
empathic design. A framework for the social in empathic design
and down. Information about affordances
is available to the actor’s senses.
needs to be generally applicable to various situations of product and
The actor’s attunement to particular
service use, including situations that do not yet exist.
affordances is determined by his/her
A possible solution to both issues is to take a “top-down”
needs and intentions, personal history
approach, rather than a “bottom-up” approach in developing
and context. See James J. Gibson, The
patterns. Kelley, Holmes, Kerr, Reis, Rusbult, and Van Lange’s “An
ecological approach to visual perception
atlas of interpersonal situations” is a good example of a pattern
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1979); and
Gerda Smets, Vormleer: De paradox
language that was developed using a top-down approach.36 They
van de vorm (Amsterdam: Uitgeverij
developed patterns by describing and analyzing common social
Bert Bakker, 1986). Several people
situations using one theoretical framework: interdependence theory.
have elaborated on Gibson’s concept of
The resulting atlas presents both the framework and the patterns.
affordances for understanding the social.
Kelley et al.’s atlas does not address the social in relation to the
Gaver, for example, introduced the term
“Affordances for Sociality” to
material, but the idea of combining both a framework and patterns
36
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
is interesting because it provides both the perspectives and the
Footnote 29 continued
handles to the social that we are looking for: It offers a thinking tool
refer to the possibilities offered by the
of the social that enables design teams to envision radically new
physical environment for social activity.
An example of affordance of sociality is
situations of product and service use that go beyond the scope of the
the table setting presented in figure 1.
context-specific patterns, as well as concrete examples of the social in
See Gaver, “Affordances for Interaction:
terms of patterns that help design teams think about the framework.
The Social is Material for Design,”
Such patterns could be developed once a suitable framework has
111-29. Valenti and Good used Gibson’s
been found.
ecological approach to perception as a
As a new search criterion, we conclude that the framework
framework for studying social interaction.
They introduced the term “Social
needs to be generally applicable to support design teams in both
Affordances,” meaning the possibilities
understanding and transforming users’ experiences (criterion 7).
for action that people offer one another,
and the role of other people in pointing
Metaphors of the Social: The Theatrical Metaphor
out new affordances. People may, for
The third category is metaphors. Metaphors are used for
example, afford one another comforting,
fighting, or play. See Stavros S.
understanding one concept in terms of another. In the field of
Valenti and James M. M. Good,
design, two important uses of metaphor may be distinguished: (1)
“Social Affordances and Interaction I:
metaphor as an expressive tool,37 of which the desktop metaphor
Introduction,” Ecological Psychology 3:2
in computing is a well-known example; and (2) metaphor as a
(1991): 77-98.
generative instrument, which means transferring the structure of one
30 Bruno Latour, Reassembling the Social:
concept to the other to develop new ways of seeing both concepts.38
An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005);
The latter sense of metaphorical thinking is also used in social
Katja Battarbee and Ilpo Koskinen,
sciences in interpreting and explaining social phenomena. Taylor
“Co-experience: User experience as
and Harper, for example, used Mauss’s metaphor of gift-giving to
interaction,” CoDesign 1:1 (2005): 5-18.
interpret their observations of teenagers’ text messaging practices.39
31 Christopher Alexander, Sara Ishikawa
Other examples of metaphors used as generative instruments in
and Murray Silverstein, A Pattern
Language (New York: Oxford University
social sciences are game metaphors, such as the prisoner’s dilemma
Press, 1977).
and the theatrical metaphor.40 For us, Goffman’s use of the theatrical
32 Ibid.
metaphor is of particular interest.
33 John Hughes and others, “Patterns
Gof man, a sociologist and important contributor to symbolic
of Home Life: Informing Design for
interactionism, is renowned for his dramaturgical analysis of social
Domestic Environments,” Personal and
encounters.41 In “The presentation of Self in everyday life,” he used
Ubiquitous Computing 4:1 (2000): 25-38.
34 Andy Crabtree, Terry Hemmings and
the theatrical metaphor as a framework in analyzing and explaining
Tom Rodden, “Pattern-based Support for
the structure of social encounters, viewing the world as a stage,
Interactive Design in Domestic Settings,”
people as actors, and social interaction as drama.42 The metaphor
in Proceedings of the 4th Conference
prompts questions such as: Who is the performer, and who is the
on Designing Interactive Systems (New
audience? What is front stage, and what is back stage? What does
York: ACM Press, 2002): 265-76.
35 David Martin and others, “Finding
the décor look, hear, smell, and feel like? What are the plot outline
patterns in the fieldwork,” in Proceedings
and the run time of the performance? Which tools of expression are
of the 7th Conference on European
used in the performance, and for which goal? What are the (social)
Conference on Computer Supported
roles of the performers? What are the performers’ motivations,
Cooperative Work (Norwell:
emotions, beliefs, and attitudes in relation to the performance?
Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001),
How are the performers’ behaviors on stage different from their
39-58; David Martin and others,
“Patterns of Interaction: A Pattern
behaviors backstage?
Language for CSCW,” www.comp.
Examining metaphors on the basis of literature suggests
lancs.ac.uk/research/projects (accessed
that Goffman’s framework would be an excellent thinking tool of
August 4, 2010).
the social for empathic design: The framework is holistic in scope;
36 Harold H. Kelley and others, An atlas of
identifies key concepts and ingredients of the social and material
interpersonal situations (Cambridge UK:
Cambridge University Press, 2003).
(e.g., “front stage-back stage” and “tools of expression”); and
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
37
Third, the theatrical metaphor required too much time to
Footnote 42 continued
understand and apply in the context of a user insights session. The
presents himself and his activity to
team members of the third project indicated that they preferred not
others, attempts to guide and control
the impressions they form of him, and
to use the metaphor because they thought it was too difficult to
employs certain techniques in order to
grasp within the time frame of an insights session. Similarly, in the
sustain his performance, just as an actor
first project, the metaphor often put team members out of their depth
presents a character to an audience,”
in a way that paralyzed the creative process. Three new criteria were
he explains. See Erving Goffman, The
drawn from these findings:
presentation of Self in everyday life
• The framework needs to offer multiple levels of description
(New York): Anchor Books Doubleday,
1959); and Joel M. Charon, Symbolic
and explanation to support analysis of user experience data in
Interactionism: An introduction, an
different phases of an empathic design process (criterion 6).
interpretation, an integration, eight
• The framework should support teams in taking user experience
edition (Englewood Cliffs): Pearson
data to a higher level of understanding for identifying themes,
Prentice Hall, 2004. Important concepts
patterns, and trends in the data (criterion 5.1).
of the metaphor include:
• Performance – In their performance, the
• The framework should be applicable within a limited time, such
performers consciously or unconsciously
as a half-day session (criterion 8).
project their roles and their definition
of the situation to the audience. The
Scaffolds of Context: Activity Theory
audience observes the performance and
Our search concluded with activity theory (AT). AT is a framework
makes inferences about the performers
for describing and explaining the structure, development, and
(e.g., their motives, emotions, beliefs,
attitudes) and the performers’ definition
social-cultural context of people’s activities. The framework points
of the situation. The roles of performer
out concepts of the social and the material that we need to take into
and audience may switch continuously.
account in developing an understanding of the what, how, and
• Location – Front stage is where the
why of people’s behavior in their social-cultural context.43 It spurs
performance takes place and both
questions such as: What is the activity? Who are the people involved
performers and audience are present.
Back stage is where the performers are
in the activity? Why do they do the activity (i.e., what is their
present, but the audience is not. Here
objective)? What actions and operations do they do in pursuing the
the performers can relax and behave out
objective? What tools do the people use in achieving the objective?
of character. The waiter of a restaurant
How do these tools mediate their activity? What roles do the people
(i.e., performer), for example, may be
have in pursuing the objective? How do the people work together in
very polite and charming in front of the
the activity; what are their rules, norms, and procedures? How does
customer who complains about the food
(i.e., audience). But once back in the
the activity develop over time?
kitchen (i.e., back stage), the waiter and
his colleague may imitate the customer
Activity Theory in a Nutshell
and make fun of him. Note that the back
Although called a theory, AT is best described as paradigm of human
stage in one performance could be the
activity.44 AT has its roots in early twentieth century Russia, where
front stage in another performance.
In the example, the waiter and his
its first foundations were laid by Lev Vygotsky in developing his
colleague in the kitchen also perform in
cultural-historical psychology.45 AT was further developed into a
front of each other.
conceptual framework by his colleague, Alexei Leont’ev.46 Only in the
• Script – Prescribes the performance:
early 1980s, after seminal work on AT had been published in English,
What happens to whom, when, where,
did the conceptual framework become known internationally. In
how and why? How is tension built up?
1987, Yrjö Engeström presented a framework of human activity in a
When does the scenery change?
• Tools of expression – Vehicles for
social-cultural context that builds on Leont’ev’s AT.47
conveying signs that the performers,
Two fundamental ideas lie at the heart of AT: (1) ”Unity of
either or not consciously, use in their
consciousness and activity,” which is the idea that the human mind
performance. There are three types of
can only be understood in the context of people’s interaction with
tools: appearance tools, e.g., clothing,
posture, age; behavior tools, e.g., facial
expressions, attitude and gestures;
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
39
transform in the activity (e.g., the stone that a sculptor is shaping)
and the objective that one is aiming to achieve (e.g., the sculpture
that the artist has in mind while shaping it).50 Mark and Laura’s
object of baby care is a healthy and happy baby Roos. Mark and
Laura’s community of baby care includes their parents, their close
friends Bram and Marije, the daycare center, and the child health
center. The concept of object-orientedness helps us to develop
understanding of the ultimate “why” of their actions in caring for
baby Roos.
Note that from an AT perspective, exploratory design
research should not be about uncovering people’s latent needs,
but about following objects that motivate people’s activities. This
perspective may shed a different light on the development of
tools and techniques that are frequently used in empathic design,
such as design probes,51 generative techniques,52 and experience
prototyping.53
The second concept is activity hierarchy. An activity can be
deconstructed into actions and lower-level operations. Actions
(similar to “tasks” in HCI) are directed toward goals (e.g.,
constructing a sentence to convey a message). Actions and goals
are conscious. Operations, meanwhile, are routinized or automated
behavioral routines and are typically unconscious (e.g., typing, or
switching gears when driving). Caring for baby Roos involves both
actions and operations, including singing a lullaby, changing her
diapers, taking her to the health center, and getting up at night to
feed her.
The levels of an activity are not fixed. Actions may become
automatic operations, and operations may become conscious actions.
In the case of Mark and Laura, for example, changing diapers used
to be a conscious action, but then it gradually turned into a routine
operation with practice. At one point, the operation of changing
diapers had become a conscious action again when Mark had
mistakenly bought diapers that are fastened in a different way.
The third concept is internalization and externalization. AT
distinguishes between internal, mental activities and external
49 Engeström, “Expansive Learning at
activities and argues that one cannot be understood without the
Work: Toward an Activity Theoretical
Reconceptualization,” 133.
other because they transform and influence one another.54 External
50 Victor Kaptelinin, “The Object of Activity:
activities become internalized when people learn to do an activity
Making Sense of the Sense-Maker,”
in the head without using any physical aids. To illustrate, Mark
Mind, Culture and Activity 12:1 (2005):
and Laura initially needed to figure out what made Roos cry. After
4-8; Yrjö Engeström and Frank Blackler,
a few weeks, they started to recognize and distinguish her cries
“On the Life of the Object,” Organization
12:3 (2005): 307-30.
and immediately knew what action to take. Internal activities are
51 Mattelmäki,
Design Probes,
externalized when an activity is too difficult to do without physical
Doctoral Thesis.
aids, when the activity does not turn out right, or when people need
52 Sanders, “Generative tools for
to coordinate the activities in working together. For example, Roos
codesigning,” 3-12.
was ill and wouldn’t stop crying, despite all efforts to comfort her.
53 Buchenau and Fulton Suri, “Experience
Prototyping,” 424-33.
54 Vygotsky, Thought and Language.
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
41
At first, Mark and Laura did not understand what was wrong; they
again needed to figure out why Roos was crying and what action
to take.
55 Kaptelinin and Nardi, Acting with
Technology 2006; Kaptelinin, Nardi
The fourth concept is mediation. People’s activities are
and Macaulay, “The Activity Checklist:
mediated by artifacts, the division of labor, and rules. All three form
A tool for representing the ‘space’
more durable structures that persist across activities, time, and place.
of context,” 27-39; Kuutti, “Activity
The durable structures shape activities and at the same time are
Theory as a potential framework for
developed and transformed in activities. They reflect the experiences
human-computer interaction research,”
17; Engeström, “Expansive Learning at
of others who have pursued similar objectives or goals. Artifacts, or
Work: Toward an Activity Theoretical
“tools,” are thinking tools as well as physical tools that the subject
Reconceptualization,” 133-56; Nardi,
uses in pursuing his/her object. Mark and Laura’s tools of baby care
“Studying Context: A Comparison of
include a comforting lullaby, Roos’ bedroom, her favorite teddy
Activity Theory, Situated Action Models
bear, and a playpen. Rules refer to implicit and explicit norms and
and Distributed Cognition,” 69-102.
conventions that govern the relationship between the subjects and
56 Susanne Bødker, “Applying Activity
Theory to Video Analysis: How
their community. For example, the child health care center, which
to Make Sense of Video Data in
is part of Mark and Laura’s community of baby care, advised Mark
Human-computer Interaction,” in Context
and Laura to build up a strict day routine for the baby that follows a
and Consciousness: Activity Theory
sequence of four actions: feeding, playing, sleeping, and taking time
and Human-computer Interaction, ed.
for yourself. Mark and Laura are now trying to develop and adhere
Bonnie A. Nardie (Cambridge: MIT
Press, 1996), 147; Kuutti, “Activity
to such a routine. Division of labor is the organization of the subjects
Theory as a Potential Framework for
and their community in terms of roles and responsibilities. Laura
Human-computer Interaction Research,”
usually brings Roos to bed. She tries to establish a bedtime routine
17; Bonnie Nardi, “Activity Theory and
by feeding Roos upstairs just before bedtime. Mark thinks it is too
Human-computer Interaction Research,”
much trouble to feed Roos upstairs, so he leaves this up to Laura. In
in Context and Consciousness: Activity
the meantime he does some household activities.
Theory and human-computer interaction,
ed. Bonnie A. Nardi (Cambridge: MIT
The fifth concept is historicity and development. Activities
Press, 1996), 7.
change and develop over long periods of time, and understanding
57 Examples are: Patricia Collins, Shilpa
an activity requires tracing how the activity has developed in the
Shukla and David Redmiles, “Activity
past. Contradictions (or tensions) within or between activity systems
Theory and System Design: A View From
are sources of change and development.55 In Mark and Laura’s case,
the Trenches,” Computer Supported
Cooperative Work 11:1 (2002): 55-80;
a contradiction between subjects and community led to a change of
Morten Fjeld and others, “Physical
action: Mark and Laura changed Roos’ sleeping routine after friends
and Virtual Tools: Activity Theory
pointed out that Roos may get used to sleeping in her parents’
Applied to the Design of Groupware,”
bedroom and may not learn to sleep on her own.
Computer Supported Cooperative Work
11 (2002): 153-80; and Kristina Lauche,
AT as Thinking Tool of the Social for Empathic Design
“Collaboration Among Designers:
Analysing an activity for system
Prominent researchers in HCI and CSCW, including Suzanne Bødker,
development,” Computer Supported
Kari Kuutti, Victor Kaptelinin, and Bonnie Nardi, have propagated
Cooperative Work 14 (2005): 253-82.
AT as a framework for HCI research and interaction design.56 AT
58 For example: Mervi Hasu, Critical
has been used in a number of cases to analyze ethnographic data
Transition from Developers to Users,
and formulate design requirements for social computing.57 Some
Doctoral Thesis (Helsinki: University
of Helsinki, Department of Education,
colleagues of Engeström have also used AT to study design practice
Center for Activity Theory and
and the effect of products on people.58 In both design research
Developmental Work Research, 2001);
and design practice, however, AT is still relatively unknown. Yet
and Sampsa Hyysalo, Uses of innovation:
our examination of the literature suggests that AT could be a very
Wristcare in the practices of engineers
powerful thinking tool of the social for doing empathic design in
and elderly, Doctoral Thesis (Helsinki:
NPD practice:
University of Helsinki, Faculty of
Behavioral Sciences, 2004).
42
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
• AT addresses the social in relation to the material (criterion
1). Unlike most theories in psychology, the framework
accounts for artifacts. And unlike many approaches in
the human factors discipline, the framework addresses
social practice, as well as individual behavior.59 Using AT
could therefore help design teams to get a sense of how the
products they design relate to people’s social practices.
• The framework identifies components of the social and
the material (e.g., division of labor and rules) that design
teams can use as anchors in reading and interpreting user
experience data (criterion 2.1). As studies in HCI and
CSCW have demonstrated, AT also provides experienced
people researchers with (new) perspectives of the social in
analyzing and structuring user data (criterion 2).60
• AT provides a comprehensive framework that emphasizes
key concepts of the social and the material that design
teams need to pay attention to in structuring and analyzing
user experience data (e.g., mediation and object-orient-
edness) (criteria 3 and 3.1).
• The framework offers design teams ways of interpreting
and explaining user experience data by revealing
relationships and processes, such as the dynamic levels of
an activity, historicity and development, and internalization
and externalization (criterion 4).
• AT supports design teams’ efforts to take user experience
data to a higher level of understanding and to identify
themes, patterns, and trends in the data. The idea of contra-
59 Frank Blackler, “Knowledge, Work
dictions can also help to identify opportunities for product
and Organizations: An Overview and
and service design (criteria 5 and 5.1).
Interpretation,” Organization Studies 16:6
• AT offers three levels of description and explanation (i.e.,
(1995): 1021-46; Yrjö Engeström, “Activity
theory as a framework for analyzing and
activity level, action level, operation level), supporting
redesigning work,” Ergonomics 43:7
design teams in building broad understanding of users’
(2000): 960-74.
experiences in the early phases of NPD, as well as more
60 Examples are: Bødker, “Applying
in-depth understanding in later phases of NPD (criterion 6).
Activity Theory to Video Analysis:
• Design teams can apply AT in building creative
How to Make Sense of Video Data in
understanding of various activities and contexts, including
Human-computer Interaction,” 147-74;
Collins, Shukla and Redmiles, “Activity
future situations of product and service use (criterion 7).
Theory and System Design: A View From
the Trenches,” 55-80; and Phil Turner,
The only criterion that AT does not meet is that of allowing for use
Susan Turner and Julie Horton, “From
under the time constraint of a half-day session (criterion 8). AT is
Description to Requirements: An Activity
often considered hard to learn and difficult to put into practice.61
Theoretic Perspective,” Proceedings
of the International ACM SIGGROUP
Given this reputation, we cannot expect design teams in practice
Conference on Supporting Group Work
to understand and use AT in a way that social scientists do. Thus,
(New York: ACM Press, 1999), 286-95.
the framework needs to be translated into more intuitive ways of
61 Nardi, “Activity Theory and Human-
building creative understanding of users’ experiences for design. In
computer Interaction Research,” 7;
the next section, we present an example of how we applied AT in
Benyon, Turner and Turner, “Designing
an NPD project.
Interactive Systems: People, Activities,
Contexts, Technologies.”
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
43
(3) by developing exercises that addressed concepts and components
of the activity system. For example, in one exercise about mediation,
the designers were asked to compare the things (or “artifacts”) that
used to help them fall asleep when they were young with the things
that helped the baby fall asleep. Each of the five exercises in the kit
addressed different concepts and components of AT.
The designers worked on the preparation kits individually
for five days (phase D). A week later, the team members partic-
ipated in a collective insights session aimed at developing shared
understanding of baby care as a starting point for identifying
opportunities for technology and concept development. During the
session, the designers first discussed their observations and findings
from working on the preparation kits. Then they created maps of
parents’ current situations by structuring their observations and
findings on posters, and labeling groups of findings with themes.
Finally, they used the maps in generating ideas about possible
futures of baby care.
Findings from Using Activity Theory in the Baby Care Project
Trying out AT as a thinking tool of the social in the baby care project
revealed four important findings. In this section, we discuss these
findings and the implications for future projects.
Finding 1 – AT gave the designers, as well as the people researchers,
a platform for structuring, discussing, and sharing the rich user experience
data. In the analysis phase, using AT as a thinking tool in structuring
and analyzing the user data did not lead to many new or different
insights from the affinity diagramming approach. However,
we in the people researcher role felt that the framework greatly
enhanced the analysis process. We identified three advantages of
using AT: First, the basic concepts of the framework provided fresh
perspectives on how the data could be structured and interpreted.
For example, the concept of activity hierarchy raised questions of
where baby care and the actions involved in it begin and end. The
concept of object-orientedness required considering the parents’
long-term objectives of caring for their babies. And the idea of
contradictions prompted us to discuss the essence of the dilemmas of
baby care that parents face in everyday life. Second, the framework
provided a structured approach to organizing the user data. Having
structured the data using Engeström’s model of an activity system
facilitated identifying patterns and trends in the user data, and
sharing the user data with the design team. And third, AT offered a
structure for bringing in special effect theories, enabling us to specify
findings and insights.
In the communication phase, the design team implicitly used
AT as a thinking tool in reading and interpreting the user data.
The first success was that nearly all the designers worked on the
preparation kit. During the insights session, the components of the
46
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
activity system model were frequently used as anchor points in
discussing and structuring observations and findings. Components
were reflected in themes that were generated by the design team,
such as “Rituals help us to handle things we don’t like” (artifacts). And
in discussing the themes, team members noticed, for instance, how
parents’ communities could play a central role in positioning their
future product.
Finding 2 – It was difficult to implement and use AT in an integral
way. We agree with Kaptelinin that the strength of AT is in its
integration of concepts and components: When a design team uses
only part of the framework (e.g., the components of AT) and simply
ignores the rest, the team’s chances of overlooking opportunities and
constraints for design are likely to increase.65 But implementing and
using AT in an integrated way was difficult in the baby care project.
In the analysis phase, one concept was not used, and one
principle was used differently. As people researchers, we did not
use the concept of internalization and externalization. Internalization
and externalization processes were touched upon in parents’ stories
about baby care, but detailed analyses of these processes were
not needed at this stage for understanding the overall “what”
and “why” of baby care, and thus were omitted to save time.
We expect the concept of externalization and internalization to be
more useful in later stages of NPD, when product or service concepts
are developed.
The concept of historicity and development was used
differently. Rather than conducting a longitudinal field study,
which would not have been possible given the constraints of the
project, changes of activity systems were traced through how people
experienced them. However, the design team was able to learn about
development of baby care in later phases of the project, when people
studies were conducted that involved the same parents who had
participated in the exploratory people study.
In the communication phase, only one of five concepts of AT
surfaced in the designers’ observations and findings—namely, the
idea of contradictions within and between activity systems. One
designer observed that a couple had different parenting styles (or
rules): “Gert is rational. He reads books about baby care. Jolanda is more
intuitive, non-scientific,” he explained. And, looking at the division
of labor, another designer noted, “Laura has difficulties sharing tasks
with Mark.” The other four concepts, however, were not explicitly
addressed in the designers’ findings and discussions. Either the
designers did not use these concepts in generating findings, or they
65 Victor Kaptelinin, “Computer-mediated
used them implicitly.
Activity: Functional Organs in Social and
In future projects, designers and people researchers could
Developmental Contexts,” Context and
collaborate in a similar way as in the baby care project to ensure that
Consciousness: Activity Theory
the concepts and components of AT are integrally used in building
and Human-computer Interaction, ed.
creative understanding. However, the risk of this approach is that
Bonnie A. Nardi (Cambridge: MIT Press,
1996), 45.
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
47
designers might start using only part of the framework (e.g., the
components of the framework) in the belief that this one part is
the framework. A more profound approach would be to introduce
the components and the concepts of AT as inseparable parts of a
whole. This means that AT needs to be translated as an integrated
system for design, and not as a set of individual components and
concepts, as done here. The challenge is to find such a translation
of AT for design.
Finding 3 – The structure of the preparation kit did not support
drawing “the big picture.” In evaluating the insights session, the
team applauded the overall process followed in sharing the user
experience data. The team members were happily surprised by
both the quality and number of themes they had generated, in
comparison to their normal professional practice. They thought the
themes were “concrete” in that the themes provided clear starting
points for ideation. Most of the critical comments concerned the
preparation kit. The team members explained that the components
of the activity system had been useful in organizing the raw data
in the kit, but that it had been difficult to “get the full picture” of the
families and baby care because the components had been revealed
over time. The “full picture” had emerged only in discussing and
structuring observations and findings during the insights session.
In future projects, the team members would prefer an overview of
the families and baby care as an introduction to the preparation kit.
Finding 4 – Emotions are at the forefront of empathic design
but are rather obscured in AT. A more general concern that as people
researchers we noticed was the framework’s lack of attention to
the emotional domain. Empathic design stresses that rationality
and emotions both need to be addressed in building creative
understanding, but in AT, emotions are only implicitly addressed
in the concept of object-orientedness.66 When introducing AT as a
thinking tool in future projects, the role of emotions in object-orient-
edness must be further explicated to ensure that they are sufficiently
addressed in the analysis and communication of user data.
Conclusion
This paper reported our search for a theoretical framework that
people researchers and designers could use as a thinking tool of
the social in structuring and analyzing user experience data in
empathic design practice. We examined a variety of frameworks on
the basis of existing literature and then experimented with candidate
frameworks in NPD practice.
We identified eight criteria for assessing the usefulness
of frameworks for empathic design practice. Although the list of
criteria is not exhaustive, it does help us to draw attention to aspects
that researchers and designers need to consider when selecting a
framework for analyzing user experience data.
66 Kaptelinin and Nardi, Acting
with Technology.
48
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
The search process yielded five groups of frameworks: special
effect theories, relational frameworks, catalogues, metaphors, and
scaffolds of context. We found activity theory, as a scaffold of context,
to be the best fit between design teams’ needs and the frameworks’
offerings. AT is different from many other frameworks we studied
in that it transcends dichotomies between mind and world, and
between individual and social. Moreover, AT provides “handles” of
the social, as well as perspectives of the social, enabling designers
and experienced people researchers to join forces in analyzing user
experience data.
Testing AT as a thinking tool of the social in NPD practice, we
found that it provides designers, as well as people researchers, with
a platform for structuring, discussing, and sharing user experience
data. The study also revealed two findings that pose important
challenges for future research. First, AT addresses emotions merely
implicitly, whereas emotions are at the forefront of empathic design.
Thus, the role of emotions in AT needs to be further explicated when
using AT as a thinking tool in future empathic design projects. And
second, we translated AT for design in terms of a set of individual
concepts and components, but the actual strength of AT is in its
integration of concepts and components. In future projects, the
framework needs to be translated as an integrated system so that
designers can use the framework to its full potential.
Acknowledgements
This research was partly funded by Philips Research Europe. We
thank Elly Zwartkruis-Pelgrim and Boris de Ruyter for valuable
comments and advice. We also express our thanks to the project
teams for collaborating in the case studies, and to the families for
participating in our people research.
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 1 Winter 2012
49