skip to main content
10.1145/1240624.1240789acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

How HCI interprets the probes

Published:29 April 2007Publication History

ABSTRACT

We trace how cultural probes have been adopted and adapted by the HCI community. The flexibility of probes has been central to their uptake, resulting in a proliferation of divergent uses and derivatives. The varying patterns of adaptation of the probes reveal important underlying issues in HCI, suggesting underacknowledged disagreements about valid interpretation and the relationship between methods and their underlying methodology. With this analysis, we aim to clarify discussions around probes, and, more importantly, around how we define and evaluate methods in HCI, especially those grounded in unfamiliar conceptions of how research should be done.

References

  1. Aley, E., Cooper, T., Graeber, R., Kerne, A., Overby, K., and Toups, Z. O. 2005. Censor chair. In Proc. MULTIMEDIA '05. NY: ACM Press, 922--929. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Amin, A. K., Kersten, B. T., Kulyk, O. A., Pelgrim, P. H., Wang, C. M., and Markopoulos, P. 2005. SenseMS. In Proc. MobileHCI '05, NY: ACM Press, 161--166. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Battarbee, K., Baerten, N., Hinfelaar, M., Irvine, P., Loeber, S., Munro, A., and Pederson, T. 2002. Pools and satellites. In Proc. DIS '02. NY: ACM Press, 237--245. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Battarbee, K., Soronen, A., and Mäyrä, F. 2004. Living in a zoo. In Proc. NordiCHI '04. NY: ACM Press, 373--376. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Blythe, M., Monk, A., and Park, J. 2002. Technology biographies. In CHI '02 Extended Abstracts. NY: ACM Press, 658--659. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Bødker, S., Kristensen, J. F., Nielsen, C., and Sperschneider, W. 2003. Technology for boundaries. In Proc. GROUP '03. NY: ACM Press, 311--320. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Candy, F. J. 2003. The fabric of society. In Proc. DPPI '03. NY: ACM Press, 28--33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Chavan, A. L. and Munshi, S. 2004. Emotion in a ticket. In CHI '04 Extended Abstracts. NY: ACM Press, 1544--1544. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Crabtree, A., Hemmings, T., Rodden, T., Clarke, K., Dewsbury, G., Hughes, J., Rouncefield, M. and Sommerville, I. (2002) "Sore legs and naked bottoms". Proc. DIRC Conference on Dependable Computing Systems, London: The Royal Statistical Society.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Desmet, P. and Dijkhuis, E. 2003. A wheelchair can be fun. In Proc. DPPI '03. NY: ACM Press, 22--27. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Dey, A. K. and de Guzman, E. 2006. From awareness to connectedness. In Proc. CHI '06. NY: ACM Press, 899--908. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Dindler, C., Eriksson, E., Iversen, O. S., Lykke-Olesen, A., and Ludvigsen, M. 2005. Mission from Mars. In Proc. IDC '05. NY: ACM Press, 40--47. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Dourish, P. 2006. Implications for design. In Proc. CHI '06. NY: ACM Press, 541--550. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Fitton, D, Chevherst, K., Rouncefield, M., Dix, A. and Crabtree, A. (2004) Probing Technology with Technology Probes. Paper presented at the Equator Workshop on Record and Replay Technologies.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Foucault, B. 2005. Designing Technology for Growing Families. Technology @ Intel Magazine. http://www.intel.com/technology/magazine/research/growing-families-0805.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Gaver, W. and Dunne, A. 1999. Projected realities. In Proc. CHI '99. NY: ACM Press, 600--607. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Gaver, B., Dunne, T., and Pacenti, E. 1999. Cultural probes. interactions 6, 1 (Jan. 1999), 21--29. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Gaver, W.W., Hooker, B., and Dunne, A. (2001). The Presence Project. London: Royal College of Art.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Gaver, W. W., Boucher, A., Pennington, S., and Walker, B. 2004. Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty. interactions 11, 5 (Sep. 2004), 53--56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Gaver, W. W., Bowers, J., Boucher, A., Gellerson, H., Pennington, S., Schmidt, A., Steed, A., Villars, N., and Walker, B. 2004. The drift table. In CHI '04 Extended Abstracts. NY: ACM Press, 885--900. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Gaye, L. and Holmquist, L. E. 2004. In duet with everyday urban settings. In Proc. New Interfaces For Musical Expression 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Hagen, P., Robertson, T., Kan, M., and Sadler, K. 2005. Emerging research methods for understanding mobile technology use. In Proc. CHISIG Australia 2005, 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Hemmings, T., Clarke, K., Crabtree, A., Rodden, T. and Rouncefield, M. (2002) Probing the Probes. In Proc. Participatory Design 2002, pp. 42--50.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Horst, W., Bunt, T., Wensveen, S., and Cherian, L. 2004. Designing probes for empathy with families. In Proc. Dutch Directions in HCI. NY: ACM Press, 15. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Howard, S. Kjeldskov, J., Skov, M.B., Garnæs, K., and Grünberger, O. 2006. Negotiating presence-in-absence. In Proc. CHI '06. NY: ACM Press, 909--921. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Hulkko, S., Mattelmäki, T., Virtanen, K., and Keinonen, T. 2004. Mobile probes. In Proc. NordiCHI '04. NY: ACM Press, 43--51. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Hutchinson, H., Mackay, W., Westerlund, B., Bederson, B. B., Druin, A., Plaisant, C., Beaudouin-Lafon, M., Conversy, S., Evans, H., Hansen, H., Roussel, N., and Eiderbäck, B. 2003. Technology probes. In Proc. CHI '03. NY: ACM Press, 17--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Isbister, K., Höök, K., Sharp, M., and Laaksolahti, J. 2006. The sensual evaluation instrument. In Proc. CHI '06. NY: ACM Press, 1163--1172. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Iversen, O. S., Kanstrup, A. M., and Petersen, M. G. 2004. A visit to the 'new Utopia'. In Proc. NordiCHI '04. NY: ACM Press, 171--179. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Iversen, O. S. and Nielsen, C. 2003. Using digital cultural probes in design with children. In Proc. IDC '03. NY: ACM Press, 154--154. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Jönsson, B., Svensk, A., Cuartielles, D., Malmborg, L., Schlaucher, P. . Mobility and learning environments: Engaging people in design of their everyday environments. http://www.certec.lth.se/doc/mobility1/MobilityLearningReport021215.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Kaye, J. 'J.' 2006. I just clicked to say I love you. In CHI '06 Extended Abstracts. CHI '06. NY: ACM Press, 363--368. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Kember, S., Cheverst, K., Clarke, K., Dewsbury, G., Hemmings, T., Rodden, T., and Rouncefield, M. 2003. Designing assistive technologies for medication tegimes in care settings. Universal Access in the Information Society, 2 (3), 235--242.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Kim, J., Lee, S., and Kim, S. 2006. Understanding users in consumer electronics experience design. In CHI '06 Extended Abstracts . NY: ACM Press, 189--194. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Kriglstein, S. and Wallner, G. 2005. HOMIE. In CHI '05 Extended Abstracts. NY: ACM Press, 2094--2098. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Kuiper-Hoyng, L. L. and Beusmans, J. W. 2004. Using home networks to create atmospheres in the home. In Proc. Dutch Directions in HCI. NY: ACM Press, 7--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Labrune, J. and Mackay, W. 2005. Tangicam. In Proc. IDC '05. NY: ACM Press, 95--102. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Lindström, M., Ståhl, A., Höök, K., Sundström, P., Laaksolathi, J., Combetto, M., Taylor, A., and Bresin, R. 2006. Affective diary. In CHI '06 Extended Abstracts. NY: ACM Press, 1037--1042.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Lundberg, J., Ibrahim, A., Jönsson, D., Lindquist, S., and Qvarfordt, P. 2002. The snatcher catcher. In Proc. NordiCHI '02. NY: ACM Press, 209--212. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Mackay, W. E. 2004. The interactive thread. In Proc. DIS '04. NY: ACM Press, 103--112. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Maldonado, H., B. Lee, and S. Klemmer. Technology for Design Education. In CHI '06 Extended Abstracts, 1067--1072. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Mamykina, L., Mynatt, E. D., and Kaufman, D. R. 2006. Investigating health management practices of individuals with diabetes. In Proc. CHI '06. NY: ACM Press, 927--936. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Mattelmäki, T., Battarbee, K., Empathy Probes. Paper presented at Participation and Design, Malmö 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Millen, D. R. 2000. Rapid ethnography. In Proc. DIS '00. NY: ACM Press, 280--286. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Murphy, J., Kjeldskov, J., Howard, S., Shanks, G., and Hartnell-Young, E. 2005. The converged appliance. In Proc. CHISIG of Australia, 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Newman, W. 1994. A preliminary analysis of the products of HCI research, using pro forma abstracts. In Proc. CHI '94. NY: ACM Press, 278--284. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Nilsson, M., Johansson, S., and Håkansson, M. 2003. Nostalgia. In CHI '03 Extended Abstracts. NY: ACM Press, 964--965. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Paulos, E. and Beckmann, C. 2006. Sashay. In Proc. CHI '06. NY: ACM Press, 881--884. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Paulos, E. and Jenkins, T. 2005. Urban probes. In Proc. CHI '05. NY: ACM Press, 341--350. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Plaisant, C., Druin, A., and Hutchinson, H. 2002. Technologies for families. In CHI '02 Extended Abstracts. NY: ACM Press, 938--939. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Rodden, T. and Benford, S. 2003. The evolution of buildings and implications for the design of ubiquitous domestic environments. In Proc. CHI '03. NY: ACM Press, 9--16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Roibás, A. C. and Johnson, S. 2006. Unfolding the user experience in new scenarios of pervasive interactive TV. In CHI '06 Extended Abstracts. NY: ACM Press, 1259--1264. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Sengers, P., and Gaver, B. (2006). Staying open to interpretation. In Proc. DIS '06, NY: ACM Press, 99--108. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Sengers, P., Liesendahi, R., Magar, W., Seibert, C., Müller, B., Joachims, T., Geng, W., Mårtensson, P., and Höök, K. 2002. The enigmatics of affect. In Proc. DIS '02. NY: ACM Press, 87--98. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Swallow, D., Blythe, M., and Wright, P. 2005. Grounding experience. In Proc. 2005 Conf. European Assoc. Cognitive Ergonomics. University of Athens, 91--98. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Vetere, F., Davis, H., Gibbs, M.R., Francis, P. and Howard, S. 2006. A magic box for understanding intergenerational play. In CHI '06 Extended Abstracts. NY: ACM Press, 1475--1480. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Vetere, F., Gibbs, M. R., Kjeldskov, J., Howard, S., Mueller, F., Pedell, S., Mecoles, K., and Bunyan, M. 2005. Mediating intimacy. In Proc CHI '05. NY: ACM Press, 471--480. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Voida, A. and Mynatt, E. D. 2005. Conveying user values between families and designers. In CHI '05 Extended Abstracts. NY: ACM Press, 2013--2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Wolf, T. V., Rode, J., Sussman, J., and Kellogg, W. (2006). Dispelling "design" as the black art of CHI. Proc. CHI 2006, NY: ACM Press, 521--530. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. How HCI interprets the probes

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '07: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2007
      1654 pages
      ISBN:9781595935939
      DOI:10.1145/1240624

      Copyright © 2007 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 29 April 2007

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '07 Paper Acceptance Rate182of840submissions,22%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader