skip to main content
research-article

Interaction design gone wild: striving for wild theory

Published:01 July 2011Publication History
First page image

References

  1. Rogers, Y., Connelly, K., Tedesco, L., Hazlewood, W., Kurtz, A., Hall, B., Hursey, J., and Toscos, T. Why it's worth the hassle: The value of in-situ studies when designing UbiComp. UbiComp 2007. J. Krumm et al., eds. LNCS 4717, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2007, 336--353. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Norman, D. Four (more) issues for cognitive science. Cognitive Science Technical Report No. 9001. Department of Cognitive Science, University of California, San Diego, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Rogers, Y. New theoretical approaches for human-computer interaction. Annual Review of Information, Science and Technology 38 (2004), 87--143.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Plowman, L., Rogers, Y., and Ramage, M. What are workplace studies for? Proc. of the 4th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1995, 309--324. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Kraut, R.E. Applying social psychological theory to the problems of group work. HCI Models, Theories, and Frameworks: Toward a Multidisciplinary Science. J. Carroll, ed. Morgan-Kaufmann, New York, 2003, 325--356.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Hutchins, E. Cognition in the Wild. MIT Press, Cambridge, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Winograd, T. and Flores, F. Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design. Ablex, New York, 1986. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Suchman, L. Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human-Machine Communication. Cambridge University Press, New York, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Dourish, P. Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Marshall, P., Hornecker, E. Hurtienne, J., and Rogers, Y. Uses and varieties of embodiment in HCI. In prep.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Robertson, T. Cooperative work and lived cognition: A taxonomy of embodied actions. Proc. of the 5th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1997, 205--220. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Antle, A.N. Embodied child computer interaction: Why embodiment matters. interactions 16, 2 (2009), 27--30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. McCarthy, J. and Wright, P. Technology as Experience. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M., and the ABC Research Group. Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart. Oxford University Press, New York, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Todd, P., Rogers, Y., and Payne, S. Nudging the trolley in the supermarket: How to deliver the right information to shoppers. International Journal on Mobile HCI (IJMHCI) 3, 2 (2011), 20--34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Ballendat, T., Marquardt, N., and Greenberg, S. Proxemic interaction: Designing for a proximity and orientation-aware environment. Proc. of ITS '10: International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces. ACM, New York, 2010, 121--130. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Chen, F. Design Mindfulness. 2011; http://www.designmindfulness.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Marshall, P., Morris, R., Rogers, Y., Kreitmayer S., and Davies, M. Rethinking 'multi-user': An in-the-wild study of how groups approach a walk-up-and-use tabletop interface. Proc. of the 29th International Conference, Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vancouver, BC, Canada, May 7--12). ACM, New York, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Yuill, N. and Rogers, Y. Mechanisms for collaboration: A design and evaluation framework for multi-user interfaces. 2011. Manuscript in review.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Interaction design gone wild: striving for wild theory

    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

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image Interactions
      Interactions  Volume 18, Issue 4
      July + August 2011
      88 pages
      ISSN:1072-5520
      EISSN:1558-3449
      DOI:10.1145/1978822
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2011 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: 1 July 2011

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Popular
      • Pre-selected

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format