Introduction to probing
Experience economy
Tuuli Mattelmäki
University of Art and Design Helsinki
School of Design
experiences are memorable and
experienced with all senses:
sight, sound, touch, taste, smell
tuuli.mattelmaki@taik.fi
www.designresearch.uiah.fi
(Pine & Gilmore 1998):
Changes the attitude towards the
object of design –they become
inged:
designing well-being experiences
instead of heart rate monitors,
designing home caring experiences
instead of vacuum cleaners.
From functionality to
usability and towards…
pleasure
(Jordan 2000, adapted
from L. Tiger)
• Physio-Pleasure:
senses
• Socio-Pleasure:
relationships with others
• Psycho-Pleasure:
cognition and emotion
• Ideo-Pleasure: values
Meaningful product experiences
• Based on stories of meaningful objects.
• The stories were supposed to help us understand what the
hooks or contacting surfaces are like that emotional ties
are attached to, and map out the design opportunities
offered by them
(Mattelmäki & Battarbee 2000, Battarbee & Mattelmäki 2002).
Towards understanding experiences: frameworks
Experience as a momentary flash in time – influenced by
previous experiences and expectations concerning the future
(Sanders 2001, Kankainen 2002)
Dynamic and constantly changing -> From routine experiences
to cognitive ones and to stories (Forlizzi & Ford 2000)
CO-EXPERIENCE: The meaning of social interaction in how
experiences are created and how their significances are
constructed (Battarbee 2004)
an object can be
meaningful because
• it offers a link or prompts a
recollection of a person,
experience, story, place, feeling or
atmosphere.
• It can be a particular item of
memorabilia, or memory associated
with it through a meaningful
experience. (cf. memorabilia, Pine
& Gilmore 1999)
1
an object can be
meaningful because
an object can be
meaningful because
• its design touches one.
• Its aesthetic and sensory quality
evokes memories, or it ages in
dignity and wears well. A piece
of metal jewellery gets a patina
from touch, the elbow rest of a
wooden rocking chair become
silky with good wear (cf.
sensuality, Pine & Gilmore
1999, and Jordan 2000).
• it presents a challenge to its user.
This challenge can evoke both
positive and negative feelings, and
may involve an ambivalent lovehate relationship.
• The thing, such as a car, has taken
money, time, work and
commitment. Learning to play
guitar is painful, but getting the
idea of it is rewarding. (Cf. Jordan
2000, psycho pleasure)
an object can be
meaningful because
an object can be
meaningful because
• it has become a companion with time.
The companionship involves loyalty,
appreciation and confidence.
• The VW beetle is almost a living soul.
• A companion cannot be replaced.
Things such as a pair of shoes, a hat or
a tool have been worn out, shaped and
tuned with their user, and can be
almost an extension of their user’s
body.
• It is a symbol of what the user is
or what he or she would like to
be, what kind of image is desired.
• A wrist computer does not make a
diver, but it can produce an
image of one. Owning a guitar is
the first step towards a rocker
image. A monthly bus ticket may
be an ideological statement in
favour of ecological thinking. (Cf.
Jordan 2000, ideo pleasure)
an object can be
meaningful because
• it works as a means of achieving a
goal. It works when required; it is
creditable and necessary.
• The goal may also be social
interaction, socialising and having
fun. A record player collects
young people to listen to music
together; a phone is a means of
communication between people.
(Cf. Jordan 2000, socio pleasure).
Luotain
framework
product
meanigns
User centred concept
design
action
people
user experience
physical
environment
other products
(see e.g. Jääskö et al 2003)
2
The world of people
The world of product meanings
personality
attitudes
values
motivation
way of life
social context
attachment
stories,
memories,
history
image
The world of action
The physical world
interaction
situation
use
context
aesthetics
atmosphere
physical environment
The world of
products
How to approach
experiences?
alternative solutions
trends
novelty
From many perspectives with
user centred design tools :
* values / design solutions
(Bueno&Rameckers 2003)
* motivation / actions
(Kankainen 2002)
context, practices,
ergonomics, usability,
lifestyle, perception of form,
domestication
3
USER in user experience
Methods
sensitive experiencer,
active influencer,
creative actor
traditional – applied – innovative methods (Hanington 2003)
SAY DO MAKE (Sanders & Dandavate 1999)
work - leisure – home->
routines, actions with goals,
play, pleasures, emotions,
self expression
objective < – > subjective approaches (Fulton Suri 2003)
1) learning from information
2) observing people
3) asking people to join in
4) experiencing ourselves
experiences ->
WHAT HAS MEANING TO
THE FUTURE USER
Methods in human centred design
Interpretation and analyses tens towards
Traditional
Adapted
Innovative
Traditional
Market research
Focus groups
Surveys
Questionnaires
Interviews
...
Observational methods
Etnographic methods
Video ethnography
Beeper studies
HCI
Heuristic evaluation
Cognitive walkthrough
...
Creative/participatory
Design workshops
Collage
Card sorting
Cognitive mapping
Velcro modeling
Visual diaries
Camera studies
...
Market research
Focus groups
SurveysCounts
Questionnaires
Statistics
Interviews
Spreadsheets
...
Graphing
Hanington (2003) Methods in Making: A Perspective on The State
of Human Research in Design. Design Issues 19/4
Adapted
Observational methods
Etnographic methods
Video ethnography
Beeper studies
HCI
Heuristic evaluation
Verbal + numerical Cognitive walkthrough
...
information
Innovative
Creative/participatory
Design workshops
Collage
Content analyses
Card sorting
Categories
Cognitive mapping
Patterns, themes
Velcro modeling
Affinities, clusters
Visual diaries
Visual + verbal
Camera studies
information
...
Hanington (2003) Methods in Making: A Perspective on The State
of Human Research in Design. Design Issues 19/4
ISO 13407 (human centred design process)
Cultural probes
Understand &
specify the
context of use
Evaluate designs
against
requirements
System meets
specified
functional user &
organisational
requirements
rebelled from established user study traditions
Gaver et al 1999
Gaver et al 2004
Specify the user &
organisational
requirements
Produce
design
solutions
4
We need user data from
places and situations where
researchers or designers
presence would be
disturbing.
How to document
experiences which take
place in private contexts?
We need to understand emotional and
subjective perspectives, attitudes and
meanings.
How to support people to document their
everyday experiences, values and needs?
1)
2)
Probes are based on selfdocumenting.
Probes are interested in
individuals’, in (potential)
users’ subjective world.
The probes are collections of
tasks, which are given to
people to make them
analyze, document and
express their experiences
and ideas.
3)
Probes are design oriented
and have an exploratory
goal.
Empathy probes
were done in company collaboration.
The main interest has been in
Mattelmäki & Battarbee 2002 gathering versatile subjective user
Mattelmäki 2003
data with an open brief for concept
Mattelmäki 2005
design.
They are descriptive and
predictive.
They empower both users’
and designers’
interpretations and
creativity.
5
Reasons for applying probes
inspiration
Designing the kits is designerly
activity
based on a review of experiences about the
feasibility of the approach from design
practitioners’, companies’ and users’ point of
view.
Probes enables personal visual
tangible expressions
Probes approach allows early
guesses about framing the
design space
Fragmented subjective data
with broad focus leave space
for personal interpretations and
insights in early design phase
information
In early concept design, where
the goal is not clear, the
challenge is to find the right
questions to ask.
Probes can be used as an
introduction to the design theme
and the users.
For information probes should be
used with other approaches.
dialogues
Probes process and data support the
user-centered dialogue on three
levels:
1) the interpretative dialogue
within the design team for sharing
the interpretations and associations
2) the direct dialogue between the
users and the designers
3) an inner dialogue, which links
designers’ own experiences and
users points of view, which is about
design empathy
participation
Probes allows participants to create
and express their needs and design
ideas
There were individual differences in
how the probes were considered by the
participants.
The design orientation, ambiguity and
openness also created uncertain
feelings and confusion.
Visual aesthetics, reflecting and
expressing were pleasurable and
interesting.
Challenges in corporate context
Custom design of probes is
pleasurable, but requires resources
Effectivity is needed for collecting,
sorting out and sharing the data
The broad and subjective results do
not necessarily help in solving acute
product development problems but
can be applied in various project.
6
Reasons for
using probes
Empathy probes process vs.
Cultural probes process
Task: start planning your probing
* Objective
- inspiration, information, participation, dialogue
* contribution to your understanding of the topic
- what do think you know already –list
- apply the elements of experiences
7