project specification

2009-01-20 Helena Lindgren1

Project specification

READ IT CAREFULLY MORE THAN ONCE!


Project initiation

Send to Helena and Lena before 13.00 Friday: Group constellation (5 members in each group: first

name, surname, user name) Suggestion of two alternative ”times” Tuesday 27/1 and

Thursday 29/1 that suite all in the group for start-up support

Send project plan to Helena and Lena before Wednesday 17.00 To be approved


Project outline Project plan Phase 1: Design

Literature study Activity and user analysis Design and implementation of prototypes

Phase 2: Evaluation and re-design Evaluation of other prototypes within same theme Re-design

Continuous documentation in a report To be peer-reviewed

Assignments are provided by research groups

Theme 1: Promoting health and control over work-related injuries for construction workers

3 groups working on the project ”Injury-Guide” domain expert: physician in environmental health

Theme 2: Promoting health, control and autonomy for older people who are not familiar with computer use

3-4 groups divided between the two sub-projects ”The Nice Guide” and ”Chat-Room”

domain expert: occupational therapist


Differences between the themes Challenges:

Theme 1) designing for mixed types of users and different expert/worker domains; and providing knowledge and support for decision making

Theme 2) special demands when designing for novice users and older persons

For both themes issues concerning design for learning, empowerment and development in organised interaction with others, focussing the activity in the design process and creating innovative solutions for the future are vital.

Different obligatory and suggested literature based on theme Theme 1) needs to put more effort in searching research literature,

Theme 2) has more obligatory literature given but needs to put more effort in finding subjects



Project

Tools for analysis:

Main theory: Activity Theory (all constructs shall be used and an assessment protocol)

Complement: HTA


Multi disciplinary development of HCI

Sciences Sociologi, antropologi, psykologi, filosofi, fenomenologi,

datavetenskap, kognitionsvetenskap, ... Theories / models

Verksamhetsteori (Activity theory), Situated Action, Action Science, information processing, Distributed Cognition, ...

Methods Etnografi, etnometodologi, tillämpad experimentell psykologi (TEP),

cognitive modelling, participatory design (PD), konversationsanalys, contextual design, formella metoder, ...

Tools Activity checklist, scenarios, arbetsmodeller, task analysis (TA),

design rationales, cognitive walkthrough, GOMS, ...


Example of an Activity theory-based assessment of the activity ”Dementia Investigation”


Initial process analysis of dementia investigation

Assessment of use environment

Main reasoning process

Supportive reasoning processes

Logistic work process (patient’s perspective)

Databases

Data


Determine the type ofdementia disease

Determine the type ofcognitive disease

Follow-up on treatment, disease progress

Determine the existence ofcognitive disease

Choice of and providing treatment

Investigating social ability

Investigating other body functions & structures

Investigating cognitive ability

Investigating activity hinders

MMSE

WAIS

Blood test

Behave-ADSPECTLevel 1. Logistic process and object-creating sub-actions

Level 3. Main reasoning process for investigating cognitive diseases

Patient-interview and observation

Relative-interview

Investigating behavioural psychological symptoms

Level 2. Object-analysing and decisive sub-processes

EEG

Investigating other diseases

ECG

MMSE

Blood test

SPECT

EEG ECG

Development of HCI Theory and Practice

Lindgren, H., Nilsson, I.: (2009) Activity Theory as Base for Designing Activity Support System for Health Promotion and Autonomy in Older Persons. (Draft for Interact’09)

For assessment of patients’ situation and capacities a range of validated occupational therapy scales were used in a project focusing older people and computer use: AMPS, OCAIR-S, MNPS (ACRS – not validated)

A protocol emerged from the activity theory-based analyses, which was used for assessing development, ability and attitudes towards computer-supported activity


Activity theory-based protocol for Evaluation

Table 2. Levels of independence in relation to Internet-mediated activities. The four main categories of activities identified at

baseline are marked in bold face. To be used by all groups for assessing the level of

autonomy of subjects in computer-based activities To be evaluated and modified accordingly if found to

some extent useful (results shall be reported in the project report)


Activity theory-based protocol for Evaluation

Can be used as protocol at sessions with users where user activity is observed. For relevant posts in the protocol, a note can be added whether the activity lies in the ZPD for the subject, or if the subject does the activity autonomously to a sufficient degree.

“Sufficient degree” may refer to whether there are time limits or limited interest, motivation, etc. that makes the performance insufficient.

Furthermore, the protocol can serve as base for the creation of key questions in interviews or questionnaires, as well as motivations for re-design or activity schemes for sessions.



Literature List: obligatory for all * Lindgren, H., Nilsson, I.: (2009) Activity Theory as Base for Designing Activity Support

System for Health Promotion and Autonomy in Older Persons. (Draft for Interact’09)

* Beaudouin-Lafon, M. 2004. Designing interaction, not interfaces. In Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual interfaces (Gallipoli, Italy, May 25 - 28, 2004). AVI '04. ACM, New York, NY, 15-22. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/989863.989865

* Beaudouin-Lafon, M.: Instrumental interaction: An interaction model for designing post-WIMP user interfaces. (2000)

And the course book of course!

http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/989863.989865


Literature List: obligatory for Theme 1)

* Documents providing the knowledge content of a system. Järvholm, B. Drafts only to be used within this project!

* Singh, G., Hawkins, L., Whymark, G.: (2007) An Integrated Model of Collaborative Knowledge Building. Interdisciplinary Journal of Learning Objects vol 3, pp 85-105.

* Dickinson, A., Gregor, P.: Computer use has no demonstrated impact on the well-being of older adults. Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 64 (2006) 744–753

* Additional articles on subjects related to the project. The project report should include at least 10 peer-reviewed articles!


Literature List: obligatory for Theme 2) Dickinson, A., Smith, M., Arnott, J., Newell, A., & Hill, R. (2007). Approaches to Web Search and navigation for older computer novices. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems CHI 2007, pp.281-290. A. F. Newell, A. Dickinson, M. J. Smith and P. Gregor : Designing a portal for older users: A case study of an industrial/academic collaboration. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interactions (TOCHI), 13(3) (2006), ACM Portal, pp.347-375. ISSN: 1073 0516 A. Dickinson, A. F. Newell, M. J. Smith and R. Hill, : Introducing the internet to the over-60's: developing an email system for older novice computer users. Interacting with Computers, 17 (2005), pp.621-642. ISSN: 0953 5438 S. Milne, A. Dickinson, A. Carmichael, D. Sloan, E. Eisma and P. Gregor,: Are guidelines enough? An introduction to designing web sites accessible to older people. IBM Systems Journal, 44(3) (2005), pp.557-571. ISSN: 0018 8670 Dickinson, A., Roos, E., Gregor, P., Syme, A., Milne, S.: Strategies for teaching older people to use the World Wide Web. Univ Access Inf Soc (2005) 4: 3–15 Dickinson, A., Arnott, J., & Prior, S. (2007). Methods for human – computer interaction research with older people. Behaviour & Information Technology, 26, 343-352.

* Additional articles on subjects related to the project. The project report should include at least 10 peer-reviewed articles!