skip to main content
10.1145/2901790.2901800acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdisConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

From Breakage to Icebreaker: Inspiration for Designing Technological Support for Human-Human Interaction

Authors Info & Claims
Published:04 June 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper explores why and how accidental breakage of technologies can promote humans to interact and ultimately lead to positive behavioral, emotional, and relational change. Through a set of research activities, including meta-synthesis of daily anecdotes, design workshops, and a case study, we gain insights into what may hinder or trigger human-human communication, and propose the conceptual and actionable process of Breakage-to-Icebreaker (B2I) design. Instead of intentionally breaking a technology, B2I design embeds mechanisms into existing products and services, creating opportunities for users to interpersonally interact online and/or offline while enjoying the original features and functionalities. Finally, we envision a broader and extended use of B2I thinking in everyday design research and practices.

References

  1. Stephen R. Barley, Debra E. Meyerson, and Stine Grodal. 2011. E-mail as a source and symbol of stress. Organization Science 22, 4: 887--906. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Eric PS. Baumer and M. Silberman. 2011. When the implication is not to design (technology). In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2271--2274. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Nancy K. Baym, Yan Bing Zhang, Adrianne Kunkel, Andrew Ledbetter, and Mei-Chen Lin. 2007. Relational quality and media use in interpersonal relationships. New Media & Society 9, 5: 735--752.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Aaron Ben-Ze'ev. 2004. Love online: Emotions on the Internet. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Eli Blevis. 2007. Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse. In Proc. CHI'07. 503--512. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Susanne Bødker. 2006. When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges. In Proceedings of the 4th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: changing roles, 1--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Tony Buzan. 2002. How to Mind Map: The Ultimate Thinking Tool That Will Change Your Life. Thorson, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Juliet Corbin and Anselm Strauss. 2014. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Richard L. Daft and Robert H. Lengel. 1986. Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management science 32, 5: 554--571.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Jack Dickey. 2015. Save the American Vacation. Retrieved May 25 from http://time.com/3892050/american-summer-vacation/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Paul Dourish. 2004. Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction. MIT press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Steven P. Dow, Alana Glassco, Jonathan Kass, Melissa Schwarz, Daniel L. Schwartz, and Scott R. Klemmer. 2010. Parallel prototyping leads to better design results, more divergence, and increased self-efficacy. ACM TOCHI 17, 4: 18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Anthony Dunne. 1999. Hertzian tales: Electronic products, aesthetic experience and critical design. RCACRD Research Publications: London.. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Brian J. Fogg. 2009. A behavior model for persuasive design. In Proceedings of the 4th international Conference on Persuasive Technology. 40. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. William W. Gaver, Jacob Beaver, and Steve Benford. 2003. Ambiguity as a resource for design. In Proc. CHI'03. 233--240. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Edward Twitchell Hall. 1996. The Hidden Dimension. Anchor Books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Keith N. Hampton, Lauren F. Sessions, Eun Ja Her, and Lee Rainie. 2009. Social Isolation and New Technology. Pew Internet and American Life Project, 4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Steve Harrison, Deborah Tatar, and Phoebe Sengers. 2007. The three paradigms of HCI. In Alt. Chi. Session at the CHI'07, 1--18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Eva Hornecker and Jacob Buur. 2006. Getting a Grip on Tangible Interaction: A Framework on Physical Space and Social Interaction. In Proc. CHI'06. 437--446. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Miwa Ikemiya and Daniela K. Rosner. 2014. Broken probes: toward the design of worn media. Personal and ubiquitous computing. 18, 3: 671--683. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Steven J. Jackson and Laewoo Kang. 2014. Breakdown, Obsolescence and Reuse: HCI and the Art of Repair. In Proc. CHI'14. 449--458. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Andrea Kavanaugh, John M. Carroll, Mary Beth Rosson, Than Than Zin, and Debbie Denise Reese. 2005. Community networks: Where offline communities meet online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 10, 4: 00-00.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Regan L. Mandryk and Diego S. Maranan. 2002. False Prophets: Exploring Hybrid Board/Video Games. In Proc. CHI EA'02, 640--641. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Joseph F. McCarthy, Tony J. Costa, and Edy S. Liongosari. 2001. Unicast, outcast & groupcast: Three steps toward ubiquitous, peripheral displays. In Ubicomp 2001: Ubiquitous Computing. 332--345. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Miller McPherson, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and Matthew E. Brashears. 2006. Social isolation in America: Changes in core discussion networks over two decades. American Sociological Review, 71: 353--375.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Susan Moeller. 2010. "24 hours unplugged." A day without media. Retrieved July 11, 2014 from http://withoutmedia.wordpress.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Eric J. Moody. 2001. Internet use and its relationship to loneliness. CyberPsychology & Behavior 4, 3: 393--401.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Nina-Jo Moore, Mark Hickson, and Don W. Stacks. 2010. Nonverbal Communication:Studies and Applications. Oxford Univ. Press: New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Bonnie A. Nardi, and Vicki O'Day. 1999. Information Ecologies: Using Technology with Heart. MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. William Odom, James Pierce, Erik Stolterman, and Eli Blevis. 2009. Understanding why we preserve some things and discard others in the context of interaction design. In Proc. CHI '09. 1053--1062. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. William T. Odom, Abigail J. Sellen, Richard Banks, David S. Kirk, Tim Regan, Mark Selby, Jodi L. Forlizzi, and John Zimmerman. 2014. Designing for slowness, anticipation and re-visitation: a long term field study of the photobox." In Proc. CHI'14. 1961--1970. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Nelly Oudshoorn and Trevor Pinch. 2003. How Users Matter: The Co-Construction of Users and Technology (Inside Technology). The MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Eric Paulos. 2009. The rise of the expert amateur: DIY culture and citizen science. In Proc.UIST'09. 181--182. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Eric Paulos and Elizabeth Goodman. 2004. The familiar stranger: anxiety, comfort, and play in public places. In Proc. CHI'04. 223--230. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. James Pierce. 2012. Undesigning technology: considering the negation of design by design. In Proc. CHI'12. 957--966. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. James Pierce and Eric Paulos. 2015. Making Multiple Uses of the Obscura 1C Digital Camera: Reflecting on the Design, Production, Packaging and Distribution of a Counterfunctional Device. In Proc. CHI'15. 2103--2112. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Harvey Sacks and Gail Jefferson. 1995. Lectures on conversation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Dan Schawbel. 2012. Why Face-to-Face Networking Still Trumps Social Networking. Retrieved June 6, 2015 from http://business.time.com/2012/04/27/why-face-toface-networking-trumps-social-networking/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Aric Sigman. 2009. Well connected Biologist 56, 1: 14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Lee Sproull and Sara Kiesler. 1986. Reducing social context cues. Management Science, 32, 11: 1492--1512. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Kaveri Subrahmanyam, Stephanie M. Reich, Natalia Waechter, and Guadalupe Espinoza. 2008. Online and offline social networks: Use of social networking sites by emerging adults. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 29, 6: 420--433.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Marcus Sanchez Svensson, and Tomas Sokoler. 2008. Ticket-to-talk-television: designing for the circumstantial nature of everyday social interaction. Proceedings of the 5th Nordic conference on Humancomputer interaction: building bridges. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Nassim Nicholas Taleb. 2012. Antifragile: Things that gain from disorder. Vol. 3. Random House Incorporated.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Caroline Tell. 2013. Step away from the phone! Retrieved August 9, 2014 from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/22/fashion/step-awayfrom-the-phone.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Eran Toch and Inbal Levi. 2012. What can "peoplenearby" applications teach us about meeting new people? In Proc. UbiComp'12. 802--803. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Seçil Uür. 2013. Wearing embodied emotions: A practice based design research on wearable technology. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Ron Wakkary and Leah Maestri. 2007. The resourcefulness of everyday design. In Proc. Creativity and Cognition'07. 163--172. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Joseph B. Walther. 1996. Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 1: 3--43.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Yi Wang and David Redmiles. 2015. Cheap talk, cooperation, and trust in global software engineering. Empirical Software Engineering. 1--35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Hua Wang and Barry Wellman. 2010. Social connectivity in America: Changes in adult friendship network size from 2002 to 2007. American Behavioral Scientist 53, 8: 1148--1169.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Peter Wright and John McCarthy. 2010. ExperienceCentered Design: Designers, Users, and Communities in Dialogue. Syn. Lect. on HCI 3, 1: 1--123.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. From Breakage to Icebreaker: Inspiration for Designing Technological Support for Human-Human Interaction

    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
      DIS '16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems
      June 2016
      1374 pages
      ISBN:9781450340311
      DOI:10.1145/2901790

      Copyright © 2016 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: 4 June 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      DIS '16 Paper Acceptance Rate107of418submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate1,158of4,684submissions,25%

      Upcoming Conference

      DIS '24
      Designing Interactive Systems Conference
      July 1 - 5, 2024
      IT University of Copenhagen , Denmark

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader