skip to main content
10.1145/3078810.3078825acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesperdisConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Public displays for public participation in urban settings: a survey

Published:07 June 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Public displays can be used to support public participation in urban settings. This article provides a survey of the use of public displays for public participation in an urban context, covering articles on this topic published between 2012 and 2016. 36 papers were selected and analysed along eight dimensions: type of political context, type of scientific contribution, standalone displays vs displays with a device, single vs multi-purpose displays, shape of displays, lab vs field study, deployment in public vs semi-public space, and the level of public participation addressed. Our analysis revealed a number of trends regarding public displays and public participation in urban settings. Inspecting these articles also led to the observation that current research on public displays is mainly targeting lower levels of public participation and that the evaluation of public displays for public participation in urban settings remains a challenge.

References

  1. Florian Alt, Stefan Schneegass, Albrecht Schmidt, Jörg Müller, and Nemanja Memarovic. 2012. How to evaluate public displays. 2012 International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis'12) (2012), #17. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Mike Ananny and Carol Strohecker. 2009. TexTales: Creating Interactive Forums with Urban Publics. In Handbook of Research on Urban Informatics: The Practice and Promise of the Real-Time City. 68--86.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Carmelo Ardito, Paolo Buono, Maria Francesca Costabile, and Giuseppe Desolda. 2015. Interaction with Large Displays. Comput. Surveys 47, 3 (2015), 1--38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Sherry R. Arnstein. 1969. A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 35, 4 (1969), 216--224.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Karl Baumann, Benjamin Stokes, François Bar, and Ben Caldwell. 2016. Designing in "Constellations": Sustaining Participatory Design for Neighborhoods. Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference: Short Papers, Interactive Exhibitions, Workshops - Volume 2 (2016), 5--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Moritz Behrens, Nina Valkanova, Ava Fatah gen. Schieck, and Duncan P. Brumby. 2014. Smart Citizen Sentiment Dashboard : A Case Study Into Media Architectural Interfaces. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis'14) September 2013 (2014), 19--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Torsten Bierz. 2006. Interaction technologies for large displays-an overview. In Visualization of Large and Unstructured Data Sets, GI-Edition Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI), Hans Hagen, Andreas Kerren, and Peter Dannenmann (Eds.), Vol. S-4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Susanne Bødker, Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose, Matthias Korn, and Anna Maria Polli. 2014. Participatory IT in semi-public spaces. In Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Fun, Fast, Foundational (NordiCHI '14), Virpi Roto, Jonna Häkkilä, Kaisa Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, Oskar Juhlin, Thomas Olsson, and Ebba Thora Hvannberg (Eds.). ACM, Helsinki, Finland, 765--774. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Harry Brignull and Yvonne Rogers. 2003. Enticing people to interact with large public displays in public spaces. Proceedings of INTERACT 3, c (2003), 17--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Neal Buerger. 2011. Types of public interactive display technologies and how to motivate users to interact. Technical Report. 7 pages. http://nealbuerger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/NealGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Sandy Claes, Karin Slegers, and Andrew Vande Moere. 2016. The Bicycle Barometer: Design and Evaluation of Cyclist-Specific Interaction for a Public Display. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2016), 5824--5835. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Sandy Claes and Andrew Vande Moere. 2015. The Role of Tangible Interaction in Exploring Information on Public Visualization Displays. Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis'15) (2015), 201--207. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Sandy Claes, Niels Wouters, Karin Slegers, and Andrew Vande Moere. 2015. Controlling In-the-Wild Evaluation Studies of Public Displays. In Proceedings of the ACM CHI'15 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vol. 1. 81--84. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Stephen Coleman and John Gøtze. 2002. Bowling Together: Online Public Engagement in Policy Deliberation. Information Polity The International Journal of Government Democracy in the Information Age (2002), 48.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Nicola Dell and Neha Kumar. 2016. The ins and outs of HCI for development. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, San Jose, California, USA, 2220--2232. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. European Institute for Public Participation (EIPP). 2009. Public Participation in Europe an international perspective. Technical Report June. 1--49 pages. http://www.partizipation.at/fileadmin/media_data/Downloads/Zukunftsdiskurse-Studien/pp_in_e_report_03_06.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Claude Fortin, Carman Neustaedter, and Kate Hennessy. 2014. Posting for Community and Culture: Considerations for the Design of Interactive Digital Bulletin Boards. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'14). 1425--1434. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Marcus Foth, Martin Tomitsch, Laura Forlano, M. Hank Haeusler, and Christine Satchell. 2016. Citizens Breaking out of Filter Bubbles: Urban Screens As Civic Media. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 140--147. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Jorge Goncalves, Simo Hosio, Yong Liu, and Vassilis Kostakos. 2014. Eliciting situated feedback: A comparison of paper, web forms and public displays. Displays 35, 1 (2014), 27--37.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. M Hanzl. 2007. Information technology as a tool for public participation in urban planning: a review of experiments and potentials. Design Studies 28, 3 (2007), 289--307.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Luke Hespanhol and Martin Tomitsch. 2012. Designing for Collective Participation with Media Installations in Public Spaces. Proceedings of the 4th Media Architecture Biennale Conference: Participation (MAB'12) (2012), 33--42. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Simo Hosio, Jorge Goncalves, and Vassilis Kostakos. 2013. Application discoverability on multipurpose public displays. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays - PerDis '13. ACM Press, Mountain View, California, 31. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Simo Hosio, Jorge Goncalves, Vassilis Kostakos, and Jukka Riekki. 2014. Exploring Civic Engagement on Public Displays. In User-Centric Technology Design for Nonprofit and Civic Engagements. 91--111.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Marko Jurmu, Masaki Ogawa, Sebastian Boring, Jukka Riekki, and Hideyuki Tokuda. 2013. Waving to a touch interface: Descriptive field study of a multipurpose multimodal public display. 2nd ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis'13) (2013), 7--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. C Katsanos, N Tselios, J Goncalves, T Juntunen, and V Kostakos. 2014. Multipurpose Public Displays - Can Automated Grouping of Applications and Services Enhance User Experience? International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 30, 3 (2014), 237--249.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. T K Khan. 2011. A survey of interaction techniques and devices for large high resolution displays. In Visualization of Large and Unstructured Data Sets - Applications in Geospatial Planning, Modeling and Engineering (IRTG 1131 Workshop), VLUDS 2010, Ariane Middel, Inga Scheler, and Hans Hagen (Eds.), Vol. 19. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Germany, Bodega Bay, California, USA, 27--35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Lisa Koeman, Vaiva Kalnikaite, and Yvonne Rogers. 2015. "Everyone is talking about it!": A distributed approach to urban voting technology and visualisations. Proceedings of the ACM CHI'15 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 1 (2015), 3127--3136. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. V Kostakos and T Ojala. 2013. Public Displays Invade Urban Spaces. IEEE Pervasive Computing 12, April (2013), 8--13. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Narges Mahyar, Kelly J Burke, Jialiang Ernest Xiang, Siyi Cathy Meng, Kellogg S Booth, Cynthia L Girling, and Ronald W Kellett. 2016. UD Co-Spaces : A Table-Centred Multi-Display Environment for Public Engagement in Urban Design Charrettes. (2016), 109--118. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Andrew Maunder, Gary Marsden, and Richard Harper. 2011. Making the link---providing mobile media for novice communities in the developing world. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 69, 10 (2011), 647--657. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Nemanja Memarovic, Marc Langheinrich, Florian Alt, Ivan Elhart, Simo Hosio, and Elisa Rubegni. 2012. Using Public Displays to Stimulate Passive Engagement, Active Engagement, and Discovery in Public Spaces. Proceedings of the 4th Media Architecture Biennale Conference on Participation (MAB '12) (2012), 55--64. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Michael E. Milakovich. 2010. The internet and increased citizen participation in government. eJournal of Democracy and Open Government(JeDEM) 2, 1 (2010), 1--9. http://www.jedem.org/index.php/jedem/article/view/22Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Antti Oulasvirta and Kasper Hornbæk. 2016. HCI research as problem-solving. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '16. ACM Press, San Jose, California, USA, 4956--4967. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Horst W J Rittel and Melvin M Webber. 1973. Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sci 4, 2 (1973), 155--169.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Gianluca Schiavo, Marco Milano, Jorge Saldivar, Tooba Nasir, Massimo Zancanaro, and Gregorio Convertino. 2013. Agora2.0: enhancing civic participation through a public display. In C&T 2013 - Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Communities and Technologies. Munich, Germany, 46--54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Mahmoud Sodangi, Mohd Faris Khamidi, and Arazi Idrus. 2013. Towards Sustainable Heritage Building Conservation in Malaysia. Applied Sciences & Environmental Sustainability 1, 1 (2013), 54--61.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Fabius Steinberger, Marcus Foth, and Florian Alt. 2014. Vote with your feet: Local community polling on urban screens. Proceedings of the 3th International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis '14) (2014), 44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Tao Ni, G.S. Schmidt, O.G. Staadt, M.A. Livingston, Robert Ball, and Richard May. 2006. A survey of large high-resolution display technologies, techniques, and applications. In IEEE Virtual Reality Conference (VR 2006), Vol. 2006. IEEE Computer Society, 223--236. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Maurice Ten Koppel, Gilles Bailly, Jörg Müller, and Robert Walter. 2012. Chained displays: Configurations of Public Displays Can Be Used to Influence Actor-, Audience-, and Passer-By Behavior. Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '12 1 (2012), 317. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Sarah-Kristin Thiel. 2015. Exploring requirements for civic engagement via public displays. In Proceedings of the 2015 British HCI Conference (HCI '15). 303--304. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Change Urban, Kai Kuikkaniemi, Giulio Jacucci, and Marko Turpeinen. 2011. Interactive Screens Will Life. Computer - IEEE Computer Magazine 44, 6 (2011), 40 -- 47. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Jacob O. Wobbrock and Julie A. Kientz. 2016. Research Contributions in Human-Computer Interaction. Interactions 23, 3 (2016), 38--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Public displays for public participation in urban settings: a survey

    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
      PerDis '17: Proceedings of the 6th ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays
      June 2017
      186 pages
      ISBN:9781450350457
      DOI:10.1145/3078810
      • General Chair:
      • Marc Langheinrich,
      • Program Chair:
      • Sarah Clinch

      Copyright © 2017 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: 7 June 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      PerDis '17 Paper Acceptance Rate21of38submissions,55%Overall Acceptance Rate213of384submissions,55%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader