Data gathering

1
Data gathering

• Program
• 13.30-14.00 Introduction to datagathering
• 14.00-14.30 Introduction to Mosaic, by Hans
  Ravnkjær
• 14.45-15.45 Exercise and break
• 15.45-16.05 Plenary session

2
2 different approaches to data

• Data as a micro sample of the real world
• Qualitative methods. Asking how, why.
• Quantitative methods. Asking how many.
• Data as inspiration

3
Who are the users? What do they do? Where do they
do it?

• The techniqes are different in
• Time consumption
• Level of detail
• Insecurity attached to the results
• The preconditions that is demanded to apply the
  technique
• The level of knowledge in the area investigated
• The data gathered (quantity or depth)
• The choice is dependent of the type of task to be
  studied
• Is the task done in succession or are there more
  tasks done at the same time?
• Does the task involve a lot of/little or
  complex/simple information?
• Does the task demand expertise in the domain or
  can anybody do it?

spørgeskemaer

4
Surveys

• Questions aimed at getting specifik information
• Different types of questions demands different
  kinds of answers
• yes/no
• a choice between different answers
• free text
• Both quantitative and qualitative data
• answers specific questions from a wide range of
  people
• - Does not answer why people answer as they do.

5
Interviews

• Interviews investigates areas in depth and gets
  new insights and answers why.
• Interviews can be
• Structured - a given questionnaire that is
  followed rigidly
• Semi-structured a questionnaire that is not
  followed rigidly
• Non structured thematic talks
• PROPS can be used e.g.. Rich Pictures,
  prototypes, photos.
• knowledge in depth
• - It is time consuming. The number of
  participants is limited

6
Focus groups

• Group interview
• When something needs to be agreed upon or
  consensus is wanted.
• When areas of conflict is investigated

7
Observations

• Observations of users everyday life and their
  tasks while they happen
• Requires respect for the observanted.
• Gives insight into the tasks
• Creates an understanding of the context
• - Time consuming

• http//www.pinzgauer.uk.com/user_files/images/body
  Text_images/factoryWorker.JPG

8
Data as inspiration

• Cultural Probes
• The idea was introduced by Gaver, Dunne and
  Pacenti (1999)
• A probe is a survey sent to the users, asking
  users to self-collect data, send them to the
  designers, who interprets and get inspiration to
  design.

• A probe
• http//praxis.cs.usyd.edu.au/peterris/?DesignPro
  cess/UserCentredDesign

9
What can probes be used for?

• Originally the probe was a mean for inspiration
  to design.
• More and more it is used as a data gathering
  tool.
• When should they be used?
• When it does not matter when the data has been
  collected
• When there is a need not to influence the data
  gathering
• When the data gathering takes place over a long
  period or can be done step wise
• E.g. how patients experience a hospital stay. How
  sales persons work.
• CP can be used throughout the whole process
• In early phases as inspiration for problem areas
• In later phases as inspiration for esthetical
  preferences

10
What does a probe contain?

• Depending on what you want to know, everyday
  artifacts is sent to the users
• Postcards
• Maps
• Disposable cameras
• Diaries
• Photo albums
• Post-it notes
• Visit diaries

11
An example - Royal College of Art, London

• The packet contains.
• A small disposable camera
• A listening glass to place on a wall or a door.
  Asking the participants to write down what they
  heard
• A dream recorder with a 2-minute tape. The
  participants were asked to record a dream.

12
Participants

• A large number of participants creates
  possibilities for comparisons and interpretation
• It puts demands on the participants
• The participants have to feel an obligation to
  fulfill the tasks

13
Tasks

• A thorough briefing of the participants prior to
  the probes being sent
• A clear description of the tasks
• Tasks and equipment should match so the
  participants are encouraged to pass on
  information
• Be careful not to limit the participants
  responses
• Make it possible for the participants to reach
  you if they have questions to a task

14
The planning proces

• What do you want to know?
• Recruit participants
• Pick participants
• Gather the probes
• Send the probes
• The probes are returned and analyzed as they
  appear
• Final analysis

15
The process from the participants p.o.v.

• The participant volunteers to be part of an
  experiment
• The participant receives and examines the whole
  packet
• Each part has attached a specific task
• The participant solves one task at a time and
  returns it

16
Interpretation

• The method is meant as inspiration
• The gives options for many open interpretations
• It can be used as actual datagathering, but that
  demands closed tasks
• Closed tasks gives possibilities for less open
  interpretation
• An open task take a picture of your mobile phone
  of something you like about it
• A closed task take a photo of a place where you
  sent a text messages to somebody. Write down the
  message.

17
Litteratur

• Dunne, A. Raby, F. (2001) Design Noir The
  Secret Life of Electronic Objects. Switzerland
  Birkhauser.
• Gaver, W. (2002). Designing for Homo Ludens. i3
  Magazine, June (2002), pp. 2-5.
• Gaver, W., Dunne, A. Pacenti, E. (1999)
  Projected Realities Conceptual Design for
  Cultural Effect. Proc. of CHI 99. ACM Press, pp.
  600-608.
• Gaver, B., Boucher, A., Pennington, S., Walker,
  B. (2004). Cultural Probes and the Value of
  Uncertainty. Interactions, 11(5), 53-56.
• Gaver, B., Dunne, T., Pacenti, E. (1999).
  Cultural Probes. Interactions, 6(1), 21-29.
• Hemmings, T., Crabtree, A., Rodden, T., Clarke,
  K. Rouncefield, K. (2002). Probing the Probes.
  Proc. of PDC 2002. CPSR, pp. 42-50.
• Hutchinson, H., Plaisant, C. Druin, A. (2002).
  Case Study A Message Board as a Technology Probe
  for Family Communication and Coordination.
  Position Paper, Workshop on New Technologies for
  Families, CHI 02, http//www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/inte
  rliving/chi02.
• Interliving (2002), http//interliving.kth.se.