Applying the lens of sensory ethnography to sustainable HCI

Sociological appropriations of practice theory as applied to sustainable design have successfully problematized overly simplistic and individualistic models of consumer choice and behavior change. By taking everyday practices as the principal units of analysis, they move towards acknowledging the socially and materially structured nature of human activity. However, to inform sustainable HCI we also need to understand how practices are part of wider experiential environments and flows of practical activity. In this article, we develop an approach rooted in phenomenological anthropology and sensory ethnography. This approach builds on theories of place, perception and movement and enables us to situate practices, and understand practical activity, as emplaced within complex and shifting ecologies of things. Drawing on an interdisciplinary study of domestic energy consumption and digital media use, we discuss ethnographic and design practice examples. We demonstrate how this theoretical and methodological framework can be aligned with the 3rd paradigm of HCI.

[1]  Salu Ylirisku,et al.  Framing design in the third paradigm , 2009, CHI.

[2]  Gregory D. Abowd,et al.  Towards a Better Understanding of Context and Context-Awareness , 1999, HUC.

[3]  Sarah Pink,et al.  Home Truths: Gender, Domestic Objects and Everyday Life , 2004 .

[4]  Kirsten Gram-Hanssen,et al.  Teenage consumption of cleanliness: how to make it sustainable? , 2007 .

[5]  Jo A. Tacchi,et al.  Radio texture: Between self and others , 2002 .

[6]  Alex S. Taylor,et al.  Making place for clutter and other ideas of home , 2008, TCHI.

[7]  B. Barnes.  Practice as collective action , 2005 .

[8]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Seeking a Foundation for Context-Aware Computing , 2001, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[9]  T. Ingold.  Perception of the Environment , 2011 .

[10]  Andy Crabtree,et al.  Designing collaborative systems - a practical guide to ethnography , 2003, The Kluwer international series on computer supported cooperative work.

[11]  K. K. Cetina,et al.  The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory , 2001 .

[12]  E. Shove.  Converging Conventions of Comfort, Cleanliness and Convenience , 2003 .

[13]  Val Richards,et al.  Being Alive , 2003 .

[14]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Re-place-ing space: the roles of place and space in collaborative systems , 1996, CSCW '96.

[15]  A. Warde.  Consumption and Theories of Practice , 2005 .

[16]  T. Ingold.  Lines: A Brief History , 2007 .

[17]  Allison Woodruff,et al.  Environmental sustainability and interaction , 2007, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[18]  Andreas Reckwitz.  Toward a Theory of Social Practices , 2002 .

[19]  Mark Hobart,et al.  What do we mean by ‘media practices’? , 2010 .

[20]  Phoebe Sengers,et al.  Reflective design , 2005, Critical Computing.

[21]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Implications for design , 2006, CHI.

[22]  Susanne Bødker,et al.  When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges , 2006, NordiCHI '06.

[23]  John Seely Brown,et al.  The Origins of Ubiquitous Computing Research at PARC in the Late 1980s , 1999, IBM Syst. J..

[24]  Eric Paulos,et al.  Some consideration on the (in)effectiveness of residential energy feedback systems , 2010, Conference on Designing Interactive Systems.

[25]  Tom Rodden,et al.  At home with the technology: an ethnographic study of a set-top-box trial , 1999, TCHI.

[26]  Sarah C. Darby,et al.  Smart metering: what potential for householder engagement? , 2010 .

[27]  Elizabeth Shove,et al.  On “The Design of Everyday Life” , 2007 .

[28]  Tracee Vetting Wolf,et al.  Dispelling "design" as the black art of CHI , 2006, CHI.

[29]  T. Schatzki.  Social Practices: A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social , 1996 .

[30]  E. Shove.  Beyond the ABC: Climate Change Policy and Theories of Social Change , 2010 .

[31]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Moving on from Weiser's Vision of Calm Computing: Engaging UbiComp Experiences , 2006, UbiComp.

[32]  Trevor H.J. Marchand,et al.  Making knowledge: explorations of the indissoluble relation between minds, bodies, and environment , 2010 .

[33]  Ian Alexander.  Designing Collaborative Systems. A Practical Guide to Ethnography , 2003, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[34]  Tim Ingold,et al.  Anthropology is Not Ethnography , 2008 .

[35]  Phoebe Sengers,et al.  The Three Paradigms of HCI , 2007 .

[36]  J. Law.  After Method: Mess in Social Science Research , 2004 .

[37]  Rebecca E. Grinter,et al.  Getting to green: understanding resource consumption in the home , 2008, UbiComp.

[38]  E. Shove.  Comfort, Cleanliness and Convenience: The Social Organization of Normality , 2003 .

[39]  Wendy Gunn,et al.  Learning to Ask Naïve Questions with IT Product Design Students , 2008 .

[40]  Eric Paulos,et al.  Home, habits, and energy: examining domestic interactions and energy consumption , 2010, CHI.

[41]  Jacob Buur,et al.  Designing with Video: Focusing the user-centred design process , 2007 .

[42]  Michael Bull,et al.  No Dead Air! The iPod and the Culture of Mobile Listening , 2005 .

[43]  SarahDarby,et al.  Smart metering: what potential for householder engagement? , 2010 .

[44]  Nick Couldry,et al.  Theorising media as practice , 2004 .

[45]  T. Saarinen.  Perception of environment , 1969 .

[46]  Michael J. Muller,et al.  Participatory design: the third space in HCI , 2002 .

[47]  David M. Smith.  For Space , 2006, Ordinary Blessings.

[48]  Paul Dourish,et al.  HCI and environmental sustainability: the politics of design and the design of politics , 2010, Conference on Designing Interactive Systems.

[49]  Neil Allan,et al.  Low-energy dwellings: the contribution of behaviours to actual performance , 2010 .

[50]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Where the action is , 2001 .

[51]  Allison Woodruff,et al.  A bright green perspective on sustainable choices , 2008, CHI.

[52]  T. Ingold.  Anthropology is Not Ethnography , 2008 .

[53]  K. Gegenfurtner,et al.  Design Issues in Gaze Guidance Under review with ACM Transactions on Computer Human Interaction , 2009 .