Dynamics, Multiplicity and Conceptual Blends in HCI

Discussions on what makes user interfaces "natural" or "intuitive" have led researchers to apply Fauconnier and Turner's theory of Conceptual Blends to explain how users rely on familiar and real-world concepts when they learn to use new digital technologies -- as a blend of experiences from the --physical and the "digital" world. This pursuit has multiple challenges of which we address four: The continuous dynamic development of experiences; the multiplicity and complexity involved; the distinction between "real" and "virtual" experiences, and finally applying descriptive concepts predictively. Based on our background in activity theoretical HCI we discuss two cases to nuance the discussion of conceptual blends and HCI. We provide an understanding of conceptual blends beyond one-to-one static blends, and immediately recognizable concepts. We focus on multiplicity, dynamics and learning, and in that we provide a more advanced methodological scaffolding of analyses of conceptual blends, hence we propose that designers need to seed blends in design.

[1]  Pelle Ehn,et al.  Work-oriented design of computer artifacts , 1989 .

[2]  Susanne Bødker,et al.  Between Initial Familiarity and Future Use: A Case of Collocated Collaborative Writing , 2014, COOP.

[3]  S. Bødker,et al.  Scenarios as Springboards in Design , 1993 .

[4]  Susanne Bødker,et al.  CHAPTER 11 – Activity Theory , 2003 .

[5]  David Benyon,et al.  Designing with blends - conceptual foundations of human-computer interaction and software engineering , 2006 .

[6]  Fredrik Öhberg,et al.  Designing blended reality space: conceptual foundations and applications , 2011, BCS HCI.

[7]  Peter Dalsgaard,et al.  Note to self: stop calling interfaces "natural" , 2015, Aarhus Conference on Critical Alternatives.

[8]  Susanne Bødker,et al.  Complex Mediation , 2005, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[9]  David Benyon,et al.  Designing with Blends , 2007 .

[10]  Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose,et al.  Participatory IT in semi-public spaces , 2014, NordiCHI.

[11]  Brian O'Keefe,et al.  Location as interaction: exploring blended spaces in the global village , 2013, BCS HCI.

[12]  Harald Reiterer,et al.  Blended Interaction: understanding natural human–computer interaction in post-WIMP interactive spaces , 2014, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[13]  E. Hutchins.  Material anchors for conceptual blends , 2005 .

[14]  W. Frawley.  Mind as Action , 1998, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[15]  Jakob E. Bardram,et al.  Supporting the Development of Transparent Interaction , 1995, EWHCI.

[16]  G. Lakoff,et al.  Metaphors We Live by , 1982 .

[17]  V. Kaptelinin.  Activity theory: implications for human-computer interaction , 1995 .

[18]  Clay Spinuzzi,et al.  Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction , 1997 .

[19]  Peter Bøgh Andersen,et al.  Design and Professional Languages , 1988 .

[20]  Thomas P. Moran,et al.  Analogy considered harmful , 1982, CHI '82.

[21]  Susanne Bødker,et al.  Poetry in motion: appropriation of the world of apps , 2012, ECCE.

[22]  Alan F. Blackwell,et al.  The reification of metaphor as a design tool , 2006, TCHI.

[23]  Orit Shaer,et al.  Reality-based interaction: a framework for post-WIMP interfaces , 2008, CHI.

[24]  David Benyon,et al.  Metaphors and Models: Conceptual Foundations of Representations in Interactive Systems Development , 1999, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[25]  Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose,et al.  Dynamics in artifact ecologies , 2012, NordiCHI.

[26]  Peter Gall Krogh,et al.  Mapping Cultural Frame Shifting in Interaction Design with Blending Theory , 2008 .

[27]  Ellen Tove Christiansen,et al.  Tamed by a rose: computers as tools in human activity , 1995 .

[28]  G. Fauconnier,et al.  The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind''s Hidden Complexities. Basic Books , 2002 .

[29]  Kenton O'Hara,et al.  On the naturalness of touchless: Putting the “interaction” back into NUI , 2013, TCHI.

[30]  David Benyon,et al.  A Blended Space for Heritage Storytelling , 2014, BCS HCI.

[31]  Kim Halskov,et al.  A guide to metaphorical design , 1994, CACM.

[32]  Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose,et al.  The Human–Artifact Model: An Activity Theoretical Approach to Artifact Ecologies , 2011, Hum. Comput. Interact..