Towards an activity-oriented design method for HCI research and practice

During the last two decades, designing for usability has been the focus of attention when developing computer systems. However, the dynamic nature of human use of computer systems has meant that designing for `usefulness' or `fitness for purpose' is increasingly becoming the primary concern for systems developers. Central to this concern are issues underpinned by the social context in which a computer user operates. Within the field of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), this situation led to a search for appropriate theories for conceptualising these design concerns. Whilst Activity Theory has been identified as a suitable framework for conceptualising these user perspectives, the lack of a standard methodology for applying it to HCI research and practice has meant that many systems developers have failed to benefit from the richness of this framework. The objective of this thesis was therefore to develop an Activity Theory based methodology for HCI research and practice. This thesis, contributes the `Activity-Oriented Design Methodology' (AODM) both as a practical and analytical methodology for using Activity Theory within HCI design. AODM incorporates four methodological tools namely: - The `Eight-Step-Model' - The `Activity Notation' - The technique of `Generating Research Questions' - The technique of `Mapping AODM Operational Processes' AODM tools were constructed from empirical work carried out as part of this research. Empirical analysis of work practices in two organisations was conducted for a period of two years using Activity Theory. This empirical work formed the basis for validating AODM. AODM tools support the systems design processes of gathering, analysing and communicating (through modelling) research and design insights from an Activity Theory perspective. It is argued that AODM provides a valuable practical and analytical methodology for operationalising Activity Theory within HCI so as to support early phases of systems design: namely, requirements capture and evaluation.

[1]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Designing for or designing with? Informant design for interactive learning environments , 1997, CHI.

[2]  Karen Holtzblatt,et al.  Contextual design , 1997, INTR.

[3]  Nancy Staggers,et al.  Mental Models: Concepts for Human-Computer Interaction Research , 1993, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[4]  L. Vygotsky.  Genesis of the higher mental functions. , 1991 .

[5]  Rachel K. E. Bellamy,et al.  Designing educational technology: computer-mediated change , 1995 .

[6]  Jonathan Grudin,et al.  The computer reaches out: the historical continuity of interface design , 1989, CHI '90.

[7]  Jenny Preece,et al.  Human-Computer Interaction: Selected Readings , 1994 .

[8]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Models in the mind : theory, perspective and application , 1992 .

[9]  R. Grice.  Minimalism Beyond the Nurnberg Funnel , 1998 .

[10]  David Wasserman.  The Activity Checklist : A Tool for Representing the “ Space ” of Context , 1999 .

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

[12]  Joyce Hawkins,et al.  The Oxford encyclopedic English dictionary , 1991 .

[13]  Nick Hammond,et al.  Transferring HCI Modelling and Design Techniques to Practitioners: A Framework and Empirical Work , 1994, BCS HCI.

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

[15]  Phil Turner,et al.  From description to requirements: an activity theoretic perspective , 1999, GROUP.

[16]  Liam J. Bannon,et al.  From Human Factors to Human Actors: The Role of Psychology and Human-Computer Interaction Studies in System Design , 1992, Design at Work.

[17]  William Buxton,et al.  Readings in human-computer interaction , 1987 .

[18]  Gerhard Fischer,et al.  Shared Understanding, Informed Participation, and Social Creativity - Objectives for the Next Generation of Collaborative Systeme , 2000, COOP.

[19]  Alan Kay,et al.  The reactive engine , 1969 .

[20]  Tom Rodden,et al.  The role of ethnography in interactive systems design , 1995, INTR.

[21]  Allen Newell,et al.  The psychology of human-computer interaction , 1983 .

[22]  A. N. Leont’ev,et al.  Activity, consciousness, and personality , 1978 .

[23]  Liam J. Bannon,et al.  Beyond the Interface: Encountering Artifacts in Use , 1989 .

[24]  Nick Hammond,et al.  Communicating HCI modelling to practitioners , 1994, CHI '94.

[25]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[26]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  The Structure of Ill-Structured Solutions: Boundary Objects and Heterogeneous Distributed Problem Solving , 1989, Distributed Artificial Intelligence.

[27]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Taking the 'No' out of Lotus Notes: activity theory, groupware, and student groupwork , 2002, CSCL.

[28]  Allen Newell,et al.  The Prospects for Psychological Science in Human-Computer Interaction , 1985, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[29]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Systems Thinking, Systems Practice: Includes a 30-Year Retrospective , 1999 .

[30]  V. V. Davydov.  Perspectives on activity theory: The content and unsolved problems of activity theory , 1999 .

[31]  John L. Bennett,et al.  Visual display terminals: Usability issues and health concerns , 1984 .

[32]  J. Wertsch.  The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology , 1981 .

[33]  Y. Engeström,et al.  Developmental studies of work as a testbench of activity theory: The case of primary care medical practice , 1993 .

[34]  Y. Engeström,et al.  Activity theory and individual and social transformation. , 1999 .

[35]  Douglas C. Engelbart,et al.  A conceptual framework for the augmentation of man's intellect , 1988 .

[36]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Some observations on mental models , 1987 .

[37]  H. Rex Hartson,et al.  Developing user interfaces: ensuring usability through product & process , 1993 .

[38]  Lucy Suchman.  Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication , 1987 .

[39]  M. Ravenel,et al.  Science and the Modern World , 1926 .

[40]  Jeff A. Johnson,et al.  Creating presentation slides: a study of user preferences for task-specific versus generic application software , 1996, TCHI.

[41]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Kids as informants: telling us what we didn't know or confirming what we knew already? , 1998 .

[42]  David E. Kieras,et al.  The GOMS family of user interface analysis techniques: comparison and contrast , 1996, TCHI.

[43]  Georges Pérec,et al.  Life: A User's Manual , 1978 .

[44]  Henry Lieberman,et al.  Watch what I do: programming by demonstration , 1993 .

[45]  Mikko Korpela,et al.  Activity Analysis as a Method for Information Systems Development: General Introduction and Experiments from Nigeria and Finland , 2000, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[46]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Informing the design of a virtual environment to support learning in children , 2001, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[47]  Robert Cailliau,et al.  How the Web Was Born: The Story of the World Wide Web , 2000 .

[48]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  A Small Matter of Programming: Perspectives on End User Computing , 1993 .

[49]  Charles Babbage,et al.  Of the analytical engine , 2002 .

[50]  Larry L. Constantine,et al.  Back to the future , 2001, CACM.

[51]  L. S. Vygotksy.  Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[52]  John M. Carroll,et al.  Designing Interaction: Psychology at the Human-Computer Interface , 1991 .

[53]  Allison Druin,et al.  Cooperative inquiry: developing new technologies for children with children , 1999, CHI '99.

[54]  Zenon W. Pylyshyn,et al.  Perspectives on the computer revolution , 1970 .