© 2025 SURF
http://dx.doi.org/10.14261/postit/57C5C531-365C-4639-8E97DF9B1EF596A9In 2015 and 2016, Saxion University of Applied Sciences organized the 2nd and 3rd edition of the Regional Innovation and Entrepreneurship Conference (RIEC).This paper will in an overall and outlining way describe why the phenomenology of wonder and wonder-based approaches can become doorways for understanding the existential and ontological dimensions of entrepreneurship teaching.
MULTIFILE
Abstract: Embodied embedded cognition (EEC) has gained support in cognitive science as well as in human–computer interaction (HCI). EEC can be characterized both by its action-centeredness as well as its roots in phenomenology. The phenomenological aspects of EEC could be seen as support for trends in design emphasizing the user experience. Meanwhile, usability issues often are still approached using traditional methods based on cognitivist assumptions. In this paper, I argue for a renewed focus on improving usability from an EEC perspective. I draw mainly on a behavior-oriented interpretation of the theory, the key aspects of which are reviewed. A tentative sketch for an embodied embedded usability is proposed, doing justice to the embodied embedded nature of interaction while retaining the goal of developing technology that is easy to use in everyday practice.
LINK
Background:Current technology innovations, such as wearables, have caused surprising reactions and feelings of deep connection to devices. Some researchers are calling mobile and wearable technologies cognitive prostheses, which are intrinsically connected to individuals as if they are part of the body, similar to a physical prosthesis. Additionally, while several studies have been performed on the phenomenology of receiving and wearing a physical prosthesis, it is unknown whether similar subjective experiences arise with technology.Objective:In one of the first qualitative studies to track wearables in a longitudinal investigation, we explore whether a wearable can be embodied similar to a physical prosthesis. We hoped to gain insights and compare the phases of embodiment (ie, initial adjustment to the prosthesis) and the psychological responses (ie, accept the prosthesis as part of their body) between wearables and limb prostheses. This approach allowed us to find out whether this pattern was part of a cyclical (ie, period of different usage intensity) or asymptotic (ie, abandonment of the technology) pattern.Methods:We adapted a limb prosthesis methodological framework to be applied to wearables and conducted semistructured interviews over a span of several months to assess if, how, and to what extent individuals come to embody wearables similar to prosthetic devices. Twelve individuals wore fitness trackers for 9 months, during which time interviews were conducted in the following three phases: after 3 months, after 6 months, and at the end of the study after 9 months. A deductive thematic analysis based on Murray’s work was combined with an inductive approach in which new themes were discovered.Results:Overall, the individuals experienced technology embodiment similar to limb embodiment in terms of adjustment, wearability, awareness, and body extension. Furthermore, we discovered two additional themes of engagement/reengagement and comparison to another device or person. Interestingly, many participants experienced a rarely reported phenomenon in longitudinal studies where the feedback from the device was counterintuitive to their own beliefs. This created a blurring of self-perception and a dilemma of “whom” to believe, the machine or one’s self.Conclusions:There are many similarities between the embodiment of a limb prosthesis and a wearable. The large overlap between limb and wearable embodiment would suggest that insights from physical prostheses can be applied to wearables and vice versa. This is especially interesting as we are seeing the traditionally “dumb” body prosthesis becoming smarter and thus a natural merging of technology and body. Future longitudinal studies could focus on the dilemma people might experience of whether to believe the information of the device over their own thoughts and feelings. These studies might take into account constructs, such as technology reliance, autonomy, and levels of self-awareness.
DOCUMENT
In this presentation of her current research project Rebecca Louise Breuer questions the common enhancement of the body through, for instance, self-tracking, data collecting and monitoring of everyday and athletic movement. She attempts to provide an alternative perspective through discussing the concept of uncommon sense by turning to (micro-)phenomenological philosophical concepts as presented by Gilles Deleuze, Hermann Schmitz, Claire Petitmengin and Peter Sloterdijk. The case study used during this presentation, which will sketch an artistic, creative alternative to common sensoring devices, is found in the sound producing pressure sensors incorporated in the Lace Sensor Dresses by Anja Hertenberger and Meg Grant, artists working in the field of e-textiles and wearable electronics.
DOCUMENT
PURPOSE: This study investigates self-injury fromthe perspective of patients with anorexia nervosa. DESIGN AND METHODS: A phenomenological design was used. Twelve patients participated. Data were collected using a semi-structured interview guide. FINDINGS: Participants display self-injurious behavior predominantly in situations when they are forced to eat. They are terrified of gaining weight and use selfinjurious behavior to copewith their anxiety. Self-injury is envisioned as a technique to regain control of their own eating pattern without bothering anyone. They feel shame for not controlling their emotions more constructively. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Healthcare professionals should systematically observe signals and explore less harmful strategies that help to regulate overwhelming feelings
DOCUMENT
Nowadays, digital tools for mathematics education are sophisticated and widely available. These tools offer important opportunities, but also come with constraints. Some tools are hard to tailor by teachers, educational designers and researchers; their functionality has to be taken for granted. Other tools offer many possible educational applications, which require didactical choices. In both cases, one may experience a tension between a teacher’s didactical goals and the tool’s affordances. From the perspective of Realistic Mathematics Education (RME), this challenge concerns both guided reinvention and didactical phenomenology. In this chapter, this dialectic relationship will be addressed through the description of two particular cases of using digital tools in Dutch mathematics education: the introduction of the graphing calculator (GC), and the evolution of the online Digital Mathematics Environment (DME). From these two case descriptions, my conclusion is that students need to develop new techniques for using digital tools; techniques that interact with conceptual understanding. For teachers, it is important to be able to tailor the digital tool to their didactical intentions. From the perspective of RME, I conclude that its match with using digital technology is not self-evident. Guided reinvention may be challenged by the rigid character of the tools, and the phenomena that form the point of departure of the learning of mathematics may change in a technology-rich classroom.
LINK
In the course of our supervisory work over the years, we have noticed that qualitative research tends to evoke a lot of questions and worries, so-called frequently asked questions (FAQs). This series of four articles intends to provide novice researchers with practical guidance for conducting high-quality qualitative research in primary care. By ‘novice’ we mean Master’s students and junior researchers, as well as experienced quantitative researchers who are engaging in qualitative research for the first time. This series addresses their questions and provides researchers, readers, reviewers and editors with references to criteria and tools for judging the quality of qualitative research papers. This second article addresses FAQs about context, research questions and designs. Qualitative research takes into account the natural contexts in which individuals or groups function to provide an in-depth understanding of real-world problems. The research questions are generally broad and open to unexpected findings. The choice of a qualitative design primarily depends on the nature of the research problem, the research question(s) and the scientific knowledge one seeks. Ethnography, phenomenology and grounded theory are considered to represent the ‘big three’ qualitative approaches. Theory guides the researcher through the research process by providing a ‘lens’ to look at the phenomenon under study. Since qualitative researchers and the participants of their studies interact in a social process, researchers influence the research process. The first article described the key features of qualitative research, the third article will focus on sampling, data collection and analysis, while the last article focuses on trustworthiness and publishing.
DOCUMENT
