Recommenders play a significant role in our daily lives, making decisions for users on a regular basis. Their widespread adoption necessitates a thorough examination of how users interact with recommenders and the algorithms that drive them. An important form of interaction in these systems are algorithmic affordances: means that provide users with perceptible control over the algorithm by, for instance, providing context (‘find a movie for this profile’), weighing criteria (‘most important is the main actor’), or evaluating results (‘loved this movie’). The assumption is that these algorithmic affordances impact interaction qualities such as transparency, trust, autonomy, and serendipity, and as a result, they impact the user experience. Currently, the precise nature of the relation between algorithmic affordances, their specific implementations in the interface, interaction qualities, and user experience remains unclear. Subjects that will be discussed during the workshop, therefore, include but are not limited to the impact of algorithmic affordances and their implementations on interaction qualities, balances between cognitive overload and transparency in recommender interfaces containing algorithmic affordances; and reasons why research into these types of interfaces sometimes fails to cross the research-practice gap and are not landing in the design practice. As a potential solution the workshop committee proposes a library of examples of algorithmic affordances design patterns and their implementations in recommender interfaces enriched with academic research concerning their impact. The final part of the workshop will be dedicated to formulating guiding principles for such a library.
LINK
Algorithmic affordances are defined as user interaction mechanisms that allow users tangible control over AI algorithms, such as recommender systems. Designing such algorithmic affordances, including assessing their impact, is not straightforward and practitioners state that they lack resources to design adequately for interfaces of AI systems. This could be amended by creating a comprehensive pattern library of algorithmic affordances. This library should provide easy access to patterns, supported by live examples and research on their experiential impact and limitations of use. The Algorithmic Affordances in Recommender Interfaces workshop aimed to address key challenges related to building such a pattern library, including pattern identification features, a framework for systematic impact evaluation, and understanding the interaction between algorithmic affordances and their context of use, especially in education or with users with a low algorithmic literacy. Preliminary solutions were proposed for these challenges.
LINK
This exploratory study investigates the rationale behind categorizing algorithmic controls, or algorithmic affordances, in the graphical user interfaces (GUIs) of recommender systems. Seven professionals from industry and academia took part in an open card sorting activity to analyze 45 cards with examples of algorithmic affordances in recommender systems’ GUIs. Their objective was to identify potential design patterns including features on which to base these patterns. Analyzing the group discussions revealed distinct thought processes and defining factors for design patterns that were shared by academic and industry partners. While the discussions were promising, they also demonstrated a varying degree of alignment between industry and academia when it came to labelling the identified categories. Since this workshop is part of the preparation for creating a design pattern library of algorithmic affordances, and since the library aims to be useful for both industry and research partners, further research into design patterns of algorithmic affordances, particularly in terms of labelling and description, is required in order to establish categories that resonate with all relevant parties
LINK
‘Creating the Difference’ is the theme of the 2014 edition of the Chi Sparks conference. It is also the challenge that the Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) community is facing today. HCI is a creative field where practitioners engage in design, production, and evaluation of interactions between people and digital technology. Creating excellent interfaces for people, they make a difference in media and systems that people are eager to use. Usability and user experience are fundamental for achieving this, as are abilities at the forefront of technology, but key to a successful difference is getting the right concepts, addressing genuine, intrinsic, human needs. Researchers and practitioners contribute to this area from theory as well as practice by sharing, discussing, and demonstrating new ideas and developments. This is how HCI creates a difference for society, for individuals, businesses, education, and organizations. The difference that an interactive product or service makes might lie in the concept of it but also in the making, the creation of details and the realisation. It is through powerful concepts and exceptional quality of realisation that innovation is truly achieved. At the Chi Sparks 2014 conference, researchers and practitioners in the HCI community convene to share and discuss their efforts on researching and developing methods, techniques, products, and services that enable people to have better interactions with systems and other people. The conference is hosted at The Hague University of Applied Sciences, and proudly built upon the previous conferences in Arnhem (2011) and Leiden (2009). Copyright van de individuele papers ligt bij de betreffende auteurs.
DOCUMENT
Introduction: Sensor-feedback systems can be used to support people after stroke during independent practice of gait. The main aim of the study was to describe the user-centred approach to (re)design the user interface of the sensor feedback system “Stappy” for people after stroke, and share the deliverables and key observations from this process. Methods: The user-centred approach was structured around four phases (the discovery, definition, development and delivery phase) which were fundamental to the design process. Fifteen participants with cognitive and/or physical limitations participated (10 women, 2/3 older than 65). Prototypes were evaluated in multiple test rounds, consisting of 2–7 individual test sessions. Results: Seven deliverables were created: a list of design requirements, a personae, a user flow, a low-, medium- and high-fidelity prototype and the character “Stappy”. The first six deliverables were necessary tools to design the user interface, whereas the character was a solution resulting from this design process. Key observations related to “readability and contrast of visual information”, “understanding and remembering information”, “physical limitations” were confirmed by and “empathy” was additionally derived from the design process. Conclusions: The study offers a structured methodology resulting in deliverables and key observations, which can be used to (re)design meaningful user interfaces for people after stroke. Additionally, the study provides a technique that may promote “empathy” through the creation of the character Stappy. The description may provide guidance for health care professionals, researchers or designers in future user interface design projects in which existing products are redesigned for people after stroke.
DOCUMENT
The user’s experience with a recommender system is significantly shaped by the dynamics of user-algorithm interactions. These interactions are often evaluated using interaction qualities, such as controllability, trust, and autonomy, to gauge their impact. As part of our effort to systematically categorize these evaluations, we explored the suitability of the interaction qualities framework as proposed by Lenz, Dieffenbach and Hassenzahl. During this examination, we uncovered four challenges within the framework itself, and an additional external challenge. In studies examining the interaction between user control options and interaction qualities, interdependencies between concepts, inconsistent terminology, and the entity perspective (is it a user’s trust or a system’s trustworthiness) often hinder a systematic inventory of the findings. Additionally, our discussion underscored the crucial role of the decision context in evaluating the relation of algorithmic affordances and interaction qualities. We propose dimensions of decision contexts (such as ‘reversibility of the decision’, or ‘time pressure’). They could aid in establishing a systematic three-way relationship between context attributes, attributes of user control mechanisms, and experiential goals, and as such they warrant further research. In sum, while the interaction qualities framework serves as a foundational structure for organizing research on evaluating the impact of algorithmic affordances, challenges related to interdependencies and context-specific influences remain. These challenges necessitate further investigation and subsequent refinement and expansion of the framework.
LINK
Office well-being aims to explore and support a healthy, balanced and active work style in office environments. Recent work on tangible user interfaces has started to explore the role of physical, tangible interfaces as active interventions to explore how to tackle problems such as inactive work and lifestyles, and increasingly sedentary behaviours. We identify a fragmented research landscape on tangible Office well-being interventions, missing the relationship between interventions, data, design strategies, and outcomes, and behaviour change techniques. Based on the analysis of 40 papers, we identify 7 classifications in tangible Office well-being interventions and analyse the intervention based on their role and foundation in behaviour change. Based on the analysis, we present design considerations for the development of future tangible Office well-being design interventions and present an overview of the current field and future research into tangible Office well-being interventions to design for a healthier and active office environment.
DOCUMENT
Purpose: The aims of this study were to investigate how a variety of research methods is commonly employed to study technology and practitioner cognition. User-interface issues with infusion pumps were selected as a case because of its relevance to patient safety. Methods: Starting from a Cognitive Systems Engineering perspective, we developed an Impact Flow Diagram showing the relationship of computer technology, cognition, practitioner behavior, and system failure in the area of medical infusion devices. We subsequently conducted a systematic literature review on user-interface issues with infusion pumps, categorized the studies in terms of methods employed, and noted the usability problems found with particular methods. Next, we assigned usability problems and related methods to the levels in the Impact Flow Diagram. Results: Most study methods used to find user interface issues with infusion pumps focused on observable behavior rather than on how artifacts shape cognition and collaboration. A concerted and theorydriven application of these methods when testing infusion pumps is lacking in the literature. Detailed analysis of one case study provided an illustration of how to apply the Impact Flow Diagram, as well as how the scope of analysis may be broadened to include organizational and regulatory factors. Conclusion: Research methods to uncover use problems with technology may be used in many ways, with many different foci. We advocate the adoption of an Impact Flow Diagram perspective rather than merely focusing on usability issues in isolation. Truly advancing patient safety requires the systematic adoption of a systems perspective viewing people and technology as an ensemble, also in the design of medical device technology.
DOCUMENT
Providing users with a sense of place – related to a specific geographic location in which one is situated, or linked to a faraway place, or even giving place-like qualities to virtual spaces such as massively multiplayer online role-playing games – has been deemed central for several forms of digital interactions. In the past decade, studies from human-computer interaction and computer-supported cooperative work have specifically addressed this theme, but the scarcity of works of place specificity focusing expressly on interactive TV suggests a gap in the current research, whereas the latest developments in mobile TV would seem highly coherent with such topic. To contribute to closing this gap, some initial directions are suggested here by pointing at compatible treatments of the notion of place in related fields, for example, the design of pervasive urban games. Game designers and game scholars might provide operational concepts that help understanding the role and the potentialities of places for interactive TV. Two general types of artifacts are selected here: works that are anchored to the experience of faraway places and works that leverage the physical location in which the user is. Their analysis yields three design strategies (experience anchoring, place permeability, and distributed storytelling), offered here as “objects to think with” and to spur further research and design. By pointing at them and at other similar strategies, similarities between digital games, ITV products, and other similar artifacts emerge and allow us to speculatively trace possible future convergences.
LINK
This investigation explores relations between 1) a theory of human cognition, called Embodied Cognition, 2) the design of interactive systems and 3) the practice of ‘creative group meetings’ (of which the so-called ‘brainstorm’ is perhaps the best-known example). The investigation is one of Research-through-Design (Overbeeke et al., 2006). This means that, together with students and external stakeholders, I designed two interactive prototypes. Both systems contain a ‘mix’ of both physical and digital forms. Both are designed to be tools in creative meeting sessions, or brainstorms. The tools are meant to form a natural, element in the physical meeting space. The function of these devices is to support the formation of shared insight: that is, the tools should support the process by which participants together, during the activity, get a better grip on the design challenge that they are faced with. Over a series of iterations I reflected on the design process and outcome, and investigated how users interacted with the prototypes.
DOCUMENT
