umu.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Stolterman, Erik
Publications (10 of 62) Show all publications
Wiberg, M. & Stolterman, E. (2019). Philosophy, HCI, and ‘Thought Styles’. In: : . Paper presented at CHI´19 (Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems) "Weaving the threads of CHI", Glasgow, Scotland, UK, May 4-9, 2019.. ACM Press
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Philosophy, HCI, and ‘Thought Styles’
2019 (English)Conference paper, Poster (with or without abstract) (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In this workshop position paper, we exemplify and elaborate on how “Standing on the Shoulders of Giants” i.e. a turn to philosophy can be a very useful approach to move forward in our exploration of HCI. In line with the call for this workshop we suggest that the classic notion of “thought styles”, a notion originally developed and proposed by Ludwick Fleck, and later introduced to the HCI community by Janlert & Stolterman might be useful as a conceptual vehicle for further explorations. Further, we elaborate on how this notion might serve as a conceptual backbone for the development of new interactive systems. We explore this notion of ‘thought styles’ by revisiting its historical and philosophical roots, and we discuss how philosophical methods including questioning, critical discussion, rational argument, and systematic presentation in relation to ‘thought styles’ and in the context of HCI might be useful. Finally, and on a more fundamental level, we conclude our position paper by acknowledging that we have a lot to gain from further explorations at the intersection of philosophy and HCI.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
ACM Press, 2019
National Category
Information Systems, Social aspects
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-158870 (URN)
Conference
CHI´19 (Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems) "Weaving the threads of CHI", Glasgow, Scotland, UK, May 4-9, 2019.
Note

Workshop position paper for “Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Exploring the Intersection of Philosophy and HCI", CHI´ 19, Glasgow Scotland, UK, May 4-9, 2019.

Available from: 2019-05-13 Created: 2019-05-13 Last updated: 2019-06-03Bibliographically approved
diva2:1135860
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Metaphors, materialities, and affordances: hybrid morphologies in the design of interactive artifacts
2017 (English)In: Design Studies, ISSN 0142-694X, E-ISSN 1872-6909, Vol. 53, p. 24-46Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

As materiality of interactive artifacts is diversified with integrated physical and digital materials, metaphoric design approaches in Human–Computer Interaction (HCI) go beyond resembling the appearance of physical objects, exploring novel materials and forms of interactive artifacts. The hybrid materialities and forms of artifacts influence how interactivity is perceived, reframing the concept of affordances according to its evolving relationship to metaphors and materialities. By conceptualizing interactive forms in their surface, behavioral and systemic aspects, we examine multifaceted roles of metaphors in HCI from concealing and revealing a formal system to expanding and reifying its meaning; and propose a morphologic perspective on affordances as an invitation for making variations of interactive forms by compositing multiple design resources.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford: Elsevier, 2017
Keywords
design rationale, design theory, interaction design, interface design, materialities
National Category
Design
Research subject
design; industrial design
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-138497 (URN)10.1016/j.destud.2017.06.004 (DOI)000418213500002 ()
Available from: 2017-08-24 Created: 2017-08-24 Last updated: 2019-01-15Bibliographically approved
Janlert, L.-E. & Stolterman, E. (2017). The Meaning of Interactivity: Some Proposals for Definitions and Measure. Human-Computer Interaction, 32(3), 103-138
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The Meaning of Interactivity: Some Proposals for Definitions and Measure
2017 (English)In: Human-Computer Interaction, ISSN 0737-0024, E-ISSN 1532-7051, Vol. 32, no 3, p. 103-138Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

New interactive applications, artifacts, and systems are constantly being added to our environments, and there are some concerns in the human-computer interaction research community that increasing interactivity might not be just to the good. But what is it that is supposed to be increasing, and how could we determine whether it is? To approach these issues in a systematic and analytical fashion, relying less on common intuitions and more on clearly defined concepts and when possible quantifiable properties, we take a renewed look at the notion of interactivity and related concepts. The main contribution of this article is a number of definitions and terms, and the beginning of an attempt to frame the conditions of interaction and interactivity. Based on this framing, we also propose some possible approaches for how interactivity can be measured.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC, 2017
National Category
Human Computer Interaction
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-133477 (URN)10.1080/07370024.2016.1226139 (DOI)000396051900001 ()
Available from: 2017-04-11 Created: 2017-04-11 Last updated: 2018-06-09Bibliographically approved
Janlert, L.-E. & Stolterman, E. (2017). Things that keep us busy: the elements of interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Things that keep us busy: the elements of interaction
2017 (English)Book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

We are surrounded by interactive devices, artifacts, and systems. The general assumption is that interactivity is good -- that it is a positive feature associated with being modern, efficient, fast, flexible, and in control. Yet there is no very precise idea of what interaction is and what interactivity means. In this book, Lars-Erik Janlert and Erik Stolterman investigate the elements of interaction and how they can be defined and measured. They focus on interaction with digital artifacts and systems but draw inspiration from the broader, everyday sense of the word.

Viewing the topic from a design perspective, Janlert and Stolterman take as their starting point the interface, which is designed to implement the interaction. They explore how the interface has changed over time, from a surface with knobs and dials to clickable symbols to gestures to the absence of anything visible. Janlert and Stolterman examine properties and qualities of designed artifacts and systems, primarily those that are open for manipulation by designers, considering such topics as complexity, clutter, control, and the emergence of an expressive-impressive style of interaction. They argue that only when we understand the basic concepts and terms of interactivity and interaction will we be able to discuss seriously its possible futures.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2017. p. 231
National Category
Social Sciences Interdisciplinary Interaction Technologies Design
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-143140 (URN)9780262036641 (ISBN)9780262341806 (ISBN)
Available from: 2017-12-18 Created: 2017-12-18 Last updated: 2018-06-09Bibliographically approved
Zimmerman, J., Teixeira, C., Stolterman, E. & Forlizzi, J. (2016). A New North American Design Research Organization. Dialectic, 1(1), 14-17
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A New North American Design Research Organization
2016 (English)In: Dialectic, E-ISSN 2572-7001, Vol. 1, no 1, p. 14-17Article in journal (Refereed) Published
National Category
Design
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-143239 (URN)10.3998/dialectic.14932326.0001.103 (DOI)
Available from: 2017-12-19 Created: 2017-12-19 Last updated: 2018-10-18Bibliographically approved
Beck, J. & Stolterman, E. (2016). Examining Practical, Everyday Theory Use in Design Research. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 2(2), 125-140
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Examining Practical, Everyday Theory Use in Design Research
2016 (English)In: She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, ISSN 2405-8726, Vol. 2, no 2, p. 125-140Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper discusses how theories (as objects) are used in articles published in Design Studies. While theory and theory construction have been given time and attention in the literature, less is known about how researchers put theories to work in their written texts about practical, everyday theory use. In the present paper, we examine 32 articles and synthesize six models of theory use based on our examination.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Tongji University Press, 2016
Keywords
Design research, Design theory, Research methodology
National Category
Design Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-143236 (URN)10.1016/j.sheji.2016.01.010 (DOI)
Available from: 2017-12-19 Created: 2017-12-19 Last updated: 2018-10-17Bibliographically approved
Beck, J. & Stolterman, E. (2016). Examining the Types of Knowledge Claims Made in Design Research. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 2(3), 199-214
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Examining the Types of Knowledge Claims Made in Design Research
2016 (English)In: She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, ISSN 2405-8726, Vol. 2, no 3, p. 199-214Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

While much has been written about designerly knowledge and designerly ways of knowing in the professions, less has been written about the production and presentation of knowledge in the design discipline. In the present paper, we examine the possibility that knowledge claims might be an effective way to distinguish the design discipline from other disciplines. We compare the kinds of knowledge claims made in journal publications from the natural sciences, social sciences, and design. And we find that natural and social science publications tend to make singular knowledge claims of similar kinds whereas design publications often contain multiple knowledge claims of different kinds. We raise possible explanations for this pattern and its implications for design research. Examining the Types of Knowledge Claims Made in Design Research.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Tongji University Press, 2016
National Category
Social Sciences Interdisciplinary Design
Research subject
design
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-143229 (URN)10.1016/j.sheji.2017.02.001 (DOI)
Available from: 2017-12-19 Created: 2017-12-19 Last updated: 2018-10-17Bibliographically approved
diva2:810870
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Faceless Interaction - A Conceptual Examination of the Notion of Interface: past, present and future
2015 (English)In: Human-Computer Interaction, ISSN 0737-0024, E-ISSN 1532-7051, Vol. 30, no 6, p. 507-539Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In the middle of the present struggle to keep interaction complexity in check as artifact complexity continues to rise and the technical possibilities to interact multiply, the notion of interface is scrutinized. First, a limited number of previous interpretations or thought styles of the notion are identified and discussed. This serves as a framework for an analysis of the current situation with regard to complexity, control, and interaction, leading to a realization of the crucial role of surface in contemporary understanding of interaction. The potential of faceless interaction, interaction that transcends traditional reliance on surfaces, is then examined and discussed, liberating possibilities as well as complicating effects and dangers are pointed out, ending with a sketch of a possibly emerging new thought style.

National Category
Human Computer Interaction Design
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-102681 (URN)10.1080/07370024.2014.944313 (DOI)000359703400002 ()
Available from: 2015-05-08 Created: 2015-04-30 Last updated: 2018-06-07Bibliographically approved
Wiltse, H., Stolterman, E. & Redström, J. (2015). Wicked Interactions: (On the Necessity of) Reframing the 'Computer' in Philosophy and Design. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 19(1), 26-49
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Wicked Interactions: (On the Necessity of) Reframing the 'Computer' in Philosophy and Design
2015 (English)In: Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, ISSN 1091-8264, E-ISSN 1091-8264, Vol. 19, no 1, p. 26-49Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The digital computational technologies that over the past decades have come to be fully integrated into nearly all aspects of human life have varying forms, scales, interactive mechanisms, functions, configurations, and interconnections. Much of this complexity and associated implications for human experience are, however, hidden by prevalent notions of ‘the computer’ as an object. In this paper, we consider how everyday digital technologies collectively mediate human experience, arguing that these technologies are better understood as fluid assemblages that have as many similarities with the infra-structural as they have properties typical for objects. We characterize these aspects in terms of ‘wicked interactions,’ drawing on and adapting the classic theory of wicked problems in design discourse that has similarly consid-ered the complexity of interactions with and within other types of social infrastructure. In doing this we emphasize the need and the potential for building up connections between philosophy of technology and design discourse, with the hope that this might further the shared goals of understanding digital technologies and their consequences and determining how to act in relation to them and their design.

Keywords
digital, design theory, experience, interaction, infrastructure, fluid assemblages
National Category
Interaction Technologies
Research subject
design
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-101706 (URN)10.5840/techne201531926 (DOI)
Available from: 2015-04-09 Created: 2015-04-09 Last updated: 2018-06-07Bibliographically approved
Mullaney, T., Yttergren, B. & Stolterman, E. (2014). Positional acts: using a kinect sensor to reconfigure patient roles within radiotherapy treatment. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction: . Paper presented at TEI'14 (pp. 93-96).
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Positional acts: using a kinect sensor to reconfigure patient roles within radiotherapy treatment
2014 (English)In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction, 2014, p. 93-96Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

With many medical procedures done today, patients are forced to act as passive recipients of care, while nurses and doctors are actively involved in the process of diagnosis or treatment. In this paper, we focus upon patient positioning for radiotherapy treatment, looking at the immobilization and positioning techniques used, and the role of the patient in this process. Our desire to engage patients in the positioning process led to the creation of an experimental positioning system which can enable patients to self-position themselves for treatment. Utilizing the body tracking and skeletal data capabilities of a Kinect™ sensor, our prototype provides visualizations of where an individual's body is in relation to the desired position, and when these two positions have become correctly aligned. Testing demonstrated how our prototype could be used to actively engage patients in the positioning process together with care providers, in a mutually empowering and supportive way.

Keywords
Kinect, body position, patient roles in healthcare
National Category
Design
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-86717 (URN)10.1145/2540930.2540943 (DOI)
Conference
TEI'14
Available from: 2014-03-05 Created: 2014-03-05 Last updated: 2018-06-08Bibliographically approved
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications