No abstract

Creativity Support Tools (CSTs) play a fundamental role in the study of creativity in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI). Even so, there is no consensus definition of the term 'CST' in HCI, and in most studies, CSTs have been construed as oneoff exploratory prototypes, typically built by the researchers themselves. This makes it difficult to clearly demarcate CST research, but also to compare findings across studies, which impedes advancement in digital creativity as a growing field of research. Based on a literature review of 143 papers from the ACM Digital Library (1999-2018), we contribute a first overview of the key characteristics of CSTs developed by the HCI community. Moreover, we propose a tentative definition of a CST to help strengthen knowledge sharing across CST studies. We end by discussing our study's implications for future HCI research on CSTs and digital creativity. CCS CONCEPTS • Human-centered computing → Interaction design theory, concepts and paradigms; HCI theory, concepts and models; Interactive systems and tools.

In interaction design for experience-oriented uses of technology, a central facet of aesthetics of interaction is rooted in the user's experience of herself "performing her perception." By drawing on performance (theater) theory, phenomenology and sociology and with references to recent HCI-work on the relation between the system and the performer/user and the spectator's relation to this dynamic, we show how the user is simultaneously operator, performer and spectator when interacting. By engaging with the system, she continuously acts out these three roles and her awareness of them is crucial in her experience. We argue that this 3-in-1 is always already shaping the user's understanding and perception of her interaction as it is staged through her experience of the object's form and expression. Through examples ranging from everyday technologies utilizing performances of interaction to spatial contemporary artworks, digital as well as analogue, we address the notion of the performative spectator and the spectating performer. We demonstrate how perception is also performative and how focus on this aspect seems to be crucial when designing experience-oriented products, systems and services.

Interaction design researchers doing research through design face not only the wicked problems in the practice of doing interaction design, but also the wicked problems that exist in the practice of doing research. In this paper we discuss the use of a tool developed for the specific purpose of documenting design projects and prompting reflection about design events as part of doing research through design. Based on cases lasting from nine to thirteen months we address specific benefits and challenges that we have encountered while employing the tool. Challenges concern roles and responsibilities, lack of routines, determining what to document, and finding the right level of detail. Benefits include support of shared reflection and discussion in on-going projects, the development, refining, and reflection upon research questions, scaffolding longitudinal and cross-project studies. Moreover, the benefits derived from entering design materials and other kinds of artefacts into a tool may not be achieved until must later, for instance when writing research publications. • Newcastle, UK Shipman and McCall [15] have identified three principal perspectives on design rationales. The argumentation perspective focuses on the reasons and considerations behind decisions made by individual designers or groups of designers. Its purpose is to identify flaws in the arguments for the design, with the goal of improving the quality of design decisions. The documentation perspective focuses on the design decision itself, together with information about who made the decisions, and when. The communication perspective focuses on documenting the communication throughout the process, by archiving e-mail messages, design documents, notes from telephone conversations, and so on. Across these three perspectives, Burge and Brown [3] mention eight aspects in which design rationales may be useful: design verification, design evaluation, design maintenance, design reuse, design teaching, design communication, design assistance, and design documentation.In all cases, a design rationale approach is supported by some kind of software tool, but the strategy for constructing the design rationale varies in several respects [11 p78]. One DIS

Facilitating participation has become one of the cornerstones of co-design, and a number of methods, techniques and events intended to inspire design participants and scaffold collaborative ideation and concept development have been developed. However, an aspect that is yet relatively unexplored in co-design literature is how different methods and techniques can be productively combined. This paper presents and discusses the dialogue-labs method, which provides a structured way of generating ideas through a sequence of co-design activities. The analysis of the method during 18 sessions, based on iterative reflection, focuses on its three key structuring aspects: the process of how dialogue-labs sessions are orchestrated, the space in which the sessions unfold and the materials that are employed. In addition to understanding the specific dialogue-labs method, this discussion of process, space and materials may yield insights into how other codesign methods are analysed and further developed or combined.

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract. Using media façades as a subcategory of urban computing, this paper contributes to the understanding of spatial interaction, sense-making, and social mediation as part of identifying key characteristics of interaction with media façades. Our research addresses in particular the open-ended but framed nature of interaction, which in conjunction with varying interpretations enables individual sense-making. Moreover, we contribute to the understanding of flexible social interaction by addressing urban interaction in relation to distributed attention, shared focus, dialogue and collective action. Finally we address challenges for interaction designers encountered in a complex spatial setting calling for a need to take into account multiple viewing and action positions. Our researchthrough-design approach has included a real-life design intervention in terms of the design, implementation, and reflective evaluation of a 180 m 2 (1937 square feet) interactive media façade in operation 24/7 for more than 50 days.