Exploring challenging group dynamics in participatory design with children

Abstract

This paper presents a structured way to evaluate challenging group or 'co-design dynamics' in participatory design processes with children. In the form of a critical reflection on a project in which 103 children were involved as design partners, we describe the most prevalent co-design dynamics. For example, some groups rush too quickly towards consensus to safeguard group cohesiveness instead of examining other choice alternatives (i.e., groupthink). Besides 'groupthink' we describe five more challenging co-design dynamics: 'laughing out loud', 'free riding', 'unequal power', 'apart together' and 'destructive conflict'. We argue that balancing these dynamics has a positive impact on the dialectic process of developing values and ideas in participatory design, as well as on children's motivation. Therefore, the CCI community could benefit from our in-depth exploration and categorization of challenging group dynamics when co-designing technology with children.

Using the MemoLine to capture changes in user experience over time with children

“…In contrast, all the children received the training at the same time within the school, and were assisted by the teacher and researchers if they encountered any difficulties. Even with a difference in individual guidance during training the children were able to follow instructions and complete the activities, as has been evidenced before from participatory design sessions involving groups of children [51,52]. Therefore the MemoLine could be completed either individually on a one-to-one basis or as part of a larger group.…”

Exploring the use of emoji as a visual research method for eliciting young children’s voices in childhood research

“…This helped children for whom storytelling was unfamiliar as they could use language modelled by their peers and add their own ideas to it. However groupthink, or the phenomenon where participants are reluctant to disagree or criticize their peers ideas, can be a concern as this can lead to 'group-think trap' where only the dominant voices are heard (Van Mechelen, Gielen, Laenen, & Zaman, 2014 Um, a sad, um when, um, when the happy friend went out with his mum and dad and he went the wrong way and he didn't know where his mum was, or dad was, or brother, and he was lost. And he was so sad.…”

Challenging group dynamics in participatory design with children

“…Although not a complete list, we revealed six challenging codesign dynamics [43], referred to as unequal power (i.e., some children come to the co-design tasks with higher status than others), free riding (i.e., reduced effort by some individuals when working in a co-design team and taking advantage of other team members), laughing out loud (i.e., an unwillingness to take the task at hand serious as a group), dysfunctional conflict (i.e., escalating disagreements leading to a polarization within the team), apart together (i.e., working individually and only combining results superficially), and groupthink (i.e., poor decision-making by rushing too quickly towards consensus, neglecting choice alternatives) [43]. Most of these challenging dynamics are well known in group dynamics research (e.g., [35][41] [11]) but have rarely been addressed in the field of CCI and in literature on co-design.…”

“…We thereby referred to 'co-design dynamics' as "a system of behaviors and psychological processes within a group of children sharing a common and often imposed design goal" [43]. However, we did not yet propose any solutions.…”

“…In previous work [43] we addressed this gap in research and presented an in-depth exploration and categorization of challenging group dynamics when co-designing technology with children. We thereby referred to 'co-design dynamics' as "a system of behaviors and psychological processes within a group of children sharing a common and often imposed design goal" [43].…”