Strategies for Annotating Portfolios

Abstract

In this paper, we extend the concept of annotated portfolios to include designs for new domains. Although annotated portfolios were intentionally left open to interpretation and appropriation, most of the published research that uses this method to articulate intermediate knowledge focuses on annotation strategies that abstract new knowledge about the qualities of interaction and about the design domain. We suggest that annotations can do more than pull towards concerns regarding abstraction and show that several not so very theoretical, but relevant findings can be achieved using other strategies. Two additional strategies are brought forward to illustrate this: a chronological design trajectory that shows the historical account of new domain explorations, and a design ecosystem strategy that aims to show how artefacts can work together. We apply all four strategies mentioned above and discuss how they contribute to revealing features of the design space for people with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis.

Eliciting New Perspectives in RtD Studies through Annotated Portfolios: A Case Study of Robotic Artefacts

“…This includes, for example, the choice of dissemination form and representation style (e.g. purely text-based [5], predominantly visual [32], or a combination thereof [9,17]). Further, portfolios can be annotated to examine different foci (i.e.…”

“…what the designer aims to communicate [5]) by applying different strategies. While the majority of works followed strategies that shed light on "interaction qualities" and "domain knowledge" embodied in a collection of artefacts [9], new approaches have also been put forward: Culén et al, for example, proposed the "design trajectory" and "design ecosystem" strategies to highlight the chronological development of artefacts and respectively how artefacts can complement each other [9].…”

“…Research through Design (RtD), described by Zimmerman et al as "an approach that employs methods and processes from design practices" [54], has been established and continued to grow in humancomputer interaction (HCI). Despite receiving criticism for a lack of standardisation, rigour and an over-saturation with design artefacts [15,53,55], RtD is advocated by researchers for making contributions by addressing under-constrained problems and understanding a broader design context [9]. In his essay on what to expect from RtD, Gaver urged caution on calls for convergence and standardisation, which would undermine the ability of design to create multiple possibilities [19].…”

2nd International Workshop on Designerly HRI Knowledge. Reflecting on HRI practices through Annotated Portfolios of Robotic Artefacts

“…Through the workshop, we will engage with these questions as well as with the general open challenge of understanding the relationship between design and emerging application domains [11] that characterize the act of annotating artefacts. We will extend previous existing work on the topic (e.g., Hoggenmüller et al [12] arguments about expert annotations as a form of a creative and generative peer critique that can facilitate discussions about the contributions of designerly approaches to technology and science-driven domains, such as HRI).…”

The 10,000 Instruments Workshop - (Im)practical Research for Critical Speculation

“…Lugones commends that we engage in 'festive resistance' which, amongst other activities, consists in "blurring categories... reinvention of our names for things and people... marking cultural mixtures... revealing the chaotic in production... announcing the impurity of the pure by ridiculing his inability at self-maintenance" [33], p. 478.…”