4 interesting research seminars at KTH
Datum: 15 mars, 2015 Plats: Lindstedtsvägen 3, floor 6, KTH, Stockholm
Welcome to interesting research seminars before Helena Tobiasson’s PhD defense, On Friday March 13 with our renowned guests at Lindstedtsvägen 3, room D2 (please note that it is a new room!). Coffee will be served from 9.30 in the blue kitchen on Lindstedtsvägen 3, floor 6. You do not need to sign up before, you can just join in.
Merleau-Ponty´s concept of The Lived Body and its relevance to Interaction Design
Professor Dag Svanaes, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway
Moore´s law predicts that digital products will continue getting smaller, cheaper and smarter. This allows for new classes of products with more computation-, interaction- and communication power getting closer to the human body. We already see this trend in products such as smartphones, digital sport accessories, digital watches with built in health monitoring and whole-body interaction games. Interaction design has traditionally been concerned with designing for the ”mind”, while less focus has been on the body of the user. I will present the French philosopher Merleau-Ponty´s concept of the lived body, and show its relevance for Interaction Design. The focus will be on the dual nature of the body: the third-person perspective of the body as an object in the world vs. the first-person perspective of the body as oneself.
Situated Elderliness – design with, by and for
Professor Christina Mörtberg, Linneaus university, Växjö, Sweden,
Socio-economic challenges in Sweden as well as in other countries are expected due to the upcoming change in demography. These changes have also an impact on health care and care of elderly. Thus, digital services are directed towards enabling elderly to stay in their homes to support an independent and good-life. Further, the increased use of digital services in facilitation of aging and wellbeing challenges also norms and values related to older people. In the Danish co-design project – the Senior Interaction project, the researchers became aware that the seniors involved in the project did not identify themselves as elderly but they talked about other person as elderly and in need of digital services. These experiences resulted in the suggestion of the notion of situated elderliness. The Danish researchers propose the notion to honor seniors’ experiences, to show how elderliness is situated in a practice, and also how elderliness emerges when people and technology meet. Karen Barad´s (2007) notion of intra-action will be a starting point in the discussion of elderliness, engagement, and digital services. Empirical material generated in participative workshops with a focus on sustainable ways of living with technologies will be used in the talk.
Practice turn in HCI — challenges ahead
Professor Kari Kuutti, university of Oulu, Finland
One way of making sense of what is happening in HCI field is to see research consisting of an ”interaction” and a ”practice” orientation. The interaction orientation has since long being the dominating one, while the practice orientation has been living in the fringes. During the last years this has been changing, and practice issues have become more visible, to the extent that it is perhaps possible to talk about a ”practice turn”. This can be seen as an echo of what has has happened in social sciences during the last quarter of a century, where the practice orientation has slowly gained momentum and become one and perhaps the driving force in the progress of the field.
The talk will give a short overview of what is meant by the practice orientation, where it is coming from and how it is currently visible in HCI field. Finally the talk will discuss about the challenges of taking practice orientation seriously in research.
Tangible Thinking and Monetized Matter – the Ambiguous Alliances of Design Research
Professor Maria Hellström Reimer, Malmö university, Seden
The talk will touch upon the increased differentiation and expansion of the idea and practice of ”design” but also on what might be conceived as a germinating ambiguity as concerns the function of design; a notion that today might evoke mixed emotions. As designers, we have invested in a phenomenon — design — that historically has appeared as an added value, positively charged, useful, and progressive, but that now at times is presented as the last straw; as the social equivalent to the breeder reactor — intelligently employed a next to infinite source of energy that will ensure our existence also beyond planetary limits. Over the last two decades, the frequency of the word “design” and concepts such as ”design thinking” have proliferated, to large extent in pace with an accelerated world economy. On the one hand, there is the directionality of design as a social and material will to manifest the world in a just and meaningful way, a supposed straightforwardness ”transforming existing conditions into preferred ones.” On the other hand there is the unquestionable entanglement of design with speculative investment in elusive futures. In this situation, tangibility gains a new and conceptual importance, and this in a radical reconsideration of driving forces, social consequences and material effects.