Presentation at INFO I609 Advanced Seminar I Informatics. PhD in Informatics, Indiana University Bloomington. * Includes short bio, trace of work related with HCI & Design, connection of Rhetoric and User Experience Design, and previous of paper to be presented at NordiCHI 2014.

1. Rhetorical Evaluation
of User Interfaces
and other PhD stuff.
Omar Sosa-Tzec
School of Informatics & Computing
Indiana University Bloomington
info i609 Advanced Seminar I Informatics

2. Hola!

3. Mérida, Yucatán

6. Image source: http://goo.gl/EKw66m
BSc in Computer Science
University of Yucatan
Connection with HCI & Design
•Web Design
•Usability
•Software Engineering
•Object-Oriented
Hypermedia Design

7. Guanajuato, Guanajuato

9. Image source: http://goo.gl/4Kf7Vi
MSc in Computer Science
Center for Research in
Mathematics
Connection with HCI & Design
•Usability
•Software Engineering
• Algorithm Design

10. San Andrés Cholula, Puebla

12. Photography by Jorge Gutierrez
MSc in Information Design
University of the Americas Puebla
Connection with HCI & Design
•Information Design,
Visualization and
Architecture
•Interface Design
& Evaluation
•Design Theory

13. Influences
Rhetoric Semiotics

14. Influences
Hanno Ehses Clarisse de Souza
Rhetoric for
Graphic Design
Semiotic Engineering
& Communicability Evaluation
How can rhetoric be
applied to web design?
How can unconventional GUIs
be evaluated?

15. Rhetoric and Interaction Design
Designer User Interface User
Speaker. Speech Listener
Rhetorical appeals:
Logos
Ethos
Pathos
Sosa-Tzec, et al. (2009)
Accomplish
a task.
Take
action.

16. Rhetoric and Interaction Design
Information Architecture
Functionality
Logos
Sosa-Tzec, et al. (2009)
Ethos Pathos
Design Thinking Emotional Design
User Appropriation

17. Bloomington, Indiana

19. Human-
Computer
Interaction
Design

20. What is the problem?

22. What are the consequences of
the interactive systems that we design?

23. How do interactive systems affect
the people’s everyday?

24. How are we, designers and researchers,
contributing on making people to affect
other people?

26. What does it mean
for the members in
the team?

28. Swipe to
the right
for Like
Swipe to
the le!t
for Nope

29. What does it mean
being put on the
“nope” list?

30. A problematic of HCI and Design
Us, designers and researchers, contribute on
deploying artifacts that affect the everyday of
people, including their beliefs and attitude

31. An Approach
to HCI Design

32. HCI Design
Rhetoric

33. Rhetoric as lenses for HCI
• Persuasion
• Content & Form
• Contingencies & People
• Metaphor, Metonymy, and other rhetorical figures
• And so on...

34. Rhetorical Evaluation
of User Interfaces
Sosa-Tzec, O., & Siegel, M.A. (forthcoming). Rhetorical Evaluation of User Interfaces.
In Proc. of 8th Nordic Conference of Human-Computer Interaction,
NordiCHI 2014, ACM Press (2014).

35. Situation

38. Evaluation

39. Purpose vs. Function: Example
Purpose
Preventing others from seeing the content of
the businessman’s laptop
Function
Providing a feeling of privacy

40. Purpose vs. Function
Anti-intentionalist
Not seeing the creator's intention as
determining the correct interpretation
of the work

41. Schema of rhetorical evaluation for user interfaces
Sosa-Tzec, & Siegel (2014)
evaluator
apparent function
interaction
function
user interface
Visual Components
Audio Components
Physical Components
UI Section
(Changes Over Time)
reflection
Legitimacy / Soundness

42. The app

43. Adding a new goal

44. Short and long swipe to the right

45. Short and long swipe to the left

46. Schema of rhetorical evaluation for user interfaces
Sosa-Tzec, & Siegel (2014)
evaluator
apparent function
interaction
function
user interface
Visual Components
Audio Components
Physical Components
UI Section
(Changes Over Time)
reflection
Legitimacy / Soundness

47. Outcome

48. Outcome of the evaluation
Apparent function Function performed by
the UI components

49. Outcome of the evaluation
Apparent function Function performed by
Make goal tracking simpler
the UI components

50. Outcome of the evaluation
Apparent function Function performed by
the UI components
Make goal tracking simpler Interaction by gestures
as embodied commitment

51. Make goal tracking simpler

52. Interaction by gestures as embodied commitment
Moving forward

53. Interaction by gestures as embodied commitment
Moving backwards

54. Discussion

55. Discussion
Evaluating an interface
requires for the evaluator to
learn about the system and
its purpose

56. Discussion
The evaluation considers the
interaction with the system

57. Discussion
This form of rhetorical
evaluation is placed between
structural approaches and
hermeneutic approaches

58. Discussion
This form of rhetorical
evaluation fosters reflection
and interaction criticism

59. Conclusion

60. Conclusion
• Approach for evaluating user interfaces based
on the notion of function from visual rhetoric
• Apparent function
• Function performed by UI components and
interaction with the system
• Reflection and interaction criticism

61. Conclusion
The goal is obtaining a wider
perspective regarding the
design of interactive systems,
one that takes into account
experiences, communication,
and meaning.

62. References
1. Bardzell, J. Interaction criticism and aesthetics. In Proc. CHI 2009. ACM Press (2009),
2357-2366.
2. de Souza, C. S. The semiotic engineering of human- computer interaction. MIT Press, 2005.
3. Foss, S. K. A rhetorical schema for the evaluation of visual imagery. Communication Studies,
45, 3-4 (1994), 213-224.
4. Gross, S., Bardzell, J., & Bardzell, S. Skeu the evolution: skeuomorphs, style, and the
material of tangible interactions. In Proc. TEI 2014. ACM Press (2014), 53- 60.
5. Hill, C. A., & Helmers, M. (Eds.). Defining visual rhetorics. Routledge, 2012.
6. Hurtienne, J., & Israel, J. H. Image schemas and their metaphorical extensions: intuitive
patterns for tangible interaction. In Proc. TEI 2007. ACM Press (2014), 127- 134.
7. Nelson H. G. & Stolterman, E. The Design Way. MIT Press, 2012.
8. Schön, D. A. The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic books, 1983.
9. Sosa-Tzec, O., Cortina-Arteaga, S., & Holguin-Molina, R. Métodos y Proceso de Diseño de
Información para una GUI en un Cliente IM bajo un enfoque Calm Technology. CLIHC
2007. Workshop at Interact 2007.

63. Acknowledgments
Chung-Ching Huang
Jordan E. Beck
Phaedra Pezzullo
Ian Wood
Erik Stolterman
HCI/d Faculty, Gabriele Ferri and PhD Students

64. Thank you!
http://tzec.com
The images here shown are property of their author, and some
of them have been taken from the results of a web search.
All of them are employed for mere academic purposes.