Human Centred Design Institute (HCDI) semianr series 2012-13

1. When users think about design
Nathan Crilly

2. When users think about design
Crilly, N. (2011). The Design Stance in User-System Interaction. Design Issues, 27(4), 16–29.
Crilly, N. (2011). Do Users Know What Designers Are Up To? Int. J Design, 5(3), 1–15.

4. Model of design
Norman, D. A., & Draper, S. W. (1986). User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on
Human-Computer Interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

5. Models of design
T: Maser (1976), Krippendorff and Butter (1984), Norman (1986/88), Kawama (1987),
M: Waller (1987) , Monö (1997), de Souza (2001/2005), Salles et al. (2001),
B: Shedroff (2001), Coates (2003), Karjalainen (2004), Forslund et al. (2006).

6. Model of communication
Shannon, C. E. (1948/1993). A Mathematical Theory of Communication. In Claude Elwood
Shannon: Collected Papers (Vol. 27, pp. 5–83). New York, NY: IEEE Press.

7. Models of communication
T: Lasswell (1948), Shannon (1948), Newcomb (1953), Westley & McLean (1957),
M: Jakobson (1960), Berlo (1960), Schramm (1961), Eco (1976),
B: Maletzke (1981), Sperber & Wilson (1986), Swann (1991), Leiss (1994).

10. Does this actually occur?
YES: “…if [users of computers] have a good idea of what the
computer is designed to do, they can predict this behaviour
with great accuracy and reliability…”
Dennett, D. (1987), The intentional stance, p 17. [emphasis added]
YES: “When users realize that they are not interacting with
autonomous machines, but with a rational product of a human
mind, …”they can resort to a wealth of beliefs and expectations
they have regarding the intellectual and creative behavior of
other people.”
de Souza, C. (1993) The Semiotic Engineering of User Interface Languages,
International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 39(5): 754.

11. Does this actually occur?
YES: “…if [users of computers] have a good idea of what the
computer is designed to do, they can predict this behaviour
with great accuracy and reliability…”
Dennett, D. (1987), The intentional stance, p 17. [emphasis added]
YES: “When users realize that they are not interacting with
autonomous machines, but with a rational product of a human
mind, they can resort to a wealth of beliefs and expectations
they have regarding the intellectual and creative behavior of
other people.”
de Souza, C. (1993) The Semiotic Engineering of User Interface Languages,
International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 39(5): 754.

12. Does this actually occur?
NO: “…humans working with a computer are not orienting to
an unseen programmer but instead are interacting with the
computer as a distinct social actor.”
Sundar, S. & Nass, C., (2000) Source orientation in human-computer interaction,
Communication Research, 27(6): pp 693-694.
BUT: users think about the designer of the system when things
go wrong, and these thoughts are useful when reasoning about
how to put things right
Reeves, B. & Nass, C. (1996), The media equation, p188 [paraphrase]

13. Philosophy of cognition
Psychology
Archaeology
Linguistics
Literary theory
Philosophy of art
Marketing theory
…

14. Philosophy of cognition
Psychology
Archaeology
Linguistics
Literary theory
Philosophy of art
Marketing theory
…

16. 2002 2006…

17. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. What do people know about design?
2. How does this vary between people?
3. When does design knowledge get used?
4. What effect does it have?
5. What should we do about it?

23. References: Models of design
Coates, D. (2003). Watches Tell More than Time: Product Design, Information and the Quest for
Elegance. London, UK: McGraw-Hill.
De Souza, C.S., Barbosa, S. D. J., & Prates, R. O. (2001). A semiotic engineering approach to user
interface design. Knowledge Based Systems, 14(8), 461–465.
De Souza, Clarisse Sieckenius. (2005). The semiotic engineering of human-computer interaction.
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Forslund, K., Dagman, A., & Söderberg, R. (2006). International Design Conference - Design 2006 (pp.
713–720). Dubrovnik, Croatia.
Karjalainen, T.-M. (2004). Semantic transformation in design: communicating strategic brand identity
through product design references. Helsinki, Finland: Ilmari.
Kawama, T. (1987). A Semiotic Approach to the Design Process. In Marketing and Semiotics: New
Directions in the Study of Signs for Sale (pp. 57–70). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
Krippendorff, K., & Butter, R. (1984). Product Semantics: Exploring the Symbolic Qualities of Form.
Innovation: The Journal of the Industrial Designers Society of America, 3(2), 4–9.
Maser, S. (1976). Theorie ohne Praxis ist leer, Praxis ohn Theorie ist blind! Form, 73, 40–42.
Monö, R. (1997). Design for product understanding: the aesthetics of design from a semiotic approach.
Stockholm, Sweden: Liber.
Norman, D. A., & Draper, S. W. (1986). User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-
Computer Interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Salles, J., Baranauskas, M. C. C., & Bigonha, R. S. (2001). Towards a communication model applied to
the interface design process. Knowledge Based Systems, 14(8), 455–459.
Shedroff, N. (1999). Information interaction design: a unified field theory of design. In Information
Design (pp. 267–292). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Waller, R. (1987). The typographic contribution to language: towards a model of typographic genres
and their underlying structures. University of Reading.

24. References: Models of communication
Berlo, D. (1960). The process of communication. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Eco, U. (1979). The role of the reader: explorations in the semiotics of texts. London, UK: Hutchinson.
Jakobson, R. (1960). Closing statement: linguistics and poetics. In Style in Language (pp. 350–377).
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lasswell, H. D. (1966). The structure and function of communication in society. In Reader in Public
Opinion and Communication (pp. 178–190). New York,: Free Press.
Leiss, W. (1994). Risk communication and public knowledge. In Communication Theory Today (pp. 127–
139). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Maletzke, G. (1963). Medienwirkungsforschung. Tübingen, Germany: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Newcomb, T. M. (1966). An approach to the study of communication acts. In Communication and
Culture: Readings in the Codes of Human Interaction (pp. 66–79). New York, NY: Holt Rinehart and
Winston.
Schramm, W. L. (1961). How communication works. In The Process and Effects of Mass
Communication (pp. 3–26). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Shannon, C. E. (1948/1993). A Mathematical Theory of Communication. In Claude Elwood Shannon:
Collected Papers (Vol. 27, pp. 5–83). New York, NY: IEEE Press.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: communication and cognition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Swann, C. (1991). Language and typography. London, UK: Lund Humphries.
Westley, B. H., & MacLean, M. S. (1966). A conceptual model for communications research. In
Communication and Culture: Readings in the Codes of Human Interaction (pp. 80–87). New York, NY:
Holt Rinehart and Winston.
Jaguar title image: http://popularautomotives.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/jaguar-cars-wallpapers.html

25. When users think about design
Nathan Crilly