Understanding Representation in Design: A Multi-Dimensional Approach

1. Lecture 3:Representation Jarmo Sarkkinen

2. Means ofdesign

3. Representation: Dictionary definitions 1. The act of representing or the state of being represented. 2. Something that represents, as: a. An image or likeness of something. b. An account or statement, as of facts, allegations, or arguments. c. An expostulation; a protest. d. A presentation or production, as of a play. 3. The state or condition of serving as an official delegate, agent, or spokesperson. 4. The right or privilege of being represented by delegates having a voice in a legislative body. 5. A body of legislators that serve on behalf of a constituency. 6. Law A statement of fact made by one party in order to induce another party to enter into a contract. 7. Mathematics A homomorphism from an algebraic system to a similar system of matrices.

4. Representation (as defined by Hall) • In the studies of culture • Using language to say something meaningful about the world to other people in a meaningful way • Each of the reflective, intentional and constructionist notions of representations emphasizes one particular sort of relationship to meanings attached to objects of change • Differences between design cultures mean differences between meanings attached to objects of change within different cultures • E.g. design specification: data flows vs. working procedures

5. Inuit terms ice = siku broken _ = siqumniq ice water = immiugaq candle _ = illauyiniq flat _ = qairniq glare _ = quasaq piled _ = ivunrit rough_ = ivvuit slush_ = quna young_ = sikuliaq

6. The constructionist view ”In the constructionist perspective, representation involves making meaning by forging links between three different orders of things: what we might broadly call the world of things, people, events and experiences; the conceptual world – the mental concepts we carry around in our heads; and the signs, arranged into languages, which ’stand for’ or communicate these concepts”

7. Representation(as defined by Potter) • For social psychologists • Representation = description • ”A central feature of any description is categorization; a description formulates some object or event as something; it constitutes it as a thing, and a thing with specific qualities” • The description presents something as good or bad, big or small, more violent or less violent, although often with more subtle options • Describing a reporter as a hack or a journalist

8. Classification(Bowker & Star 1999) • ”A spatial, temporal, or spatio-temporal segmentation” of objects of change • ≠ ’surface structure’ of objects • Systems of classifications • Categories of these systems are mutually exclusive? • Systems are complete? • Classifications help to include and exclude some meanings in the processes of meaning making • Complete systems of classifications are rare • More implicit classifiers matter (each word I say)

9. Representation(as defined by Kyng) • In the studies of design • Representations capture intentionally selected qualities of that which is represented and nothing more • Inadequate representations or lack of experience in using representations may lead to unexpected difficulties and confusion • Use of representations in cooperative design efforts

10. Cooperative work and representations • Understanding possibilities and limitations with respect to objects of change in the ’multicultural’ team • Enable cooperation between users and designers • Enable hands-on explorations • Enable to represent experience with both work and technical possibilities and limitations • Both users and designers need to ”share” representations of design

11. Representations of the future system • Mock-ups and prototypes • Represent interfaces • Represent the structure and content of the system (e.g. a work plan or a patient record) • When users are carrying out work • No need for technical expertise by users • Concepts with ”family resemblance” • Need to be grounded in work practices of end users

12. Representations of work 1) Work situation descriptions (current work situations) • Imply needs grounded on current work situations and enable so called ’revisits’ to current but ever changing work situations 2) Use scenarios (future-oriented) • Represent emerging designs • Indicate how new computer support and changes in work may improve work situations • Recreate and describe a new context for trial

13. Task outliner mock-up

14. Mediatory function of representations • They mediate ”the relation between designers and their products, between designers in a team, between the design team and other design teams, and between the design team and the future users” [Bødker 1998] • They mediate construction, that is, the productive relation between team members and objects of change • They mediate cooperation, that is, the representational relation between team members • They mediate conceptualization, that is, the dialectical relation between team members and objects of change [Adapted from Bertelsen 2000]

15. Examples of representations(Benyon 2002)

16. Three approaches for coming together around representations • DESIGNER – representation – user (D-R-U) • USER – representation – designer (U-R-D) • Multiple participants – multiple representations

17. Approach #1 • Human relations vs. tools (and technology) • Design models with user classifications • Empowerment of users: with users, neither for nor by them • Design by doing => mutual learning • Lead by users??? • Whose viewpoint emphasized???

18. Approach #2 • E.g. usability trials, as seen by Woolgar (1991) • An evolving technology sets ’parameters’ for user action • Framing ”The User” and the relationship between this user and an evolving technology • How a technology should be ’read’ • To configure a user is to ”define, enable and constrain” this user and to produce a configured relationship of this user to an evolving technology • What is a normal and what is a bizarre user? • Lead by both??? • In fact, the user and the designer configure each other

19. Approach #3 ”3D” D ifferent viewpoints => D ealing with diversity => D ecision making based on multiple viewpoints

20. Differentreadings andinterpretationsofrepresentations(Robinson 1991a)

21. Double level language(Robinson 1991b) • Not only computer applications but also representations of design during evolution of applications should support at least two levels of language: 1) Formal level (higly restrictive) 2) Cultural level (more flexible) • Participants always need to interpret representations as they encounter each other around them • Understanding, interpreting, and changing ”items” at the formal level of language used in representation is mediated by conversation at the ”cultural” level of language

22. (Human-) Representation - Human • Multitude of readings possible • Representations just plans, then interpreted in action • How much do representations close inside them? Best Better No good interprets sufficient for one meanings