In this design exhibit, we describe methods we have used to design a noticeboard interface for an older community in London. Three low-fidelity methods of prototyping interaction provided shared and accessible means for us and our end users to communicate design ideas, explore qualities of the user experience, and evaluate them within situations of use. This approach facilitated the development of an appropriate, innovative and feasible solution for a unique context

Bueno, M.

Mazé, Ramia

English

Swedish Institute of Computer Science Publications Database

Mixers is a design project for enhancing
communications within a community of
older people in London. The University 
of the Third Age (U3A) is a volunteer-run
learning organization for people between
the ages of 60 and 90. We worked with
them to reconsider their physical and
information environment as they moved 
to a new headquarters within London.
Existing means for finding out about
events, changes, and news at the University
involved notes printed on bits of paper,
which were difficult to read, filter through,
and remember. They expressed an explicit
wish for a better notice system. 
DIS2002 | 01
We designed a tangible interface to an
audio noticeboard, to support students 
at the University in accessing recorded
announcements. It has three components:
lights which indicated relevant messages, 
a tactile bar for tuning among them, and 
a hand-held earphone. The system is
accessed by slotting the student ID card
into the interface.
We produced a working electronic
prototype of the interface. This was
projected to be one of several embedded 
in coffee tables in the atrium space, 
where students enter the building and
gather to chat in between classes. 
Mixers
a participatory approach to design prototyping
In this design exhibit, we describe methods we have used to design a noticeboard interface
for an older community in London. Three low-fidelity methods of prototyping interaction
provided shared and accessible means for us and our end users to communicate design
ideas, explore qualities of the user experience, and evaluate them within situations of use.
This approach facilitated the development of an appropriate, innovative and feasible
solution for a unique context. 
Keywords: design methodology, prototypes, experience design, participatory design, tangible interface
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed
for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page.  To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redis-
tribute to lists, requires specific permission and/or a fee.   DIS2002, London © Copyright 2002   ACM 1-58113-2-9-0/00/0008  $5.00
by Ramia Mazé and Monica Bueno1 2
The design solution was evolved through 
a series of site visits and participatory
workshops. Users at the University of the
Third Age are ‘experts’ on their needs and
values as older people, as the volunteers
who would be interacting with the system
on a daily basis, and on what would work
within their community. Considering them
as ‘design partners’, we engaged them at
many levels throughout the project.
We used various methods for developing
our interaction design from concept to user
interface, three of which will be described
02 | DIS2002
here. In our design process, prototypes
provided means of imagining new kinds 
of information experiences, of evaluating
interaction alternatives through trying 
them out, and for refining qualities of the
user interface. Above all, they provided an
accessible and reciprocal means for users 
to participate in evolving the design.
Participatory Prototyping
Prototypes are a common means for 
testing and problem-solving during 
product development. Inspired by
participatory design, experience design, 
and critical design methods, we used
prototypes as a means of generating ideas,
communicating interaction alternatives,
and trying out product experiences. To
these ends, we used three prototyping
methods: video scenarios, interaction
props, and working mock-ups.
These prototypes were participatory in 
the sense that we used them to open our
design process to user input as much, and
at as many levels, as possible. At the project
level, users engagement with prototypes
gave us insight into their values,
community culture, and contexts of use. 
At the level of design, users applied
themselves – hands-on and in real-life
situations – in trying out and generating
design concepts. At the interaction level,
users engaged first-hand in evaluating 
and reflecting on interface possibilities. 
Interaction In Action
Prototyping activity took place in our
studio, at external workshops with end
users, and on location at the U3A. For
working ‘in the field’ and collaboratively
with users, we used low-fidelity prototypes
to provide a familiar and accessible means
for users to enter creatively into the design
space with us. For example, at video
scenario work-shop in a user’s home,
prototyping means consisted of starter
scenarios on a VHS tape, cardboard
interaction props, and a camcorder. These
provided ample inspiration, material for
testing interactions, and means for
reiterating scenarios of use. 
The general rule of thumb throughout was:
"Show me what you mean." Beyond merely
discussing ideas, prototypes were used to
experience them through role-playing and
trying out simple representations. In this
way, we explored, evaluated, and even
experienced interaction concepts with 
users on site and in real situations.
methods in practice
In our design process for Mixers, we identified three prototyping methods which 
furthered valuable development of the interaction design together with users:
•  Video Scenarios as a means of projecting possible user experiences.
•  Interaction props for communicating and experiencing interaction options.
•  Working mock-ups for refining qualities of the interaction design.
Video Scenarios
While considering the informational needs
that the product would support, we were
also concerned with situating it within a
wider understanding of user experience.
Together with end-users, we explored
possibilities for everyday rituals of
accessing notices and potential roles for 
the noticeboard in the life of the University.
Would it become a kind of library, where
users would linger and immerse
themselves in researching all kinds of
topics? Could it be a means for finding 
out in on what friends in other classes 
were up to? We used video scenarios 
to involve users in ‘trying on’ different
experiences.
DIS2002 | 03
Initially, we improvised interaction
concepts internally, involving colleagues in
acting out situations which we videotaped.
We then took these scenarios to an off-site
workshop, where they set the stage for
discussion and role-playing with users.
Using stop-motion and other techniques,
video scenarios enabled us to simulate
interactive functions, interact in social and
public situations, and test various types of
noticeboard content. Improvisation itself
revealed unexpected roles for the system,
such as communal messages as an excuse
for starting a conversation with a stranger.
Facilitating direct experience and
immediate reflection, video scenarios
provided a means for users to evaluate
ideas by acting them out. 
Video scenarios were a means of evolving
interaction concepts with users in real
situations, a kind of experiential sketching.
We didn’t hold back from acting out
provocative concepts or edit out accidents
and unexpected situations arising from
improvisation. By exposing the entire
design space to users, we discovered
unexpected opportunities. For instance, 
in one sketch, a personal message was
accidentally overhead by someone else.
Rather than discounting it as a privacy
problem, our users were intrigued by the
possibility of audio overlap as a means of
learning about other classes and sparking
face-to-face encounters. This finding,
among others, was reflected in the final
design as physical proximity between two
interfaces embedded in a coffee table and
the design of the audio speaker for personal
- and potentially shared - use. 
Interaction Props
Collaboratively with users, we explored
possibilities for structuring, representing,
and accessing information. Would users
want to save, browse, edit, or share notices?
What made more sense, organizing infor-
mation by time, topic, or relevance? Should
the system offer information or do users
want to seek it out? In moving from
interaction concepts to the user interface,
we used a series of simple physical sketches
to role-play alternatives for information
organization and product functionality.
Interaction ‘props' became a sort of lingua
franca for communicating, structuring, and
evaluating interaction schemes together. 
Made of craft materials and fashioned in 
a modular fashion, the props were
immediately understandable as sketches.
Users felt free to take them apart and
reconfigure them as a means of explaining
things in a way that made sense to them. 
In role-play scenarios, we tried out and
refined combinations of props for activities
such as seeking a topic, panning through
messages, replaying an item, and sharing
notices. User reactions ranged from
"I really wouldn't ever skim through a
single message, only among several
messages,” to pure delight when simple
actions worked. Collaboratively, we were
discovering the value of simple, direct,
tangible interaction for our users and the
public context that we were designing for. 
Assemblages of interaction props,
sequenced in scenarios, provided an
increasingly clear picture of the most
favorable interaction scheme from the
users' point of view, as well as gaining
insight into the look and feel of the
experience. From these, we developed 
a further cardboard prototype, which 
we installed for a day at the University. 
We observed how formal qualities of the
product fit within the physical space,
surveyed general public reactions to the
legibility of the interface, and listened to
how people explained the projected
functionality to each other. We took our
findings forward in developing the scale
and formal aesthetics of the product and
the look and feel of the product for the
particular site. 
Working Mock-ups
At this point we had a collaboratively
designed physical model and scenarios
conveying interactive functions. It was 
time for us to transition to crafting the
physical form and developing the working
electronics for the product. We continued
to engage our user group in trying out
finely-grained variables in the experience,
such as behavior of lights in the interface,
tangible and auditory feedback, and cues
for guiding users from one action to the
next. We used ‘soft’ mock-ups for testing
and refining these with users.
Inspired by the useful modularity of
interaction props, we crafted soft mock-ups
with transplantable elements made of
malleable plastic and foam materials. 
Easily slotted into variable physical 
04 | DIS2002
Conclusions
In Mixers, design prototypes were essential to our development of an interaction design
solution for a particular user group, public context of use, and site at the University of the
Third Age. Prototyping activity took us 'in the field' with low-fidelity means of situating
concepts in everyday scenarios of use. As a sort of experiential sketching, we used hands-on
prototyping and role-playing to try out and quickly iterate various interactions immersed
within a wider context of user experience.
The methods we used for prototyping ideas engaged users in sharing, designing, and
making choices with us. Video scenarios opened up an imaginative space for generating
concepts, using improvisation to design sequences of interaction embedded in public 
and social situations. Interaction props enabled users to try out, take apart, and reconfigure
schemes for organizing information.  We tested and continued to refine the look and feel 
of the interface as working mock-ups. With users, we evolved an innovative, feasible, 
and appropriate experience for interacting with noticeboard content. 
Through a participatory approach to design prototyping, our interaction design solution
went beyond designing for communication needs at the University of the Third Age. 
We explored and designed an experience of interacting with information which
enhances the social possibilities and cultural life of the University as well. 
mock-ups, electronic elements consisted 
of sensors, actuators, and a barcode reader,
coordinated using Basic Stamp and
Macromedia Director. Through physically
reconfiguring the interface and making
simple modifications to the programming,
we were able to isolate and fine-tune
variables of the experience for internal
testing and with users.
The evolved interaction design to date
consisted of a simple set of easily-learned,
satisfying, and essential interactions with
information. For such a tightly coordinated
user experience, success depended on
careful and coherent integration of visual,
interactive, and tangible qualities at each
point of a user’s interaction with the
product. The simple user action of
inserting the ID card to retrieve messages
involved the choreography of design factors
such as graphical indicators on the card,
subtle tactile feedback on insertion, and
clear response of light indicators on the
interface. Flexible, working mock-ups
enabled us to respond to user feedback 
and quickly iterate product qualities, 
toward developing a seamless and
satisfying junction between the look 
and the feel of the product experience.
1 Ramia Mazé
PLAY, Interactive Institute
c/o Viktoria Institute, Box 620
SE-405 30, Göteborg, Sweden
ramia.maze@interactiveinstitute.se
2 Monica Bueno
Philips Design
Emmasingel 24, 5611AZ
Eindhoven, The Netherlands
monica.bueno@philips.com
Mixers was completed in June, 2000, 
during our postgraduate studies in 
Computer Related Design at the 
Royal College of Art, London. Video clips 
of the process and design can be viewed 
at www.viktoria.se/~ramia/mixers.html.
References
Buchenau, M., and Suri, J. Experience Prototyping. In Proceedings of DIS '00, ACM Press, 424-433.
Burns, C., Dishman, E., Verplank, B., and Lassiter B. Actors, hair-dos and videotape: Informance design. In
Proceedings of CHI ‘94, ACM Press, 119-120.
Greenbaum, J. and Kyng, M., editors. Design at Work: Cooperative design of computer systems. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum 1991. 
Gaver, W. The Presence Project. London: RCA CRD Research Publications 2001.
Houde, S., Hill, C. What do Prototypes Prototype? In Handbook of Human Computer Interaction, Amsterdam:
Elsevier Science, 1997
MacKay, W., Ratzer, A., and Janecek, P. Video Artifacts for Design: Bridging the Gap Between Abstraction and Detail.
In Proceedings of DIS '00, ACM Press, 72-82.


Design at Work: Cooperative design of computer systems.

The Presence Project. London:

What do Prototypes Prototype? In Handbook of Human Computer Interaction,

Mixers: A participatory approach to design prototyping

RISE – Research Institutes of Sweden

Digitala Vetenskapliga Arkivet - Academic Archive On-line

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.12.8455

Mixers: A participatory approach to design prototyping

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Swedish Institute of Computer Science Publications Database

RISE – Research Institutes of Sweden

Digitala Vetenskapliga Arkivet - Academic Archive On-line