Advertisement

Making the city my own: uses and practices of mobile location technologies for exploration of a new city

  • Louise Barkhuus
  • Donghee Yvette Wohn
Original Article
  • 17 Downloads

Abstract

In this paper, we present an interview study of 13 recent newcomers to New York City, focusing on their early experiences of exploration and use of mobile location services and other tools for getting to know their new city. We describe their reasons and intentions behind exploratory practices using digital tools and emphasize how they make meaning out of new places in relation to technology tools as well as their previous places. Mobile location technologies make the process of finding specific places and exploring new neighborhoods a digital search task but discourage the notion of wandering and exploration. We point out missed opportunities for socio-technical systems supporting place making and place discovery and suggest that digital exploration tools should stay peripheral to the activities that people enjoy as tech-free but support a wider notion of search for salient characteristics of places.

Keywords

Location-based services Mobile technologies Place technologies 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank the participants for their time. Also thanks to Mor Naaman and his research group at Cornell Tech for early insights and discussion around this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Brinkerhoff JM (2009) Digital Diasporas. Identity and Transnational Engagement. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lingel J, Naaman M and Boyd D (2014) City, self, network: transnational migrants and online identity work. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing (CSCW ‘14). ACM, New York, 1502–1510Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Irina A. Shklovski and Scott D. Mainwaring (2005) Exploring technology adoption and use through the lens of residential mobility. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘05). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 621–630Google Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Vertovec S (2004) Cheap calls: the social glue of migrant transnationalism. Global Networks 4:219–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Horst H and Miller D (2006) The cell phone: an anthropology of communication. BergGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Panagakos AN (2009) From Napster to MEGA: power, gender, and generation in a Greek-Canadian community. Women, Gender, and Diasporic Lives: Labor, Community, and Identity in Greek Migrations 135Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Parham AA (2004) Diaspora, community and communication: Internet use in transnational Haiti. Global Networks 4(2):199–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bradley NA, Mark DD (2005) An experimental investigation into wayfinding directions for visually impaired people. Personal Ubiquitous Computing 9(6):395–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chang Y-J, 2010 T-YW (December 2010) Comparing picture and video prompting in autonomous indoor wayfinding for individuals with cognitive impairments. Personal Ubiquitous Computing 14(8):737–747Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gary LA (1999) Cognitive abilities in the service of wayfinding: a functional approach. Prof Geogr 51(4), Blackwell):555–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee H (2010) Mobile social networks and urban public space. New Media Soc 12(5):763–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cramer H, Rost M, Lars Erik Holmquist LE (2011) Performing a check-in: emerging practices, norms and ‘conflicts’ in location-sharing using foursquare. In: In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services ACM Press, New York, NY, pp 57–66Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Evans L (2015) Being-Towards the social: mood and orientation to location-based social media, computational things and applications. In New Media & Society 17, 6, 2015, Sage, 845–860Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Luca M, Zervas G (2013) Fake it till you make it: reputation, competition, and Yelp review fraud. Harvard Business School NOM Unit Working Paper 14-006(2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hicks A, Comp S, Horovitz J, Hovarter M, Miki M, Jennifer LB (2012) Why people use Yelp. com: an exploration of uses and gratifications. Computers in Human Behavior 28(6):2274–2279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Simmel G (1903) The Metropolis and Mental Life. In Georg Simmel on Individuality and Social Forms. (Heritage of Sociology Series), Donald N. Levine (ed.), 1972. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Casey ES (1993) Getting back into place. Towards a Renewed Understanding of the Place-World. Indiana University PressGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harrison S and Dourish P (1996) Re-place-ing space: the roles of place and space in collaborative systems. In Proceedings of the 1996 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, ACM Press, New York, 67–76Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lynch K (1960) The image of the city, vol 11. MIT pressGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Milgram S (1976) Psychological maps of Paris. In: Environmental psychology: people and their physical settings, 2nd edn. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp 104–124Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bentley F, Cramer H, Hamilton W, Basapur S (2012) Drawing the city: differing perceptions of the urban environment. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, New York, pp 1603–1606Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Strauss A, Corbin JM (1990) Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lingel J (2015) Information practices of urban newcomers: An analysis of habits and wandering. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 66(6):1239–1251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Duneier M (2000) Sidewalk. Farrar, Straus and GirouxGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jacobs J (1961) The death and life of great American cities. VintageGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Diakopoulos N, De Choudhury M, 2012 MN Finding and assessing social media information sources in the context of journalism. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘12). ACM. USA, New York, NY, pp 2451–2460Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ackerman MS (2000) The intellectual challenge of CSCW: the gap between social requirements and technical feasibility. Human–Computer Interaction 15.2–3 (2000), 179–203Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Putnam RD (2000) Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community. In: Simon & SchusterGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The IT University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.New Jersey Institute of TechnologyNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations