Personal Technologies

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 25–38 | Cite as

Patterns of home life: Informing design for domestic environments

  • John Hughes
  • Jon O'Brien
  • Tom Rodden
  • Mark Rouncefield
  • Stephen Viller

Abstract

This paper considers how we may provide support for the development of general design principles in domestic environments. In particular, we examine the potential for usingdesign patterns as a means of presenting ethnographic material and outlining design solutions. The paper reports on the development of an initial pattern language based on our studies of a number of domestic, environments and offers a general structure for presenting these patterns. Finally, we briefly reflect on our experiences of developing an on-line set of patterns for this class of environment.

Keywords

Domestic environments Design patterns Ethnography Patten language Systems design 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hughes JA, Randall D, Shapiro D. From ethnographic record to system design: some experiences from the field. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 1993; 1(3): 123–141Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blythin S, Rouncefield M, Hughes JA. Never mind the ethno stuff- what does all this mean and what do we do now?: ethnography in the commercial world. Interactions 1997; 4(3): 38–47Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rodden TA, King V, Hughes J, Sommerville I. Process modelling and development practice. In: EWSPT'94. Springer, London, 1994; 55–64Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rouncefield M. An ethnography of “everyday admissions work”. Lancaster University, Lancaster, 1998 http:// www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/computing/research/cseg/projects/ Intranet/ADM.htmGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bowers J, O'Brien J, Pycock J. Practically accomplishing immersion: cooperation in and for virtual environments. In: Proceedings of the ACM 1996 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work — CSCW'96. ACM Press, 1996; 380–389Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    O'Brien J, Rodden T. Interactive systems in domestic environments. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems — DIS'97. ACM Press, 1997; 247–259Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Heath C, Luff P. Documents and professional practice: “bad” organisational reasons for “good” clinical records. In: Proceedings of the ACM 1996 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work — CSCW'96. ACM Press, 1996; 354–363Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Luff P, Heath C. System use and social organisation: observations on human computer interaction in an architectural practice. In Button G. (ed) Technology in working order. Routledge, London, 1993; 72–98Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harper RHR, Lamming MG, Newmann WM. Locating systems at work: implications for the development of active badge applications. Interacting with Computers 1992; 4(3): 343–363Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Button G, Sharrock W. The production of prder and the prder of production. In: Proc. ECSCW'97, Kluwer, Amsterdam, 1997, 1–16Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Heath C, Luff P. Collaboration and control: crisis management and multimedia technology in London Underground control rooms. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 1992; 1(1): 69–94Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Heath C, Jirotka M, Luff P, Hindmarch J. Unpacking collaboration: the interactional organisation of trading in a city dealing room. In: ECSCW'93. Kluwer, Amsterdam, 1993, 155–170Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Beyer H. Holtzblatt K. Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, 1998Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Viller S, Sommerville I. Coherence: social analysis for software engineers. Lancaster University, Lancaster, 1998. ftp://ftp.comp.lancs.ac.uk/pub/reports/1998/ CSEG.8.98.pdfGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hughes J, O'Brien J, Rodden T, Rouncefield M, Sommerville I. Presenting ethnography in the requirements process. In: Proc. RE'95. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1995; 27–35Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Twidale M, Rodden TA, Sommerville I. The designer's notepad: supporting and understanding cooperative design. In: ECSCW'93. Kluwer, 1993; 93–108Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Viller, S, Sommerville I. Coherence: an approach to representing ethnographic analyses in systems design. Human-Computer Interaction, 1999; 14 (182): 9–41Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Button G, Dourish P. Technomethodology: paradoxes and possibilities. In: ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems — CHI'96. ACM Press, 1996; 19–26Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hughes JA, Randall D, Shapiro D. Faltering from ethnography to design. In: Proceedings of CSCW'92. ACM Press, 1992; 115–122Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hughes JA, King V, Rodden T Andersen H. Moving out from the control room: ethnography in system design. In: Proceedings of CSCW'94., Chapel Hill, NC, 1994; 429–439Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Plowman L, Rogers Y, Ramage M. What are workplace studies for? In: Proceedings of ECSCW'95. Kluwer, 1995; 309–324Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Alexander C. A timeless way of building. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1979Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Alexander C, Ishikawa S, Silverstein M. A pattern language. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1977Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gamma E, Helm R, Johnson R, Vlissides J. Design patterns: elements of reusable object-oriented software. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1995Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sane A. The patterns home page. 1998. http:hillside.net/ patterns/patterns.html.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Erickson T. Towards a pattern language for interaction design. In: Heath C, Hindmarch J, Luff P. (eds) Workspace studies: Recovering work practice and informing systems design. 2000.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bayle E, Bellamy R, Casaday G, Erickson T. Putting it all together: towards a pattern language for interaction design. SIGCHI Bulletin 1998; 30(1): 17–23Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Coplien JO, Schmidt DC. (eds) Pattern languages of program design. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1998Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    NCR Corporation “Passionfruit” — an NCR Knowledge Lab Report. NCR Knowledge Lab, London, 1998Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Moran R. The electronic home: social and spatial aspects. Report of the EC's European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 1993Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Banta M. Taylored lives: narrative productions in the age of Taylor, Veblen, and Ford, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1993Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Newman O. Defensible space: people and design in the violent city. Architectural Press, London, 1972Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Morley D. The nationwide sudience., BFI, London, 1980Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hobson D. Crossroads: the drama of a soap opera. Methuen, London, 1982Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lull J. Inside family viewing: ethnographic research on television's audiences. Routledge, London, 1981Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Silverstone R. Television and everyday life., Routledge, London, 1994Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Venkatesh A., A conceptualisation of the household/ technology interaction. In: Lutz R. (ed) Advances in Consumer Research, Vol XII, Association for consumer Research. Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1985: 189–194Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Venkatesh A, Vitalari N. A post-adoption analysis of computing in the home. Journal of Economic Psychology, 1986; 8: 161–180Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Venkatesh A. Computers and other interactive technologies for the home. Communications of the ACM, 1996; 39(12): 47–54Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hirsch, E. “The Long Term and Short Term of Domestic Consumption” in R. Silverstone and E, Hirsch (eds.)Cosuming technologies: media and information in domestic spaces (London, Routledge) (1992) pp57–71Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sacks H. Lecture 3, Spring 1972. In: Schegloff EA. (ed) Lectures in conversation: volume II. Blackwell, Oxford, 1992; 548Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Shapiro D. Ferrets in a sack? Ethnographic studies and task analysis in CSCW. In: Shapiro D, Tauber MJ, Traunmuller R. (eds) The design of computer supported cooperative work and groupware systems. Elsevier. Amsterdam, 1996Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    see http://wwwit.bton.ac.uk/cil/usability/patterns/Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Goffman E. The presentation of self in everyday life. Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1971Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Philips..see http://www.design.philips.com/vof/Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bentley R, Sommerville I, Rodden TA, Sawyer P,. Hughes JA, Randall D, Shapiro D. Ethnographically-informed systems design for air traffic control. In: Proceedings of CSCW'92. ACM Press, 1992; 123–129Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sommerville I, Rodden TA, Sawyer P, Bentley R. Sociologists can be surprisingly useful in interactive systems design. In: Proceedings of HCI'92, 1992; 341–354Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Usability patterns FAQhttp://wwwit.bton.ac.uk/cil/ usability/patterns/FAQ.html#What-pattern-look-like)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Hughes
    • 1
  • Jon O'Brien
    • 2
  • Tom Rodden
    • 1
  • Mark Rouncefield
    • 1
  • Stephen Viller
    • 1
  1. 1.Departments of Computing and SociologyLancaster UniversityLancasterUK
  2. 2.Cambridge LaboratoryXerox Research Centre EuropeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations