Advertisement

A Matter of Digital Materiality

  • Tone Bratteteig
Chapter
Part of the Computer Supported Cooperative Work book series

Abstract

Design is about imagining future possibilities and making things that enable us to live some of these possibilities. ‘Maybe the most fascinating thing about design is that it is a process that starts with a thought and ends with the world looking different’ says Stolterman (2007: 13). Design starts with the making of ideas – of possibilities and of problems and solutions (Schön 1983; Lanzara 1983). The ideas get clearer as they are formulated and communicated, concretized and tried out in detail (Bjerknes and Bratteteig 1987; Henderson 1999). The imagining of the design result drives the process forward.

Keywords

Virtual Machine Temporal Form Design Result Digital System Abstraction Level 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Christina Mörtberg and Erik Stolterman for long-lasting discussions about the material side of computing. Thanks also to Gisle Hannemyr for pointing out the distinction between digital and electronic.

References

  1. Andersen, N.E., Kensing, F., Lassen, M., Lundin, J., Mathiassen, L., Munk-Madsen, A., & Sørgaard, P. (1990). Professional systems development – Experiences, ideas, and action. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Andersen, P.B. (1986). Semiotics and informatics: computers as media. In P. Ingwersen et al (Eds.), Information technology and information use. Towards a unified view of information and information technology (pp. 64–97). London: Taylor Graham.Google Scholar
  3. Andersen, P.B., & Bratteteig, T. (Eds.). (1989). Computers and language at work. The relevance of language and language use in development and use of computer systems. The SYDPOL Programme, Department of Informatics, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
  4. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity. Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(2), 801–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durhamn & London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Becker, H. (2000). The etiquette of improvisation. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 7(3), 171–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berg, M. (1997). On distribution, drift and the electronic medical record: some tools for a sociology of the formal. In J. A. Hughes, W. Prinz, T. Rodden & K. Schmidt (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth conference on European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW’97) Lancaster, UK (pp. 141–156). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  8. Bjerknes, G., & Bratteteig, T. (1987b). Perspectives on description tools and techniques in system development. In P. Docherty, K. Fuchs-Kittowski, P. Kolm & L. Mathiassen (Eds.), System design for human development and productivity: Participation and beyond (pp. 319–330). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  9. Bjerknes, G., & Bratteteig, T. (1988a). The memoirs of two survivors – or evaluation of a computer system for cooperative work. In I. Greif (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, Portland, Oregon, USA (pp. 167–177). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  10. Blevis, E., Lim, Y. K., & Stolterman, E. (2006.). Regarding software as a material of design. Design research society In Proceedings of Wonderground – the 2006 Design Research Society International Conference, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
  11. Bowker, G., & Star, S.L. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. Brand, S. (1994). How buildings learn: What happens after they’re built. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  13. Bratteteig, T. (2002). Bringing Gender Issues to Technology Design. In Floyd, C., Kelkar, G., Kramarae, C., Limpangog, C. & Klein-Franke, S. (Eds.), Feminist challenges in the information age. Opladen: Verlag Leske + Budrich.Google Scholar
  14. Bratteteig, T. (2004). Making change. Dealing with relations between design and use. Diss. Oslo: Department of Informatics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
  15. Capjon, J. (2004). Trial-and-error-based innovation: Catalysing shared engagement in design, Diss.Oslo: Oslo School of Architecture and Design.Google Scholar
  16. Checkland, P. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  17. Ciborra, C. (2002). The labyrinths of information: Challenging the wisdom of systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Dijkstra, E.W. (1976). A discipline of programming. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  19. Dourish, P. (2001). Where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Dourish, P., & Button, G. (1998). Technomethodology: Paradoxes and Possibilities. In M. J. Tauber (Ed.), Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: common ground (CHI ’96), Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (pp. 19–26). New York: ACM press.Google Scholar
  21. Fjuk, A., Kaasbøll, J., & Groven, A.-K. (2006). Improvements of teaching and tools for learning object-orientation. In A. Fjuk, A. Karahasanovic, & J. J. Kaasbøll (Eds.), Comprehensive object-oriented learning: The learner’s perspective (pp. 205–220). Santa Rosa: Informing Science Press.Google Scholar
  22. Fujimura, J. (1996). Crafting science. A sociohistory of the quest for the genetics of cancer. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Glette, K. (2009): personal communication, Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
  24. Gelernter, D. (1998). Machine beauty. Elegance and the heart of technology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  25. Goodwin, C. (1997). The blackness of black: Color categories as situated practice, resnick. In L. B. Resnick, R. Säljö, C. Pontecorvo & B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools and reasoning; essays on situated cognition (pp. 111–140). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Gramazio, F., & Kohler, M. (2007). Digital materiality, talk at Oslo Arkitektforening. October 18. 2007.Google Scholar
  27. Greenfield, A. (2006). Everyware: The dawning age of ubiquitous computing. Berkeley: New Riders Publ.Google Scholar
  28. Grinter, R.E. (1995). Using a configuration management tool to coordinate software development. In N. Comstock & C. Ellis (Eds.), Proceedings of conference on organizational computing systems (COCS ’95) (pp. 168–177). New York: ACM press.Google Scholar
  29. Grinter, R. E. (1998). Recomposition: putting it all back together again. In I. Greif (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1998 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work (CSCW ’98) Seattle Washington, USA (pp. 393–403). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  30. Hailperin, M., Kaiser, B., & Knight, K. (1999). Concrete abstractions. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publ. Co.Google Scholar
  31. Hallnäs, L., & Redström, J. (2006). Interaction design: foundations, experiments. Borås: The Interactive Institute.Google Scholar
  32. Harper, D. (1987). Working knowledge: Skill and community in a small shop. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  33. Henderson, K. (1999). On line and on paper. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  34. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  35. Hård, M. (1994). Technology as practice: local and global closure processes in diesel-engine design. Social Studies of Science, 24(2), 549–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ishii, H., Mazalek, A., & Lee, J. ( 2001). Bottles as a minimal interface to access digital information. In J. Jacko & A Sears (Eds.), Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘01), Seattle, Washington (pp. 187–188). New York: ACM pres.Google Scholar
  37. Ishii, H., & Ullmer, B. (1997). Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms. In S. Pemberton (Ed.), Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘97), Georgia, United States (pp. 234–241). New York: ACM press.Google Scholar
  38. Jacucci, G., & Wagner, I. (2007). Performative roles of materiality for collective creativity. In B. Schneiderman, G. Fischer, E. Giaccardi & M. Eisenberg (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI conference on Creativity & Cognition (C&C ’07), Washington, DC, USA (pp. 73–82). New York: ACM press.Google Scholar
  39. Juul-Nielsen, J. (1984). Personal communication at Risør Trebåtbyggeri Wooden Boat Building, Norway.Google Scholar
  40. Kernighan, B. W. & Pike, R. (1999). The practice of programming. Simplicity, clarity, generality, Reading. Massachuesetts: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  41. Knuth, D. (1973). The art of computer programming vol. 3: Sorting and searching, Reading. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  42. Kramer, J. (2007). Is abstraction the key to computing? Communications of ACM, 50(4), 37–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lanzara, G.F. (1983). The design process: Frames, metaphors and games. In U. Briefs, C. Ciborra & L. Schneider (Eds.), Systems design for, with and by the user (pp. 29–40) Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  44. Larssen, A.T., Loke, L., Robertson, T., & Edwards, J. (2004). Understanding movement as input for interaction – A study of two Eyetoy™ games. In Proeedings of OZCHI 2004 (1–10). Available at: http://www.ozchi.org/proceedings/2004/index.html.Google Scholar
  45. Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Laumann, K. (2005). Men er det kreativt? Digitale verktøy i kreative prosesser (In Norwegian: But is it creative? Digital tools in creative processes) MA thesis. Oslo:Department of Informatics, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
  47. Loke, L., Larssen, A. T., Robertson, T., & Edwards, J. (2007). Understanding movement for interaction design: Frameworks and approaches. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 11(8), 691–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Löwgren, J., & Stolterman, E. (1998). Design av informationsteknik – materialet utan egenskaper [In Swedish]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
  49. Maeda, J. (2000). Maeda@media. London: Thomas & Hudson.Google Scholar
  50. Mazé, R., & Redström, J. (2005). Form and the computational object. Digital Creativity, 16(1), 7–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. McCullough, M. (1998). Abstracting craft. The practiced digital hand. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  52. Minsky, M. (1967). Computation: Finite and infinite machines. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  53. Moggridge, B. (2007). Designing interactions. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  54. Musil, R. (1996). The man without qualities. New York: Vintage books.Google Scholar
  55. Mörtberg, C. (2001). Abstracting, quantifying, classifying, simplyfying, standardising, building hierachies: What are the systems designers sorting out? The conference Information Technology, Transnational Democracy and Gender. Ronneby, Sweden.Google Scholar
  56. Nygaard, K. (1986). Program Development as a Social Activity. In Information processing 86: Proceedings of the IFIP 10th World Computer Congress, Dublin, Ireland (pp. 189–198). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  57. Nygaard, K. (2002). Foreword. In C. Ciborra, The labyrinths of information: Challenging the wisdom of systems . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Schön, D. (1983): The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
  59. Sevaldson, B. (2005). Developing digital design techniques: Investigations on creative design computing. Diss. Oslo: Oslo School of Architecture and Design.Google Scholar
  60. Star, S.L. (1991). Invisible work and silenced dialogues in representing knowledge. In I. Eriksson, B.A. Kitchenham, & K. Tijdens (Eds.), Women, work and computerization: understanding and overcoming bias in work and education (pp. 81–92). Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
  61. Stolterman, E. (2006). Personal communication.Google Scholar
  62. Stolterman, E. (2007). Designtänkande (In Swedish: Design Thinking). In Harvard, Åsa & Ilstedt, Sara. (Eds.), Under ytan: en antologi om designforskning [In Swedish: Under the surface: An anthology on design research] (pp. 12–19). Stockholm: Raster Förlag.Google Scholar
  63. Suchman, L.A. (1994). Do categories have politics? The language/action perspective reconsidered. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, 2(3), 177–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Suchman, L. A. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations. Plans and situated actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Säljö, R. (2000). Lärande i praktiken. Ett sociokulturellt perspektiv [In Swedish: Learning in practice. A socio-cultural perspective]. Stockholm: Prisma Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
  66. Vallgårda, A., & Redström, J. (2007). Computational composites. In M. B. Rosson & D: Gillmore (Eds.), Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘07), San Jose CA, USA (pp. 513–522). New York: ACM pressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Webster (2008). Webster dictionary and thesaurus online: www.webster.com. Accessed June 2008.Google Scholar
  68. Weiser, M., & Brown, J. S. (1997). The coming age of calm technology, In P.J. Denning, & R. M. Metcalfe (Eds.), Beyond calculation: The next fifty years of computing (pp. 75–86). New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  69. Weizenbaum, J. (1976). Computer power and human reason. From judgement to calculation. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  70. Whalley, P., & Barley, S. R. (1997). Technical work in the division of labor: Stalking the Wily anomaly. In S. R. Barley, & J. Orr (Eds.), Between craft and science: Technical work in the U.S. settings (pp. 23–52). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Winograd, T. (1979). Beyond programming languages. Communications of the ACM, 22(7), 391–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Winograd, T., & Flores, F. (1986). Understanding computers and cognition. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
  73. Wroblewski, D.A. (1991). The construction of human–computer interfaces considered as a craft. In J. Karat (Ed.), Taking software design seriously (pp. 1–17). Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  74. Zuboff, S. (1989). In the age of the smart machine: The future of work and power. New York: Basic Books. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tone Bratteteig
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of InformaticsUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations