Advertisement

Abstract

Every HCI artefact reproduces a specific stance towards its users. Influential within the academic sphere is the notion of a User-Centered-Design process. However, observing actual design practice renders the assumption of the centrality of users problematic. To this end, the text conducts an exploration of the relationship between discourse within the fields of HCI and architecture. A special focus are the formal expressions of deconstructivism within architecture and their potential counterparts within HCI design.

Keywords

deconstruction interdisciplinarity cultural informatics critical technical practice 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alexander, C.: Notes on the Synthesis of Form (Harvard Paperbacks). Harvard University Press (October 1964)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M.: A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction (Center for Environmental Structure Series). Oxford University Press (August 1978)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dunne, A.: Hertzian Tales: Electronic Products, Aesthetic Experience, and Critical Design. The MIT Press (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eisenman, P.: Contrasting concepts of harmony in architecture: Debate between christopher alexander and peter eisenman. Lotus International 40, 67 (1983)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Feenberg, A.: Philosophy Documentation Center: Ten paradoxes of technology. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 14(1), 3–15 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Heidt, M., Kanellopoulos, K., Pfeiffer, L., Rosenthal, P.: Diverse ecologies interdisciplinary development for cultural education. In: Kotzé, P., Marsden, G., Lindgaard, G., Wesson, J., Winckler, M. (eds.) INTERACT 2013, Part IV. LNCS, vol. 8120, pp. 539–546. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    International Organization for Standardization (ISO), S.: 9241-210: 2010. ergonomics of human system interaction-part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kerne, A.: Doing interface ecology: the practice of metadisciplinary. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 Electronic Art and Animation, pp. 181–185 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kerne, A., Mistrot, J.M., Khandelwal, M., Sundaram, V., Koh, E.: Using composition to re-present personal collections of hypersigns. Interfaces (September 2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ostwald, M.J., Vaughan, J.: A data-cluster analysis of facade complexity in the early house designs of peter eisenman. NOVA. The University of Newcastle’s Digital Repository (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ranganathan, A., Campbell, R.H.: What is the complexity of a distributed computing system? Complexity 12(6), 37–45 (2007)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rogers, Y.: HCI theory: Classical, modern, and contemporary. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 5(2), 1–129 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Heidt
    • 1
  • Andreas Bischof
    • 1
  • Paul Rosenthal
    • 2
  1. 1.Research Training Group crossWorldsChemnitz University of TechnologyChemnitzGermany
  2. 2.Visual Computing GroupChemnitz University of TechnologyChemnitzGermany

Personalised recommendations