Tension Space Analysis: Exploring Community Requirements for Networked Urban Screens

  • Steve North
  • Holger Schnädelbach
  • Ava Fatah gen Schieck
  • Wallis Motta
  • Lei Ye
  • Moritz Behrens
  • Efstathia Kostopoulou
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8118)


This paper draws on the design process, implementation and early evaluation results of an urban screens network to highlight the tensions that emerge at the boundary between the technical and social aspects of design. While public interactive screens in urban spaces are widely researched, the newly emerging networks of such screens present fresh challenges. Researchers wishing to be led by a diverse user community may find that the priorities of some users, directly oppose the wishes of others. Previous literature suggests such tensions can be handled by ‘goal balancing’, where all requirements are reduced down to one set of essential, implementable attributes. Contrasting this, this paper’s contribution is ‘Tension Space Analysis’, which broadens and extends existing work on Design Tensions. It includes new domains, new representational methods and offers a view on how to best reflect conflicting community requirements in some aspects or features of the design.


‘tension space analysis’ ‘human factors’ ‘design tensions’ ‘design space’ ‘urban screens’ ‘networked urban screens’ 


  1. 1.
    Screens In The Wild,
  2. 2.
    Brignull, H., Izadi, S., Fitzpatrick, G., Rogers, Y., Rodden, T.: The introduction of a shared interactive surface into a communal space. In: Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 49–58 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Struppek, M.: The social potential of Urban Screens. Visual Communication 5, 173 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fatah gen Schieck, A.: Towards an integrated architectural media space. First Monday 4 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fatah gen Schieck, A., Boddington, G., Fink, P.: Framework for the implementation of urban big screens in the public space (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McQuire, D.S.: The media city: Media, architecture and urban space. Sage Publications Ltd. (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Large digital screens in public spaces. Joint guidance by English Heritage and CABE (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fatah gen Schieck, A.: A tale of two cities. In: Urban Screens 2008, Melbourne, Australia (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Taylor, K.: Programming video art for urban screens in public space. First Monday (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Memarovic, N., Langheinrich, M., Alt, F.: Interacting Places — A Framework for Promoting Community Interaction and Place Awareness through Public Displays. In: Adjunct Proceedings of the Tenth Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Davies, N., Langheinrich, M., José, R., Schmidt, A.: Open Display Networks: A Communications Medium for the 21st Century. IEEE Computer 45(5), 58–64 (2012); Special Issue on Interactive Digital SignageGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Memarovic, N., Langheinrich, M., Alt, F.: The Interacting Places Framework – Conceptualizing Public Display Applications that Promote Community Interaction and Place Awareness. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis 2012). ACM, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Papastergiadis, N.: Spatial Aesthetics: Rethinking the Contemporary. In: Smith, E., Condee (eds.) Antinomies of Art and Culture, pogl., vol. 19Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brynskov, M., Dalsgaard, P., Ebsen, T., Fritsch, J., Halskov, K., Nielsen, R.: Staging urban interactions with media façades. In: Gross, T., Gulliksen, J., Kotzé, P., Oestreicher, L., Palanque, P., Prates, R.O., Winckler, M. (eds.) INTERACT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5726, pp. 154–167. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schnädelbach, H., Penn, A., Steadman, P., Benford, S., Koleva, B., Rodden, T.: Moving office: inhabiting a dynamic building. In: Proceedings of the 2006 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 313–322 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schnädelbach, H.: Hybrid spatial topologies. The Journal of Space Syntax 3(2), 204–222 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chamberlain, A., Crabtree, A., Rodden, T., Jones, M., Rogers, Y.: Research in the wild: understanding ’in the wild’ approaches to design and development. In: Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS 2012), pp. 795–796. ACM, New York (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rogers, Y.: Interaction design gone wild: striving for wild theory. Interactions 18(4), 58–62 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chayutsahakij, P.: Human Centered Design Innovation. Institute of Design. IIT Technology (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vanden Abeele, V.A., Van Rompaey, V.: Introducing human-centered research to game design: designing game concepts for and with senior citizens. In: Vanden Abeele, V.A., Van Rompaey, V. (eds.) CHI 2006 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA 2006), pp. 1469–1474. ACM, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stolterman, E.: The nature of design practice and implications for interaction design research. International Journal of Design 2, 55–65 (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Garrett, J.J.: The Scope Plane: Functional Specifications and Content Requirements. The Elements of User Experience: User-Centered Design for the Web. In: Prioritizing Requirements, ch. 4. Peachpit Press (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Card, S.K., Mackinlay, J.D., Robertson, G.G.: The design space of input devices. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: Empowering People, pp. 117–124 (1990)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    MacLean, A., Young, R., Bellotti, V., Moran, T.: Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis. Human-Computer Interaction 6(3&4), 201–250 (1991); Special Issue on Design Rationale: Carroll, J.M., Moran, T.P. (eds.)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tatar, D.: The design tensions framework. Human–Computer Interaction 22, 413–451 (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Friedman, B.: Value-sensitive design. Interactions 3, 16–23 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fatah gen Schieck, A., Schnädelbach, H., Penn, A.: Research in the Wild: Exploring the potential of Networked Urban Screens for Communities and Culture. In: Research in the Wild Workshop, DIS 2012, Newcastle, UK (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Union Platform, By USER1,
  29. 29.
  30. 30.
  31. 31.
  32. 32.
  33. 33.
  34. 34.
    Müller, J., Walter, R., Bailly, G., Nischt, M., Alt, F.: Looking glass: a field study on noticing interactivity of a shop window. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 297–306. ACM, New York (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steve North
    • 1
  • Holger Schnädelbach
    • 1
  • Ava Fatah gen Schieck
    • 2
  • Wallis Motta
    • 2
  • Lei Ye
    • 1
  • Moritz Behrens
    • 2
  • Efstathia Kostopoulou
    • 2
  1. 1.Mixed Reality Laboratory (MRL), Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of NottinghamNottinghamUK
  2. 2.The BartlettUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations