Using Affinity Diagrams to Evaluate Interactive Prototypes

  • Andrés LuceroEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9297)


Affinity diagramming is a technique used to externalize, make sense of, and organize large amounts of unstructured, far-ranging, and seemingly dissimilar qualitative data. HCI and interaction design practitioners have adopted and used affinity diagrams for different purposes. This paper discusses our particular use of affinity diagramming in prototype evaluations. We reflect on a decade’s experience using affinity diagramming across a number of projects, both in industry and academia. Our affinity diagramming process in interaction design has been tailored and consists of four stages: creating notes, clustering notes, walking the wall, and documentation. We draw examples from eight projects to illustrate our particular practices along these four stages, as well as to ground the discussion.


Interaction design KJ method Evaluation Analysis 



A big shout out to Dima Aliakseyeu, Selene Mota, Marion Boberg, Hannu Korhonen, Jussi Holopainen, Tero Jokela, Akos Vetek, Jari Kangas and Deepak Akkil who co-built the affinity walls shown here. Thanks also to Jacob Buur, Robb Mitchell, and the anonymous reviewers for insightful comments on this paper.


  1. 1.
    Benyon, D.: Designing Interactive Systems: A Comprehensive Guide to HCI, UX and Interaction Design. Pearson Education, Harlow (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beyer, H., Holtzblatt, K.: Contextual Design: Defining Customer-Centered Systems. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buur, J., Soendergaard, A.: Video card game: an augmented environment for user centred design discussions. In: DARE 2000, pp. 63–69. ACM (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cox, D., Greenberg, S.: Supporting collaborative interpretation in distributed Groupware. In: CSCW 2000, pp. 289–298. ACM (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Curtis, P., Heiserman, T., Jobusch, D., Notess, M., Webb, J.: Customer-focused design data in a large, multi-site organization. In: CHI 1999, pp. 608–615. ACM (1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gaver, W.: Making spaces: how design workbooks work. In: CHI 2011, pp. 1551–1560. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Geyer, F., Pfeil, U., Höchtl, A., Budzinski, J., Reiterer, H.: Designing reality-based interfaces for creative group work. In: C&C 2011, pp. 165–174. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Geyer, F., Pfeil, U., Budzinski, J., Höchtl, A., Reiterer, H.: AffinityTable - a hybrid surface for supporting affinity diagramming. In: Campos, P., Graham, N., Jorge, J., Nunes, N., Palanque, P., Winckler, M. (eds.) INTERACT 2011, Part III. LNCS, vol. 6948, pp. 477–484. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hanington, B.: Universal Methods of Design: 100 Ways to Research Complex Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions. Rockport Publishers, Beverly (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harboe, G., Minke, J., Ilea, I., Huang, E.M.: Computer support for collaborative data analysis: augmenting paper affinity diagrams. In: CSCW 2012, pp. 1179–1182. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Harboe, G., Doksam, G., Keller, L., Huang, E.M.: Two thousand points of interaction: augmenting paper notes for a distributed user experience. In: Lozano, M.D., Gallud, J.A., Tesoriero, R., Penichet, V.M.R. (eds.) Distributed User Interfaces: Usability and Collaboration, pp. 141–149. Springer, London (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hartson, R., Pyla, P.S.: The UX Book: Process and Guidelines for Ensuring a Quality User Experience. Morgan Kaufmann, Amsterdam (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Holtzblatt, K., Wendell, J.B., Wood, S.: Rapid Contextual Design. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jokela, T., Lucero, A.: MixedNotes: a digital tool to prepare physical notes for affinity diagramming. In: AcademicMindTrek 2014, pp. 3–6. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Judge, T.K., Pyla, P.S., McCrickard, D.S., Harrison, S., Hartson, H.R.: Studying group decision making in affinity diagramming. Technical report TR-08-16, Computer Science, Virginia Tech (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kawakita, J.: The original KJ method. Kawakita Research Institute, Tokyo (1991)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kildal, J., Lucero, A., Boberg, M.: Twisting touch: combining deformation and touch as input within the same interaction cycle on handheld devices. In: MobileHCI 2013, pp. 237–246. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Klemmer, S.R., Newman, M.W., Farrell, R., Bilezikjian, M., Landay, J.A.: The designers’ outpost: a tangible interface for collaborative web site. In: UIST 2001, pp. 1–10. ACM (2001)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Koh, B., Su, R.: Interactions for addressing shortcomings encountered when physically creating and manipulating large affinity diagrams.
  20. 20.
    Koskinen, I., Zimmerman, J., Binder, T., Redström, J., Wensveen, S.: Design Research Through Practice: From the Lab, Field, and Showroom. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kuniavsky, M.: Observing the User Experience: A Practitioner’s Guide to User Research. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lucero, A., Lashina, T., Diederiks, E. and Mattelmäki, T.: How probes inform and influence the design process. In: DPPI 2007, pp. 377–391. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lucero, A., Boberg, M., Uusitalo, S.: Image space: capturing, sharing and contextualizing personal pictures in a simple and playful way. In: ACE 2009, pp. 215–222. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lucero, A.: Framing, aligning, paradoxing, abstracting, and directing: how design mood boards work. In: DIS 2012, pp. 438–447. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lucero, A., Jones, M., Jokela, T., Robinson, S.: Mobile collocated interactions: taking an offline break together. Interactions 20(2), 26–32 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lucero, A., Vetek, A.: NotifEye: using interactive glasses to deal with notifications while walking in public. In: ACE 2014, Article 17, 10 p. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Luff, P., Heath, C.: Mobility in collaboration. In: CSCW 1998, pp. 305–314. ACM (1998)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Luff, P., Heath, C., Norrie, M., Signer, B., Herdman, P.: Only touching the surface: creating affinities between digital content and paper. In: CSCW 2004, pp. 523–532. ACM (2004)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mayhew, D.J.: The Usability Engineering Lifecycle: A Practitioner’s Guide to User Interface Design. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Miura, M., Sugihara, T., Kunifuji, S.: GKJ: Group KJ method support system utilizing digital pens. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. 94(3), 456–464 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nunes, M., Greenberg, S., Neustaedter, C.: Sharing digital photographs in the home through physical mementos, souvenirs, and keepsakes. In: DIS 2008, pp. 250–260. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wallace, J., McCarthy, J., Wright, P.C., Olivier, P.: Making design probes work. In: CHI 2013, pp. 3441–3450. ACM (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mads Clausen InstituteUniversity of Southern DenmarkKoldingDenmark

Personalised recommendations