機車訪談：在第一物稱視角下的機車物件人誌學研究與設計

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	張文韋 Wen-Wei Chang
論文名稱：	機車訪談：在第一物稱視角下的機車物件人誌學研究與設計 Interview with Scooters: A “first-thing perspective” thing ethnography research and design of the scooters in Taiwan
指導教授：	陳玲鈴 Lin-Lin Chen 梁容輝 Rung-Huei Liang
口試委員:	陳玲鈴 Lin-Lin Chen 梁容輝 Rung-Huei Liang 陶亞倫 Ya-Lun Tao
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	設計學院 - 設計系 Department of Design
論文出版年：	2017
畢業學年度：	105
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	72
中文關鍵詞：	物件人誌學、機車、人機互動、物件中心設計、物件訪談
外文關鍵詞：	Thing Ethnography, Scooter, HCI, Things-Centered Design, Interview with Things
相關次數：	點閱：256 下載：34
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

「移動性」向來是人類文明發展的基石之一，在不同的移動性之下，世界與我們的關係也隨之變化。而隨著現今物聯網技術、資料收集與演算能力的發展，其理想的、適切的「智慧移動（Smart Mobility）」也成為各領域所探尋的重要議題。
基於對移動性與使用者之關係的探索，本研究聚焦於臺灣的機車互動經驗，以設計人誌學（Design Ethnography）與物件中心設計（Things-Centered Design）為取徑，提出新的研究方法－「物件訪談（Interview with Things）」－以探討機車與人的關係網絡。透過自動照相機與GPS定位裝置的安裝，本研究收集六組「機車視角」的資料數據，以物的角度來研究以往多側重於人類方的人－物、物－物互動關係；另一方面，本研究邀請表演工作者作為資料數據的轉譯者，運用其表演專業的同理能力與詮釋技巧，化身為機車並參與訪談，藉此了解機車的社交生活與角色關係。在本篇論文的最後，我們基於六組機車訪談的結果，歸納出三種特別的人－車關係，並以推測設計的取徑設計出三組機車配件，藉此去激起大眾對於機車的想像與討論。

In the city, mobility is calling for new forms of smartness. To understand what is needed to design thoughtful forms of smart mobility, this paper proposed and applied a new thing ethnography methodology – Interview with Things – to reveal the interwoven networks of personal and social relationships that develop around scooters in Taiwanese everyday life. To this end, a three-day study with six different types of scooterists was conducted in Taipei. Cameras and sensors were directly attached to the scooters themselves, to collect data from a 'thing' perspective. The data collected were then organized and offered to professional actors, who were invited to 'speak' on behalf of the scooters. Through the performance of the actors interpreting and empathizing with the scooter's everyday life, intents, expectations and relationships between scooters and scooterists were revealed and captured. We further discussed how the socio-material networks among scooters could provoke various creative and meaningful arrangements in everyday life. In the end of this thesis, three conceptual scooter accessories were presented to illustrate three unique scooter-scooterist relationships in Taiwan.

Abstract    10

1. Introduction    11
1-1. Objectives    13
1-2. Thesis Structure    14

2. Literature Review    15
2-1. The Current Challenges of The Internet Of Things (Iot)    15
2-2. Material Culture Studies and Design Ethnography    19
2-3. Things-Centered Approach in HCI    21
2-4. The Scooter in Taiwan    24

3. Research Activities    28
3-1. Interview with Things: Taking a ‘first-thing’ point of view to make sense of thing ethnography data    28
3-2. Data Collection: Thing ethnography    29
3-3. Data Organization: Preparing materials for the actors    30
3-4. Data Interpretation: Actors’ performances    33

4. Results    35
4-1. Social relationships – The social-material networks among scooters, other things and people    35
4-2. About yourself – Reflections on the scooter’s identities    37

5. Discussion    40
5-1. Socio-material dimensions of openness of the scooter    40
5-2. A co-constructive speculation of what it is like to be a thing    42

6. Design Activities    44
6-1. The “facial composite” of scooters    44

7. “Scooter as _”    51
7-1. More than a Transportation: Three unique relationships between a scooter and a scooterist    51
7-2. Imaging Alternative Realities with Scooters: Three relationship-driven design concepts    53
7-3. Discussion: Design along with a thing’s socio-material network    66

8. Conclusion    68

9. Reference    70

                                

1. Bleeker, J. (2009). Why Things Matter: A manifesto for networked objects–cohabiting with pigeons, arphids and Aibos in the Internet of Things. The object reader, 165-74.
2. Chamorro-Koc, M., Popovic, V., & Emmison, M. (2009). Human experience and product usability: Principles to assist the design of user–product interactions. Applied Ergonomics, 40(4), 648-656.
3. Cila, N., Giaccardi, E., Tynan O'Mahony, F., Speed, C., & Caldwell, M. (2015). Thing-Centered Narratives: A study of object personas. Paper presented at Research Network for Design Anthropology Seminar 3: Collaborative Formation of Issues (January 2015), Aarhus, Denmark.
4. Comber, R., Thieme, A., Rafiev, A., Taylor, N., Krämer, N. C., & Olivier, P. (2013, September). BinCam: Designing for Engagement with Facebook for Behavior Change. In INTERACT (2) (pp. 99-115).
5. Dant, T. (1999). Material culture in the social world. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
6. Davoli, L., & Redström, J. (2014, June). Materializing infrastructures for participatory hacking. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Designing interactive systems (pp. 121-130). ACM.
7. DiSalvo, C., & Lukens, J. (2011). NonAnthropocentrism and the Non-Human in Design: Possibilities for Designing New Forms of Engagement With and Through Technology. From Social Butterfly to Engaged Citizen Urban Informatics, Social Media, Ubiquitous Computing, and Mobile Technology to Support Citizen Engagement.
8. Fallan, K. (2008). De-scribing Design: Appropriating Script Analysis to Design History. Design Issues, 24(4), 61-75.
9. Gell, A. (1992). The technology of enchantment and the enchantment of technology. Anthropology, art and aesthetics, 40-63.
10. Giaccardi, E., Cila, N., Speed, C., & Caldwell, M. (2016, June). Thing Ethnography: Doing Design Research with Non-Humans. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (pp. 377-387). ACM.
11. Giaccardi, E., Kuijer, L., Neven, L. (2016). Design for Resourceful Ageing: Intervening in the Ethics of Gerontechnology. Proceedings of DRS 2016, Design Research Society 50th Anniversary Conference. Brighton, UK, 27–30 June 2016.
12. Giaccardi, E., Speed, C., Cila, N., & Caldwell, M. (2016). Things as co-ethnographers: Implications of a thing perspective for design and anthropology. In R. C. Smith, & K. Tang Vangkilde (Eds.), Design Anthropological Futures. (pp. 235-248). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
13. Gibson, J. J. (2014). The ecological approach to visual perception: classic edition. Psychology Press.
14. Goffman, E. (1978). The presentation of self in everyday life (p. 56). London: Harmondsworth.
15. Harris, M. (2001). The rise of anthropological theory: A history of theories of culture. AltaMira Press.
16. Hebdige, D. (2004). Object as Image. Material Culture: Critical Concepts in the Social Sciences, 2, 121.
17. Kirk, D. S., & Sellen, A. (2010). On human remains: Values and practice in the home archiving of cherished objects. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 17(3), 10.
18. Koreshoff, T. L., Leong, T. W., & Robertson, T. (2013, November). Approaching a human-centred Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 25th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference: Augmentation, Application, Innovation, Collaboration (pp. 363-366). ACM.
19. Lai, Y. (2010). Riding under the state gaze－The historical analysis of Taiwan autobike from the Japanese colonial period to 1970. Graduate Institute of Industrial Design.
20. Laschke, M., Hassenzahl, M., & Diefenbach, S. (2011, June). Things with attitude: Transformational products. In Create11 conference (pp. 1-2).
21. Latour, B. (1996). On actor-network theory: A few clarifications. Soziale welt, 369-381.
22. Law, L. (2005). Sensing the city: urban experiences. Hodder Education.
23. Lin, S. (1998). Taiwan motorcycle history. Taiwan Motorcycle Research and Development Security Promotion Association.
24. Linehan, C., Kirman, B. J., Reeves, S., Blythe, M. A., Tanenbaum, J. G., Desjardins, A., & Wakkary, R. (2014, April). Alternate endings: using fiction to explore design futures. In CHI'14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 45-48). ACM.
25. Marenko, B. (2014). Neo-Animism and Design: A New Paradigm in Object Theory. Design and Culture, 6(2), 219-241.
26. Markussen, T., & Knutz, E. (2013, September). The poetics of design fiction. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces (pp. 231-240). ACM.
27. Maulsby, D., Greenberg, S., & Mander, R. (1993, May). Prototyping an intelligent agent through Wizard of Oz. In Proceedings of the INTERACT'93 and CHI'93 conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 277-284). ACM.
28. Mennicken, S., Vermeulen, J., & Huang, E. M. (2014, September). From today's augmented houses to tomorrow's smart homes: new directions for home automation research. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (pp. 105-115). ACM.
29. Odom, W. et al. 2009. Understanding why we preserve some things and discard others in the context of interaction design. CHI’09, 1053-1062.
30. Petrelli, D., Whittaker, S. 2010. Family memories in the home: contrasting physical and digital mementos. Pers. and Ubiq. Comput. 14 (2), 153-169.
31. Pruitt, J., & Adlin, T. (2010). The persona lifecycle: keeping people in mind throughout product design. Morgan Kaufmann.
32. Pruitt, J., & Grudin, J. (2003, June). Personas: practice and theory. In Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Designing for user experiences (pp. 1-15). ACM.
33. Rebaudengo, S., Aprile, W., & Hekkert, P. (2012). Addicted products, a scenario of future interactions where products are addicted to being used.”. In Out of control: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on design and emotion (pp. 1-10).
34. Rijsdijk, S. A., & Hultink, E. J. (2009). How today's consumers perceive tomorrow's smart products. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26(1), 24-42.
35. Rose, D. (2014). Enchanted objects: Design, human desire, and the Internet of things. Simon and Schuster.
36. Ross, P. R., & Wensveen, S. A. (2010). Designing behavior in interaction: Using aesthetic experience as a mechanism for design. International Journal of Design, 4(2).
37. Rozendaal, M. (2016). Objects with intent: a new paradigm for interaction design. interactions, 23(3), 62-65.
38. Speed, C., & Shingleton, D. (2012, June). An internet of cars: connecting the flow of things to people, artefacts, environments and businesses. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM workshop on Next generation mobile computing for dynamic personalised travel planning (pp. 11-12). ACM.
39. Storni, C. (2015). Notes on ANT for designers: ontological, methodological and epistemological turn in collaborative design. CoDesign, 11(3-4), 166-178.
40. Takayama, L., Pantofaru, C., Robson, D., Soto, B., & Barry, M. (2012, September). Making technology homey: finding sources of satisfaction and meaning in home automation. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (pp. 511-520). ACM.
41. Van Allen, P., McVeigh-Schultz, J., Brown, B., Kim, H. M., & Lara, D. (2013, April). AniThings: animism and heterogeneous multiplicity. In CHI'13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2247-2256). ACM.
42. Van der Tuin, I., & Dolphijn, R. (2012). New materialism: Interviews & cartographies. Open Humanities Press.
43. Wakkary, R., & Maestri, L. (2007, June). The resourcefulness of everyday design. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI conference on Creativity & cognition (pp. 163-172). ACM.
44. Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics?. Daedalus, 121-136.
45. Wright, P., & McCarthy, J. (2008, April). Empathy and experience in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 637-646). ACM. ISO 690
46. Yang, R., & Newman, M. W. (2012, September). Living with an intelligent thermostat: advanced control for heating and cooling systems. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (pp. 1102-1107). ACM.

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文