Creating Personas for Political and Social Consciousness in HCI Design
Keywords:personas, phenomenography, values, difference, possibility, action
Personas have become an important tool for Human-Computer Interaction professionals. However, they are not immune to limits and critique, including stereotyping. We suggest that while some of the criticisms to personas are important, the use of personas is open to them in part because of an unquestioned focus on explicating user needs and goals.
Traditionally indeed, personas and the associated scenarios are created by focusing on needs and goals of the target users. This focus, while helping designers, also obscures some other potentially relevant aspects. In particular, when the goal of the product or software being designed is associated with social and political goals rather than with bringing a product to the market, it may be relevant to focus personas on political aspirations, social values and the will of personas to take action. We argue that it would be possible when producing personas (and associated scenarios too) to partially move away from representing needs and embrace personas which more explicitly represent political or social beliefs. We suggest that drawing on phenomenography will allow to achieve this. We provide empirical evidence for our position from two large-scale European projects, the first one in the area of Social Innovation and the second in the area of eParticipation.
Åkerlind, GS 2012, ‘Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods’, Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 115-127.
Anvari, F & Tran, HMT 2013, ‘Persona ontology for user centred design professionals’, in J Bloomer, M Nkhoma & N Leung (eds), Proceedings of the ICIME 4th International Conference on Information Management and Evaluation, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, pp. 35-44.
Anvari, F, Richards, D, Hitchens, M, Babar, MA, Tran, HMT & Busch, P 2017, ‘An empirical investigation of the influence of persona with personality traits on conceptual design’, Journal of Systems and Software, vol.134, pp. 324-339.
Avison, D & Fitzgerald, G 2003, Information systems development: methodologies, techniques and tools (3rd edition), McGraw Hill, Maidenhead, UK.
Barnard, A, McCosker, H & Gerber, R 1999, 'Phenomenography: a qualitative research approach for exploring understanding in health care’, Qualitative Health Research, vol. 9, no. 2, pp.212-226.
Carroll, J M 2000, Making use: scenario-based design of human-computer interactions, MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Chapman, CN & Milham, RP 2006, ‘The personas' new clothes: methodological and practical arguments against a popular method’, in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 634-636.
Chiu, C M, Hsu, M H, & Wang, E T 2006, Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision support systems, 42(3), 1872-1888.
Cooper, A 2004, The inmates are running the asylum:[Why high-tech products drive us crazy and how to restore the sanity]. Sams, Indianapolis IN.
Cooper, A, Reimann, R & Cronin, D, 2007, About face 3: the essentials of interaction design, John Wiley and Sons, Indianapolis IN.
Dietz, T, Stern, P C, & Guagnano, G A, 1998, ‘Social structural and social psychological bases of environmental concern,’ Environment and behavior, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 450-471.
Dunkin, R 2000, ‘Using phenomenography to study organisational change’, in JA Bowden & E Walsh (eds), Phenomenography, RMIT University press, Melbourne, pp. 137-152.
Emmons, K M, 1997, ‘Perspectives on environmental action: reflection and revision through practical experience,’ The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 34-44.
European Commission, 2008, ‘Attitudes of European citizens towards the environment. Eurobarometer 295,’ retrieved 31 March 2018, http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/archives/ebs/ebs_295_en.pdf
Floyd , IR, Jones, MC & Twidale MB 2008, ‘Resolving incommensurable debates: a preliminary identification of persona kinds, attributes and characteristics’, Artifact, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 12-26.
Fumagalli, A & Lucarelli, S 2015, ‘Finance, austerity and commonfare’, Theory, Culture & Society, vol. 32, no. 7-8, pp. 51-65.
Goh, CH, Kulathuramaiyer, N & Zaman, T 2017, ‘Riding Waves of Change: A Review of Personas Research Landscape Based on the Three Waves of HCI’, in J Choudrie, MS Islam, F Wahid, JM Bass & J Eka Priyatma (eds), 14th IFIP WG 9.4 International Conference on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, pp. 605-616.
Gothelf, J & Seiden, J 2013, LEAN UX - Applying lean principles to improve user experience, O’Reilly, London.
Gudjonsdottir, R 2010, ‘Personas and scenarios in use’, PhD Human-Computer Interaction thesis, KTH, Sweden, retrieved 22 October 2018, http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:319155/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Lamb, P, Sandberg, J & Liesch, PW 2011, ‘Small firm internationalisation unveiled through phenomenography’, Journal of International Business Studies, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 672-693.
Mann, L, Dall’Alba, G & Radcliffe, D 2007. ‘Using phenomenography to investigate different ways of experiencing sustainable design’, in Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, n.p. retrieved 22 October 2018, https://peer.asee.org/using-phenomenography-to-investigate-different-ways-of-experiencing-sustainable-design.pdf
Marsden, N & Haag, M 2016, ‘Stereotypes and politics: reflections on personas’, in Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA, pp. 4017-4031.
Marton, F, 1981, ‘Phenomenography—describing conceptions of the world around us,’ Instructional science, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 177-200.
Marton, F 1986, ‘Phenomenography—a research approach to investigating different understandings of reality’, Journal of Thought, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 28-49.
Massanari, A. L, 2010, ‘Designing for imaginary friends: information architecture, personas and the politics of user-centered design,’ New media & society, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 401-416.
Matthews, T, Judge, T & Whittaker, S 2012, ‘How do designers and user experience professionals actually perceive and use personas?’. in Proceedings of the 2012 SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Austin Texas, pp. 1219-1228.
McCosker, H, Barnard, A & Gerber, R 2003, ‘Phenomenographic study of women’s experiences of domestic violence during the childbearing years’, Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1-13.
Mulder, S, & Yaar, Z 2006, The user is always right: A practical guide to creating and using personas for the web, New Riders, Berkeley CA.
Muller, M 2014, ‘Curiosity, Creativity, and Surprise as Analytic Tools: Grounded Theory Method,’ in J Olson & W Kellogg (eds), Ways of Knowing in HCI, Springer, New York NY.
Nielsen, L, 2003, ‘Constructing the User,’ In Proceedings of Human Computer Interaction International - HCII2003, Crete, Lawrence Erlbaum Ass., pp. 430-434
Pruitt, J, & Grudin, J, 2003, ‘Personas: practice and theory,’ In Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Designing for User Experiences, pp. 1-15.
Putnam, R. D, 2001, Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community, Simon and Schuster, New York NY.
Rogers, Y, Sharp, H, & Preece, J, 2007, Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction, John Wiley and Sons, London.
Rönkkö, K, Hellman, M, Kilander, B & Dittrich, Y 2004, ‘Personas is not applicable: local remedies interpreted in a wider context’, in Proceedings of the Eighth Conference on Participatory Design: Artful integration: interweaving media, materials and practices, Toronto, vol. 1, pp. 112-120.
Rosenfeld, L, & Morville, P, 2002, Information architecture for the world wide web, O'Reilly, London.
Sciannanamblo, M, Wilson, A, Lyle, P, Teli, M, De Paoli, S, Bassetti, C & De Angeli, A 2018, ‘Co-designing for common values: creating hybrid spaces to nurture autonomous social collaboration’, Co-Design, submitted.
Schuler, D, & Namioka, A. (eds.), 1993, Participatory design: Principles and practices. Lawrence Erlbaum, London.
Sjöström, B & Dahlgren, LO 2002, ‘Applying phenomenography in nursing research’, Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 339-345.
Strauss, A & Corbin, JM 1990, Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques, SAGE Publications, Los Angeles CA.
Svensson, L 1997, ‘Theoretical foundations of phenomenography’, Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 159-171.
Trigwell, K 2006, ‘Phenomenography: An approach to research into geography education’, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 367-372.
Turner, P, & Turner, S, 2011. ‘Is stereotyping inevitable when designing with personas?’ Design studies, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 30-44.
Vogiatzi, M, Keratidis, C, Schinas, M, Diplaris, S, Yümlü, S, Forbes, P & Symeonidou, M 2017, ‘The STEP Project: Societal and Political Engagement of Young People in Environmental Issues’, in I Kompatsiaris, J Cave, A Satsiou, G Carle, A Passani, E Kontopoulos, S Diplaris & D McMillan (eds), Proceedings of the International Conference on Internet Science, Thessaloniki, pp. 148-156.
Weber, M, 1978, Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Univ of California Press, Berkeley CA.
Wilson, AN, Sachy, M, Ottaviano, S, De Paoli, S & De Pellegrino, F 2017, ‘PIE News Deliverable D3.1 User Research Report and Scenarios’, retrieved 31 March 2018 http://pieproject.eu/2017/07/03/d3-1-user-research-report-and-scenarios/
Yates, C, Partridge, HL & Bruce, CS 2012, ‘Exploring information experiences through phenomenography’, Library and Information Research, vol. 36, no. 112, pp. 96-119.