Analysis

К оглавлению
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 
51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 
68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 
85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 
102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 
119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 
136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 
153 154 155 156 

In the analysis the data was discussed and we listed interesting topics from our

field notes focusing on the activities of the observed peoples. We found four

themes that seemed fruitful as means to think about design for public places. In

a complex environment focusing on activities is one way to break down the

setting to lesser units and analyze the aspects of interest for the study, in our case

the design of IT. The main connection to design is that activities can be

supported by or are at least almost always affected by the use of artifacts. For

further discussions on the world as constituted by man-made artifacts see for

example Dahlbom & Mathiassen (1993) and Wertch (1998). One aim with this

study is to give design implications, showing how IT designs could improve by

considering what frames and shapes action and use in a setting. Therefore, we

present design implications that point at salient aspects affecting the use of IT.

In the next section excerpts from the field notes (in italics) are used to illustrate

instances of behaviors observed.

The video recordings were used in order to gain a deeper understanding of

social interaction and the micro mobility in use of artifacts. Certain activities,

such as being together and using artifacts, were videotaped to be able to

analyze the activities from a micro mobility perspective. Micro mobility is the

way people use the mobility of objects, usually in interaction (Luff & Heath,

1998).

In the analysis we used the categories “single persons” and “people in

company.” This is something that people usually show by position, direction,

physical proximity, and body alignment (Ryave & Schenkein, 1974). We were

mistaken a few times, for example when we saw two men walking at the same

pace and the same direction next to each other, but then suddenly split up and

enter a train in different cars without saying goodbye. What is important here

is to understand that people that to us would appear as being single or as being

part of a group would also appear similarly to other people in the same context.

It should be noted that this was used as an analytical tool for understanding how

people is interpreted as being together.