The secret life of domestic objects

ABSTRACT

We report the results of a pilot study examining significant domestic objects, and the associated user experience. We propose a conceptual framework capturing three types of user-modified functionalities. We used the framework as a lens through which to view the relationship between user activities and user-modified functionalities. Our findings indicate that modified functionalities result in attracting both objects and personal activities to the surrounding area. Significant objects with modified functionalities seem to help users create a private 'space' within the 'place' of home that can fulfil or accommodate their personal ritual activities and habitual tendencies. We conclude by speculating that such user-modified functions are early indicators of opportunities for technical innovation.

REFERENCES

• 1: Baillie, L., & Benyon, D. (2001). Investigating Ubiquitous Computing in the Home. Paper presented at the The 1st Equator IRC Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing in Domestic Environment, The School of Computer Science and Information Technology, The University of Nottingham.
• 2: Crabtree, A., Hemmings, T., & Mariani, J. (2003, 14th-18th September). Informing the design of calendar systems for domestic use. Paper presented at the the 8th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Helsinki, Finland.
• 3: Crabtree, A., & Rodden, T. (2002). Routine Activities and Design for the Domestic Environment. Nottingham: The University of Nottingham.
• 4: Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Rochberg-Halton, E. (1981). The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols and the Self. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• 5: Dewsbury, G. (2004). Intelligent or "Smart" Home Technology, from http://www.gdewsbury.ukideas.com/IntellBuild.html
• 6: Eronen, L. (2002). Digital Television for All: User Preferences and Designers? Views on What Would Suit the User. Paper presented at the User Interfaces for All, Springer-Verlag.
• 7: Harper, R. (2003). Inside the Smart Home: Ideas, Possibilities and Methods. In R. Harper (Ed.), Inside the Smart Home. London: Springer.
• 8: Debby Hindus, The Importance of Homes in Technology Research, Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Cooperative Buildings, Integrating Information, Organization, and Architecture, p.199-207, October 01-02, 1999
• 9: Debby Hindus , Scott D. Mainwaring , Nicole Leduc , Anna Elizabeth Hagström , Oliver Bayley, Casablanca: designing social communication devices for the home, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.325-332, March 2001, Seattle, Washington, United States [doi>10.1145/365024.383749]
• 10: Kember, S., Cheverst, K., Dewsbury, G., Hemmings, T., Rodden, T., & Rouncefield, M. (2002). Keep Talking the Medications: Assistive Technologies for Medication Regimes in Care Settings. In S. Keates, P. Langdon, P. Clarkson & P. Robinson (Eds.), Universal Access and Assistive Technology. London: Springer-Verlag.
• 11: Kopytoff, I. (1986). The Cultural Biography of Things: Commoditization as Process. In A. Appadurai (Ed.), The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• 12: Marcus, C. C. (1995). House as a Mirror of Self: Exploring the Deeper Meaning of Home. Berkeley: Conari Press.
• 13: Ruohomaa, E. (1997). Radio as a (Domestic) Medium: Towards New Concepts of the Radio Medium. In U. Carlsson (Ed.), Radio Research. in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden (Vol. Special Issue of Nordicom Review No 18, pp. 249 p.): Nordic Information Centre for Media and Communication Research.
• 14: Silverstone, R., & Hirsch, E. (1992). Consuming Technologies. New York: Routledge.
• 15: Venkatesh, A. (1996). An Ethnographic Study of Computing in the Home. Irvine: University of California, Irvine.

INDEX TERMS

Keywords:
deign, domestic objects, functionality, home, neighbouring objects, pervasive computing, user study