Reaching a Consensus through Participatory Design with Children: The Two-Way Approach

In this paper, we present a case study which investigates the process of reaching a consensus in a mobile game design project for children, carried on with the participatory design approach. Making consensus, here, is a matter of making group decision on one of the narrative designs produced in different themes with various techniques throughout the early stage of co-design process. We need a new methodology because neither of the methods in the relevant literature is perfectly fit to our case. Therefore we developed “Two-way design selection technique” that consisted of separate debriefing sessions with children and adults. Results showed that the new technique was successful in terms of children’s and adults’ effective participation, contribution to the co-design process as well as reaching a consensus. On the other hand, it has some limitations regarding interaction. In this sense, future studies should focus on enabling more interactive discussion opportunities.

Content

Author and article information

Contributors

Tuba Uğraş

Kerem Rizvanoğlu

Sevinç Gülseçen

Conference

Publication date: July 2018

Publication date (Print): July 2018

Pages: 1-5

Affiliations

[1 ] Yildiz Technical University

Istanbul, Turkey

[2 ] Galatasaray University

Istanbul, Turkey

[3 ] Istanbul University

Istanbul, Turkey

Article

DOI: 10.14236/ewic/HCI2018.218

SO-VID: ac9fb2e4-41f3-48af-bbf6-b51c592c8bad

License:

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Conference name: Proceedings of the 32nd International BCS Human Computer Interaction Conference

Conference acronym: HCI

Conference number: 32

Conference location: Belfast, UK

Conference date: 4 - 6 July 2018

Conference sponsor: Electronic Workshops in Computing (eWiC)

Conference theme: Human Computer Interaction Conference

History

Product

1477-9358 BCS Learning & Development

Self URI (article page): https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.14236/ewic/HCI2018.218

Self URI (journal page): https://ewic.bcs.org/

REFERENCES

G.M. BreakwellS. Hammond. and C. Fife-schaw 2004 Research methods in psychology Sage Publications
C. DindlerO.S. Iversen 2007 Fictional inquiry—design collaboration in a shared narrative space CoDesign 3 4 213 234
A. DruinA. BoltmanA. MiuraM. PlattN. UscherD. Knotts-Callahan 1997 Understanding children’s technology needs and desires Intel Research Council Grant Summary
A. Druin 1999a The Role of Children in the Design of New Technology HCIL Technical Report No 99 23
A. Druin 1999b May Cooperative inquiry: developing new technologies for children with children In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 592 599 ACM
J.A. FailsM.L. GuhaA. Druin 2013 Methods and techniques for involving children in the design of new technology for children. Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction 6 2 85 166
C. FrauenbergerJ. GoodA. AlcornH. Pain 2012 June Supporting the design contributions of children with autism spectrum conditions In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children 134 143 ACM
M.L. GuhaA. DruinJ.A. Fails 2013 Cooperative Inquiry revisited: Reflections of the past and guidelines for the future of intergenerational co-design. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 1 1 14 23
L. HannaK. RisdenK. Alexander 1997 Guidelines for usability testing with children. interactions 4 5 9 14
L. HannaD. NeapolitanK. Risden 2004 June. Evaluating computer game concepts with children In Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Interaction design and children: building a community 49 56 ACM
K.A. HeinS.R. JaegerB.T. CarrC.M. Delahunty 2008 Comparison of five common acceptance and preference methods. Food quality and preference 19 7 651 661
R.W. Joiner 1998 The effect of gender on children’s software preferences. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 14 3 195 198
H.T. LawlessH. Heymann 1999 Acceptance and preference testing In Sensory Evaluation of Food 430 479 Springer, Boston, MA
S. MacFarlaneG. SimM. Horton 2005 June. Assessing usability and fun in educational software In Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Interaction design and children 103 109 ACM
J. PreeceY. RogersH. Sharp 2002 Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction New York John Wiley & Sons, Inc
J.C. ReadS. MacFarlane 2006 June. Using the fun toolkit and other survey methods to gather opinions in child computer interaction In Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Interaction design and children 81 88 ACM
J.C. ReadS.J. MacFarlaneC. Casey 2002 August. Endurability, engagement and expectations: Measuring children’s fun In Interaction design and children 2 1 23 Shaker Publishing Eindhoven
G. SimM. Horton 2012 June. Investigating children’s opinions of games: Fun Toolkit vs. This or That In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children 70 77 ACM
P.M. ValkenburgJ. Cantor D. ZillmannP. Vorderer 2000 Children’s likes and dislikes of entertainment programs Media Entertainment: The Psychology of its Appeal 135 152 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
G. WalshE. FossJ. YipA. Druin 2013 April. FACIT PD: a framework for analysis and creation of intergenerational techniques for participatory design In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2893 2902 ACM
B. ZamanV. Abeele 2007 January. How to measure the likeability of tangible interaction with preschoolers In CHI Nederland 57 59 Infotec Nederland
B. ZamanV.V. AbeeleD. De Grooff 2013 Measuring product liking in preschool children: An evaluation of the Smileyometer and This or That methods. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 1 2 61 70

Comments

Comment on this article

[1] G.M. BreakwellS. Hammond. and C. Fife-schaw 2004 Research methods in psychology Sage Publications

[2] C. DindlerO.S. Iversen 2007 Fictional inquiry—design collaboration in a shared narrative space CoDesign 3 4 213 234

[3] A. DruinA. BoltmanA. MiuraM. PlattN. UscherD. Knotts-Callahan 1997 Understanding children’s technology needs and desires Intel Research Council Grant Summary

[4] A. Druin 1999a The Role of Children in the Design of New Technology HCIL Technical Report No 99 23

[5] A. Druin 1999b May Cooperative inquiry: developing new technologies for children with children In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 592 599 ACM

[6] J.A. FailsM.L. GuhaA. Druin 2013 Methods and techniques for involving children in the design of new technology for children. Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction 6 2 85 166

[7] C. FrauenbergerJ. GoodA. AlcornH. Pain 2012 June Supporting the design contributions of children with autism spectrum conditions In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children 134 143 ACM

[8] M.L. GuhaA. DruinJ.A. Fails 2013 Cooperative Inquiry revisited: Reflections of the past and guidelines for the future of intergenerational co-design. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 1 1 14 23

[9] L. HannaK. RisdenK. Alexander 1997 Guidelines for usability testing with children. interactions 4 5 9 14

[10] L. HannaD. NeapolitanK. Risden 2004 June. Evaluating computer game concepts with children In Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Interaction design and children: building a community 49 56 ACM

[11] K.A. HeinS.R. JaegerB.T. CarrC.M. Delahunty 2008 Comparison of five common acceptance and preference methods. Food quality and preference 19 7 651 661

[12] R.W. Joiner 1998 The effect of gender on children’s software preferences. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 14 3 195 198

[13] H.T. LawlessH. Heymann 1999 Acceptance and preference testing In Sensory Evaluation of Food 430 479 Springer, Boston, MA

[14] S. MacFarlaneG. SimM. Horton 2005 June. Assessing usability and fun in educational software In Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Interaction design and children 103 109 ACM

[15] J. PreeceY. RogersH. Sharp 2002 Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction New York John Wiley & Sons, Inc

[16] J.C. ReadS. MacFarlane 2006 June. Using the fun toolkit and other survey methods to gather opinions in child computer interaction In Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Interaction design and children 81 88 ACM

[17] J.C. ReadS.J. MacFarlaneC. Casey 2002 August. Endurability, engagement and expectations: Measuring children’s fun In Interaction design and children 2 1 23 Shaker Publishing Eindhoven

[18] G. SimM. Horton 2012 June. Investigating children’s opinions of games: Fun Toolkit vs. This or That In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children 70 77 ACM

[19] P.M. ValkenburgJ. Cantor D. ZillmannP. Vorderer 2000 Children’s likes and dislikes of entertainment programs Media Entertainment: The Psychology of its Appeal 135 152 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc

[20] G. WalshE. FossJ. YipA. Druin 2013 April. FACIT PD: a framework for analysis and creation of intergenerational techniques for participatory design In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2893 2902 ACM

[21] B. ZamanV. Abeele 2007 January. How to measure the likeability of tangible interaction with preschoolers In CHI Nederland 57 59 Infotec Nederland

[22] B. ZamanV.V. AbeeleD. De Grooff 2013 Measuring product liking in preschool children: An evaluation of the Smileyometer and This or That methods. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 1 2 61 70

Celebrating 65 years of The Computer Journal - free-to-read perspectives - bcs.org/tcj65