The Impact of Low-tech Systems on User Experience: First Methodological Reflections around the Urban Biosphere Experiment
Article No.: 44, Pages 1 - 5
Abstract
The low-tech approach questions our relationship to technology by challenging notions of need, comfort, and autonomy. By designing useful, simple, and sustainable systems, people involved in the low-tech approach push for a reduction in technology complexity, the empowerment of users, and the idea of sobriety. In this work-in-progress, we present our methodology to investigate the user experience (UX) resulting from the use of low-tech systems. We use the Urban Biosphere participatory experiment as a use case to challenge the traditional view of UX design on notion like efficiency and comfort, and to unveil the challenges and opportunities brought by low-tech innovation approaches for user experience designers willing to engage into strong sustainable practices. The goal is to identify leverage points that can be addressed through design to disseminate low-tech solutions more widely and improve their acceptance and adoption.
References
[1]
Roel Roscam Abbing. 2021. ‘This Is a Solar-Powered Website, Which Means It Sometimes Goes Offline’: A Design Inquiry into Degrowth and ICT. LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits (June 2021). https://doi.org/10.21428/bf6fb269.e78d19f6
[2]
ADEME. 2021. Transition(s) 2050 - Choisir Maintenant Agir Pour Le Climat. Technical Report.
[3]
ADEME. 2022. État des lieux et perspectives des démarches "low-tech". Technical Report. 48 pages.
[4]
Tracy Bhamra and Vicky Lofthouse. 2010. Design for Sustainable Behaviour: Strategies and Perceptions. Journal of Engineering Design 21, 4 (2010), 385–403.
[5]
Megan J Bissing-Olson, Kelly S Fielding, and Aarti Iyer. 2016. Experiences of pride, not guilt, predict pro-environmental behavior when pro-environmental descriptive norms are more positive. Journal of Environmental Psychology 45 (2016), 145–153.
[6]
Gunnar Borg. 1985. An introduction to Borg’s RPE-scale. Mouvement Publications.
[7]
Julian Carrey, Sébastien Lachaize, and Guillaume Carbou. 2021. Les low-techs comme objet de recherche scientifique. Vers une société pérenne, équitable et conviviale.
[8]
Fabrizio Ceschin and İdil Gaziulusoy. 2019. Design for Sustainability: A Multi-level Framework from Products to Socio-technical Systems (1 ed.). Routledge, London. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429456510
[9]
Jonathan Chapman. 2005. Emotionally Durable Design: Objects, Experiences and Empathy. Routledge, London. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849771092
[10]
Clément Colin and Antoine Martin. 2023. The User Experience of Low-Techs: From User Problems to Design Principles. Journal of User Experience (2023).
[11]
Mathieu Durand, Adeline Pierrat, and Jérémie Cavé. 2019. Quand Le Low-Tech Fait Ses Preuves : La Gestion Des Déchets Dans Les Pays Du Sud >>. Urbanités (2019).
[12]
Nikolaus Franke and Martin Schreier. 2010. Why Customers Value Self-Designed Products: The Importance of Process Effort and Enjoyment. Journal of product innovation management 27, 7 (2010), 1020–1031.
[13]
Claude Fussler and Peter James. 1996. Driving eco-innovation: a breakthrough discipline for innovation and sustainability. Pitman Publishing.
[14]
Emmanuel Grimaud, Yann Philippe Tastevin, and Denis Vidal. 2017. Low tech, high tech, wild tech. Réinventer la technologie ?Techniques & Culture. Revue semestrielle d’anthropologie des techniques67 (June 2017), 12–29. https://doi.org/10.4000/tc.8464
[15]
Barbara Grosse-Hering, Jon Mason, Dzmitry Aliakseyeu, Conny Bakker, and Pieter Desmet. 2013. Slow Design for Meaningful Interactions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Paris France, 3431–3440. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466472
[16]
Marc Hassenzahl, Sarah Diefenbach, and Anja Göritz. 2010. Needs, Affect, and Interactive Products–Facets of User Experience. Interacting with computers 22, 5 (2010), 353–362.
[17]
Marc Hassenzahl and Holger Klapperich. 2014. Convenient, Clean, and Efficient?: The Experiential Costs of Everyday Automation. In Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Fun, Fast, Foundational. ACM, Helsinki Finland, 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1145/2639189.2639248
[18]
IPCC. 2022. Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, USA.
[19]
Evangelos Karapanos, John Zimmerman, Jodi Forlizzi, and Jean-Bernard Martens. 2009. User Experience over Time: An Initial Framework. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 729–738. https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518814
[20]
Stephen R Kellert. 1993. Values and perceptions of invertebrates. Conservation biology 7, 4 (1993), 845–855.
[21]
Holger Klapperich, Alarith Uhde, and Marc Hassenzahl. 2020. Designing Everyday Automation with Well-Being in Mind. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 24, 6 (Sept. 2020), 763–779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-020-01452-w
[22]
Bran Knowles, Oliver Bates, and Maria Håkansson. 2018. This changes sustainable HCI. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–12.
[23]
Sari Kujala, Virpi Roto, Kaisa Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, Evangelos Karapanos, and Arto Sinnelä. 2011. UX Curve: A method for evaluating long-term user experience. Interacting with Computers 23, 5 (2011), 473–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2011.06.005 Feminism and HCI: New Perspectives.
[24]
Lucie Leguen. 2024. Cuisiner Low-Tech - Recettes Locales et Créatives Pour Économiser l’énergie (eugen ulmer eds ed.).
[25]
Donella H Meadows, Dennis L Meadows, Jørgen Randers, and William W Behrens III. 1972. The Limits to Growth. (1972).
[26]
Michael I. Norton, Daniel Mochon, and Dan Ariely. 2012. The IKEA Effect: When Labor Leads to Love. Journal of Consumer Psychology 22, 3 (July 2012), 453–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.08.002
[27]
Brian Parkinson, Agneta H Fischer, and Antony SR Manstead. 2005. Emotion in social relations: Cultural, group, and interpersonal processes. Psychology press.
[28]
Timo Partala and Timo Saari. 2015. Understanding the Most Influential User Experiences in Successful and Unsuccessful Technology Adoptions. Computers in Human Behavior 53 (Dec. 2015), 381–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.012
[29]
Gauthier Roussilhe. 2022. Les besoins essentiels de la low-tech | Gauthier Roussilhe.
[30]
Richard M Ryan and Edward L Deci. 2000. Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. American Psychologist (2000).
[31]
Pertti Saariluoma and Jussi PP Jokinen. 2014. Emotional dimensions of user experience: A user psychological analysis. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 30, 4 (2014), 303–320.
[32]
Klaus Scherer, Vera Shuman, Johnny Fontaine, and Cristina Soriano. 2013. The GRID meets the Wheel: Assessing emotional feeling via self-report. In Components of emotional meaning: A sourcebook. Oxford University Press, 281–298.
[33]
Hendrik NJ Schifferstein and Elly PH Zwartkruis-Pelgrim. 2008. Consumer-Product Attachment: Measurement and Design Implications. International journal of design 2, 3 (2008), 1–13.
[34]
Martin Schrepp, Andreas Hinderks, and Jörg Thomaschewski. 2017. Design and evaluation of a short version of the user experience questionnaire (UEQ-S). International Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Artificial Intelligence, 4 (6), 103-108. (2017).
[35]
Kennon M Sheldon, Andrew J Elliot, Youngmee Kim, and Tim Kasser. 2001. What Is Satisfying About Satisfying Events? Testing 10 Candidate Psychological Needs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80, 2 (2001), 325–339.
[36]
Carolyn F Strauss and Alastair Fuad-Luke. [n. d.]. The Slow Design Principles. ([n. d.]).
[37]
Audrey Tanguy, Lisa Carrière, and Valérie Laforest. 2023. Low-Tech Approaches for Sustainability: Key Principles from the Literature and Practice. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy 19, 1 (Dec. 2023), 2170143. https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2023.2170143
Index Terms
- The Impact of Low-tech Systems on User Experience: First Methodological Reflections around the Urban Biosphere Experiment
Recommendations
Participatory development of user experience design guidelines for a B2B company
AcademicMindtrek '16: Proceedings of the 20th International Academic Mindtrek ConferenceAs business success is increasingly dependent on an organization's ability to provide a pleasant user experiences (UX) for its products, companies need to find ways to harness every employee to think about UX in their daily work. To support this goal, ...
Exploring Participatory Design in Urban Community Gardens
MAB '23: Proceedings of the 6th Media Architecture Biennale ConferenceCommunity gardens are areas that encounter frequent, intricate more-than-human interactions in the built environment. In this paper, we explore the opportunities and challenges of using participatory design methods to establish a dialogue with the ...
InContext: Futuring User-Experience Design Tools
CHI EA '22: Extended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsTechnology is changing, which means the design processes supporting it must also change. Digital tools for user experience and interaction design are vital in enabling designers to create appropriate, enjoyable and functional human-computer experiences,...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
October 2024
286 pages
ISBN:9798400718243
DOI:10.1145/3673805
Copyright © 2024 Owner/Author.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 08 October 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Work in progress
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
ECCE 2024
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 56 of 91 submissions, 62%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 19Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)19
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8
Reflects downloads up to 06 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format