Final Paper // Module DBB03 - Qualitative Research Methods for Interaction Design

Qualitative Research Methods for Interaction Design Tove T.J. Elfferich, Marjolein M.D. Kors, Jan J.E. Zekveld University of Technology Eindhoven Den Dolech 2, 5612 AZ, Eindhoven, The Netherlands +31 (0)40 247 9111 t.j.elfferich@student.tue.nl, m.d.kors@student.tue.nl, j.e.zekveld@student.tue.nl ABSTRACT Updated 26/11/2013. The technological possibilities of mobile phones are increasing enormously, at the same time the role that photographs play in (digital) communication is increasing aswell. Therefor mobile devices (e.g. mobile phones, tablets) tend to contain more and more pictures. In an effort to systematically explore the usage of photographs on mobile devices and to get insight in the way this usage ascribes value to photographs in relation to their autobiographical memory, we devised 6 interview studies on individuals varying in usage of electronic mobile devices usage of photographs. We constructed an affinity diagram to enable us to qualitatively interpret the data. These analysis was used to form the base to derive new design opportunities from.

Author Keywords Research methods - Affinity diagramming – Conducting interviews – Data analysis –– Design research INTRODUCTION Digital photography The use of digital photographs has known an enormous growth and the integration of cameras in the mobile phones is one of the reasons for this growth: the VGA cameras have made room for cameras that are able to make better photographs than the digital cameras from 10 years ago.

Because of the combination with mobile phone applications and other software related products, the photographs are adjusted, improved and, perhaps even more importantly, shared with others very easily. Because of these technical improvements, even people who do not have any affinity or experience with digital photography can make and share a relatively good photograph within seconds, which makes communicating by sending photographs very popular.

However, because of this enormous stream in photographs mobile phones contain many photographs that are accessible 24/7. The usage of photos has therefore changed compared to the use of physical photographs in the past. What makes it interesting to see how this all affects the value people ascribe to photographs. Therefore the aim for this research is focused towards the value of photographs on mobile devices.

Autobiographic memory This research focuses on the functionality photographs have on the process of composing a self-image and identity. More specifically this research aims for the way people make use

of the photographs to support their autobiographical memory. The results of this research contribute to a larger PhD research, conducted by Mendel Broekhuijsen for the Sydney University of Technology. Relating to this research, our research question is: “How do people use digital photograph collections on their mobile devices for supporting autobiographic memory?”

Hypothesis We think that people capture their experiences on their mobile devices and share with others to not only remember these experiences themselves, but so that others can remember their experiences as well.

We believe that sharing experiences is becoming more and more important not only because technology allows us, but also because we live in an age in which people attach value to what others know or see from them. We derive a big part of our identity not only by what we think of ourselves, but to what other thinks of us. We believe that this strive for acknowledgement is illustrated by the way we share our experiences and thoughts.

Validating hypothesis We will conduct user interviews in order to receive information from the users. By formulating questions around three specific topics (‘Photographs on mobile phone’, ‘Usage of photos’ and ‘Value of Photographs in general’) we think we will get enough information to have a clear view on this subject.

We are especially interested in the value people attach to sharing photos, since this will be the core source of information for validating our hypothesis. If people do not seem to attach value to sharing, or give very different reasons for attaching value to sharing photographs, this will be a sign of disapproval of our hypothesis.

METHOD Choice for Participants In advance of selecting the participants a couple of criteria were formed in which we wanted participants to differ in order to create a variety/ diversity in answers as big as possible.

These characteristics were the amount of minutes that a participant interacts with its smartphone on daily basis, the amount of times that a participant uses the photo function of their smartphone and the participant’s age. The overall criteria for all the participants was that the participant had to

make use of a smartphone and of its photo function to at least. Keeping the goal the mind of having a diversity in characteristics the following participants were selected for the interview: 1. A 21 year old male moderate smartphone user and moderate photo function user 2. A 21 year old heavy male smartphone user and moderate photo function user 3. A 55 year old average female smartphone user and moderate photo function user 4. A 23 year old heavy male smartphone user and average photo function user 5. A 21 year old average female smartphone user and heavy photo function user 6. A 48 year old heavy female smartphone user and average photo function user While 6 participants constitute a relatively small sample size, it is appropriate for an interview in which each person contributes in-depth data over its personal smartphone and mobile photo-function usage. Moreover, our aim was to gain insights by broaden our understanding of the reason why one makes, reviews or shares a phone and the kind of value that is attached to it rather than to produce a set of data which is statistically generalizable.

Procedure Interview Context After six suitable participants were arranged, an interviewer interviewed them individually in the presence of an observer.

The role of the observer was to make notes and to at the end ask for more information on unclear, interesting or forgotten matters. All interviews were carried out in the same room of which three of the six were face to face, two through Skype and one through a phone.

After introducing the subject of the interview the participants signed an ethical form before the interview was taken as prove of agreement.

The interviewer asked the participants questions related to the value of the photos on their smartphone and their usage of the smartphone its photo-function (taking, documenting, reviewing and sharing). Thereby the participants were asked to show a for them valuable photo on their smartphone.

Each of these interviews ended with a debriefing and lasted anywhere from 10 to 20 minutes. Once an interview had ended 10 minutes were used by the interviewer and observer to discuss the just collected data and to create an intermediate hypothesis, which was used as comparison material in the next interview. Once all the interviews were executed the video data and notes were processed into written text.

Data Analysis After conducting the interviews, the collected data was analyzed by making use of an affinity diagram. This method was used because it is an easy and accessible way for working in groups data analysis simultaneously and relies on creating a shared and physical representation of a set of concepts, or statements, with the help of post-its.

The first step in the creation of the affinity diagram was to write down all the through the interviews collected raw data, covering information, findings and quotes, into small but well formulated ‘chunks’. These chunks were given a different color post-it per participant and an participant identification

number on the back. While creating these chunks we noted the interesting insights on yellow post-its, an action which was continued throughout the further development of the affinity diagram. In the next step we thought of seven chapters among which the chunks could be divided.

These chapters were: the kind of smartphone user, the kind of photo-function user, (re)viewing rituals, categorization, sharing pictures, giving value to pictures and the goal of pictures.

Subsequently these seven chapters were placed in a horizontal row on the wall together with a vertical row on the left consisting out of six post-it, one for each participant.

Then all the chunks were placed within this now created diagram on the spot where the linked participant and category came together. Also the insights noted on the yellow post-its were placed within. The final step was to search for more insights, what was done in two ways.

The first method consisted out of studying the affinity diagram while searching for patterns and overlap between different categories. The second more abstract way consisted out of translating the chunks into code in order to create a ‘Graph and Code’ diagram (For results see Appendix C). Both ways provided different kinds of insights which were then written down and used to form some first design opportunities.

Figure 1. Picture of Affinity Diagram.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Findings As stated before, the information collected throughout the affinity diagramming method was put into a graph. This formed the base for the first analysis, the second data analysis was based upon our own interpretation of the ‘chunks’. Here we share some findings with you. For an overview of all findings see Appendix D. Analysis of Affinity Diagram - People tend to create backups of their mobile photos on a computer thus they might have more thrust in their computer than their mobile phone.

- The usability of a device such as a mobile phone or camera is of influence on the value of the photo that is taken, the easier the device the less value that a photo receives.

Analysis of the Abstract Relations Within the Affinity Diagram - Valuable photos and non-valuable photos are interchangeably organized on a mobile phone on an only by “date taken” structured manner, other devices do not provide more overview.

- Heavy smartphone users which use photographs on their mobile phone average, express a need for a better categorization of their photos on their mobile phone.

Design opportunities After analyzing all our data we directly saw several design opportunities, providing possible solutions for the context we researched. We name two specifically: - Design a way through which people themselves are able to categorize their mobile phone photos on an easier way which matches the easy usability of a mobile phone.

- Design a way through which the valuable photos and the non-valuable photo are recognized and categorized separately so that people can easily access their valuable photos and have the ability to scroll through the nonvaluable photos.

Conclusion on findings After analyzing our conducted interviews we conclude that people do share their photographs, although there is a difference in the kind of photographs people share. People are aware of the photographs they share and make distinction between personal valuable photographs and photographs which are valuable for others. Photographs are either shared through digital media or in a physical way depending on the value that is attached to the picture.“ Our hypothesis is quite abstract, and not too specific. In a way this is not a strong characteristic. However, we do know that our group of interviewees is too small to validate extreme or very specific hypotheses based on the given research question.

Discussion During our research we made several assumptions that have influenced not only our research, but also our outcome. Therefore we would like to re-assess some of these assumptions.

User Group Sampling Our first objective was to get as many information out of our interviews as possible. The user sampling was conducted to give ourselves tools to make this possible. In our attempt we defined our sample groups ourselves, without counselling any literature. This worked out quite well we believe, since we (roughly stating) quickly noticed a large variety amongst answers. However, we cannot state with certainty that without this user group sampling we would have had less variety in our outcome. We would have to do a second test to mirror our findings.

User Background information Because of the nature of the research and the limited time available, we made user profiles from which we know they

were incomplete because of the lack of background information, neglecting potential relevant information as job, salary, family size, affinity with technology, affinity with photography, et cetera. To make our next research more reliable we would continue doing our research, we would take more information into account, and ask more participators.

Data analysis We used a ‘Code Graph’ in order to represent our qualitative data in a way that it made sense, and used this graph to draw conclusions. This works because you can easily see connections and differences. The disadvantage from this method however is that you tend to draw quantitative conclusions from this small qualitative research method.

When seeing interesting things while analyzing, you may even forget that the interviewee is only one person, who is part of a specific group, but who do not represent this entire group. When purely aiming for design opportunities this mistake will not do much harm, but using this graph this way quickly gives a wrong (or: unreliable) interpretation of reality when you use this method to create an overview of the world.

Summary We conducted user interviews in order to collect data, that could give us more insight in the influence of photographs on mobile devices and how these collections can be used to support the autobiographic memory. We analyzed the data making use of an Affinity Diagram method. Out of this analysis we drew our conclusions and were able to come up with possible future plans (design opportunities) regarding the subject ‘use of digital photos to support autobiographic memory’.

Conclusion on method When using this method as researcher, it is important to go back to your own research plan after a data analysis . In this way, the researcher can verify his collected data based on research question to see if there are comparisons or substantial differences. This may result in a need for more data collection to come to a conclusion for the existing research question or it might result into a new research project, for yourself or other researchers.

Using this method as designer, the conclusion out of the data collection and the analyses of it, is a hypothesis itself.

This can be the start for a design project or can contribute to a design project in progress. The outcomes of the design can be tested in a next evaluation, which might result in a new loop of data collection and analyzing.

Acknowledgement We would like to thank the study participants for giving of their time to share their experiences on use of digital photographs. We are also very grateful to Nita Virtala for performing in our video and Dennis de Klein for the video editing help.

Last, but not least, we would like to thank Panos Markopoulos for facilitating this Master’s Module and providing us with lectures and feedback.

Appendix A _characteristics for selecting participants * Type of smartphone user according to the amount of minutes the user interacts with mobile phone.

S_Heavy user S_Average user S_Moderate user

(> 60 ( <10, >60 (> 10

times a day) times a day) times a day)

** Amounts of time that the user interacts with his mobile phone regarding to the photography function.

P_Heavy user P_Average user P_Moderate user

(>14 ( >7, <14 (>1, <7

times a week) times a week) time a week)

Appendix B _Questions // photographs on mobile phone How does the user value its pictures on his mobile phone?

1) Can you give describe two situations in which you took your mobile phone to make a picture?

Do you remember why?

2)

Would you mind losing your photographs? Which photos would you mind losing (the most)? | Can you give us the reason for minding this?

3)

Can you show us 1 or 2 pictures that are on your mobile device which mean something (special?) to you? Explain why..

4)

How does the way of categorizing your photographs illustrate the value of these photographs for you?

// usage of photos - After taken the photograph, what do you do with it?

(For example: 1)sharing, 2)reviewing, 3)documenting (how?))

1)

Do you share photographs?

If so,

- What ways of sharing photographs do you use? (Social media) - With whom do you share your photographs?

- What factors determine whether you share or do not share a photograph?

- Is there a link between how you value a picture and which media you use to share this picture?

2)

Do you document your photographs? If so, - How do you categorize your photographs?

- Why do you categorize your photographs?

3)

Do you review photographs? If so, (difference in conversations, own photos, etc.)

- Through what kind of media do you review your photographs? (mobile/laptop) - What kind of photographs do you review?

- When do you review your photographs?

- Where do you review your photographs?

- Why do you review your photographs?

- Would you mind to share the last pictures you reviewed with us? (including what, when, where, why?)

- Do you experience a difference in reviewing photographs using different social media/ albums?

Appendix C: _Graph and Code diagram #User- age

Type of smartphone (1 user

Use of photographs on mobile (2 phone

Reason of making picture with mobile (3 device

Reason of reviewing (4 pictures

Categorizing and organizing of photographs on mobile (5 device

Meaning and value of pictures on mobile (6 device

The why and how of (7 sharing

#1 – 21

S_Moderate

P_Moderate

Cm; Mn;

Cp;

Rp+; ran; al;

Bu+; Lp+; Ca-;

Smp+; X;

Sh+; X;

#2 – 21

S_Heavy

P_ Moderate

Ca; Cp;

Cm;

Rp-;

Bu-; Lp-; Ca-;

Smp+; Rcp-;

Sh+; ssF;

#3 – 55

S_ Moderate

P_Moderate

Cm;

Rp++; al; to;

ran;

Bu-; Lp-; Ca-;

Smp+;

Sh+; ssF;

ssD;

#4 – 23

S_Heavy

P_Average

Ca; Cm; Mn; Cp;

Rp+; al;

awa;

Bu+; Lp+; Ca-; N+;

X; Rcp+;

Sh+; ssF;

ssD;

#5 – 21

S_Average

P_ Heavy

Ca; Cm;

Rp+; al; to;

awa;

Bu+; Lp+; Ca-;

Smp+; Rcp-;

Sh+; ssD;

#6 - 48

S_Average

P_Average

Ca; Cm;

Rp+; ran; al; to;

Bu+; Lp+; Ca-; N+;

X; Rcp+;

Sh+; ssF;

3)

Reason of making picture with mobile device Ca - To communicate an activity or location to others Cm - To capture a moment in a quick way Mn - As Mnemonic Cp - To capture a personal valuable happening 4)

Reason of reviewing pictures Rp- Review of pictures - never Rp+ - Review of pictures – sometimes Rp++ - Review of pictures – often ran awa al to

- Review of pictures on random moments - Review of pictures, only with a specific goal - Review of pictures alone - Review of pictures together with others

5)

Categorizing and organising of photographs on mobile device Bu- No backups of photographs on mobile device Bu+ - Backups on another device than only on the mobile phone Lp- Not minding to lose photographs Lp+ - Minding to lose photographs Ca- Photographs are not organized or categorized Ca+ - Photographs are organized or categorized N - Need for categorizing and organizing.

6)

Meaning and value of pictures on mobile device Smp+ - Self-made pictures are valuable Smp- Self-made pictures are not valuable Rcp+ - Received pictures are valuable Rcp- Received pictures are not valuable 7)

The why and how of sharing Sh- No pictures are shared Sh+ - Pictures are shares ssD - Pictures are shared to support a story, Digitally ssF - Pictures are shared to support a story, Physically

ssD;

Appendix D: _Analysation Results Affinity disgram & Abstract Analysis of Affinity Diagram  People share mobile photos for the communication of interesting, funny or spontaneous happenings or for practical matters such as knowledge. 

People experience visual communication to be easier, faster and more efficient than written communication.



People decide on advance what the purpose of a photo is and then chose the most suitable medium accordingly, such as a Facebook-app, Whatsapp, main camera etc.



The usability of a device such as a mobile phone or camera is of influence on the value of the photo that is taken, the easier the device the less value that a photo receives.



People tend to create backups of their mobile photos on a computer thus they might have more thrust in their computer than their mobile phone.



The usability of a device such as a mobile phone determines the effort that one wants to put into the interaction, the easier the device the less effort one wants to give.



People are more lenient towards photos which are taken with a mobile phone than towards photos that are taken with a camera.



Even while mobile phone photos are all in one place and only categorized by date people are still most of the times able to find the people they need, people adapt themselves.



Valuable photos and non-valuable photos are interchangeably organized on a mobile phone on an only by “date taken” structured manner, other devices do not provide more overview.

Analysis of the Abstract Relations Within the Affinity Diagram  It seems that moderate mobile phone photo-function users do not mind losing their photos and neither do they create backups. [Resemblance person 2 and 3] 

Heavy mobile phone users which are also average mobile phone photo-function users express a need for a better categorization of their photos on their mobile phone. [Resemblance person 4 and 6]



Heavy mobile phone users which are also average mobile phone photo-function users experience the photos which they receive from others as valuable. [Resemblance person 4 and 6]



People we capture personal valuable events through their mobile phone review these photos on their phone by themselves and not with others. [Resemblance person 1 and 4]



Noticeable is that person 3 and 4 have quite some similarities, such as their age, reason to review their photos and reason to share, but also a significant difference in their phone usage, thus minutes of interaction with their mobile phone.

[Resemblance person 3 and 6]



Noticeable is that of person 3 and 6, who are of the same generation, the moderate phone user mentions to not mind to lose its photos while the average person does. [Resemblance person 3 and 6]



Noticeable is that person 5 who is the only heavy mobile phone photo-function user does not physically uses its mobile photos to support a conversation what is in contrast to almost all the others. [Noticeable person 5]



Noticeable is that person 2 who is an heavy mobile phone user and moderate mobile phone photo-function user does not review its photos while the others all do. [Noticeable person 2]



If the balance between mobile usage and mobile photo-function usage is more towards the mobile photo-function than people experience their phone as a replacement for their camera.



If photos of personal valuable happenings are shared than this is on a physical way such as through the screen of a device or DVD but not digitally.