skip to main content
10.1145/2858036.2858399acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The Poetics of Socio-Technical Space: Evaluating the Internet of Things Through Craft

Published:07 May 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Drawing on semi-structured interviews and cognitive mapping with 14 craftspeople, this paper analyzes the socio-technical arrangements of people and tools in the context of workspaces and productivity. Using actor-network theory and the concept of companionability, both of which emphasize the role of human and non-human actants in the socio-technical fabrics of everyday life, I analyze the relationships between people, productivity and technology through the following themes: embodiment, provenance, insecurity, flow and companionability. The discussion section develops these themes further through comparison with rhetoric surrounding the Internet of Things (IoT). By putting the experiences of craftspeople in conversation with IoT rhetoric, I suggest several policy interventions for understanding connectivity and inter-device operability as material, flexible and respectful of human agency.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

p815-lingel.mp4

mp4

343.8 MB

References

  1. Luigi Atzori, Antonio Iera, and Giacomo Morabito. 2010. The Internet of Things: A survey. Comput. Netw. 54, 15 (October 2010), 2787--2805. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2010.05.010 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Sally Augustin. 2004. The Meaning of Office Things: A Study of Special Objects in Office Environments. Ph.D Dissertation. Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Shaowen Bardzell, Daniela K. Rosner, and Jeffrey Bardzell. 2012. Crafting quality in design: Integrity, creativity, and public sensibility. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS '12), 11--20. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2317956.2317959 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Genevieve Bell and Paul Dourish. 2007. Yetserday's tomorrows: Notes on ubiquitous computing's dominant vision. Personal Ubiquitous Comput. 11, 2: 133--143. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Christine Borgman. Data, Data Everywhere -- But How to Manage and Govern? Video. (15 June 2015). Retreived August 22, 2015 from http://works.bepress.com/borgman/366Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Aoife Brennan, Jasdeep S. Chugh, and Theresa Kline. 2002. Traditional versus open office design: A longitudinal field study. Environment and Behavior, 34, 3: 279--299.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3, 2: 77--101.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Graham Brown. 2009. Claiming a corner at work: Measuring employee territoriality in their workspaces. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 1: 44--52.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Matthew Crawford. 2009. The Case for Working with Your Hands or Why Office Work is Bad for Us and Fixing Things Feels Good. Penguin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Mihaly Csikzentmihaly. 1991. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. HarperPerennial.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Dries De Roeck, Karin Slegers, Johan Criel, Marc Godon, Laurence Claeys, Katriina Kilpi, and Ann Jacobs. 2012. I would DiYSE for it!: a manifesto for do-it-yourself internet-of-things creation. In Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on HumanComputer Interaction: Making Sense Through Design (NordiCHI '12), 170--179. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2399016.2399044 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Anne S. Devlin, Sarah Donovan, Arianne Novolov, Olivia Nold, Andrea Packard, and Gabrielle Zandan. 2009. "Impressive"? credentials, family photographs, and the perception of therapist qualities. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 4: 503--512.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Paul Dourish and Genevieve Bell. 2011. Divining the Digital Guture. MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Kimberly Elsbach. 2004. Interpreting workplace identities: The role of office decor. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 1: 99--128.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Virginia Eubanks. 2011. Digital Dead End: Fighting for Social Justice in the Information Age. MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Ylva Fernaeus, Martin Jonsson, and Jakob Tholander. 2012. Revisiting the Jacquard loom: threads of history and current patterns in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '12), 1593--1602. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2207676.2208280 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Sarah Fox, Rachel Rose Ulgado, and Daniela Rosner. 2015. Hacking culture, not devices: Access and recognition in feminist hackerspaces. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '15), 56--68. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2675133.2675223 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Joan Fujimura. 1991. On methods, ontologies, and representation in the sociology of science: Where do we stand. In Social organization and social process: Essays in honor of Anselm Strauss, David Maines (ed). A. de Gruyter, NY, NY, 207--248.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Jack Jen Gieseking. 2013. Where we go from here. The mental sketch mapping method and its analytic components. Qualitative Inquiry, 19, 9: 712--724.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. James Glanz. 2012. Power, pollution and the Internet. The NY Times. Retrieved September 23, 2015 from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/technology/datacenters-waste-vast-amounts-of-energy-belyingindustry-image.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Connie Golsteijn, Elise Hoven, David Frohlich, and Abigail Sellen. 2014. Hybrid crafting: towards an integrated practice of crafting with physical and digital components. Personal Ubiquitous Comput. 18, 3: 593611. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Elizabeth Goodman and Daniela Rosner. 2011. From garments to gardens: negotiating material relationships online and 'by hand'. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '11), 2257--2266. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1978942.1979273 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Samuel D. Gosling, Sei Jin Ko, Thomas Mannarelli, and Margaret Morris. 2002. A room with a cue: Personality judgements based on office and bedrooms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 3: 379.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Sara Hachem, Thiago Teixeira, and Valérie Issarny. 2011. Ontologies for the internet of things. In Proceedings of the 8th Middleware Doctoral Symposium (MDS '11), article 3, 6 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Daniela Hernandez. 2012. Before the iPad, there was the Honeywell Kitchen Computer. Wired. Retrieved September 29, 2015 from http://www.wired.com/2012/11/kitchen-computer/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Susmita Horrow and Anjali Sardana. 2012. Identity management framework for cloud based internet of things. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Security of Internet of Things (SecurIT '12), 200--203. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Philip Howard. 2015. Pax Technica: How the Internet of Things May Set Us Free or Lock Us Up. Yale University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Steven J. Jackson. 2014. Rethinking repair. Media Technoloiges: Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society. Tarleton Gillespie, Pablo Boczkowski, Kirsten Foot (eds). MIT Press, Cambridge, USA, 221-Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Tom Jenkins. 2015. Designing the "Things" of the IoT. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI '15). ACM, NY, NY, USA, 449--452. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2677199.2691608 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Jodi Kantor and David Streitfeld. 2015. Inside Amazon: Wrestling big ideas in a bruising workplace. NY Times. Retrieved August 15, 2015 from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/technology/inside -amazon-wrestling-big-ideas-in-a-bruisingworkplace.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. David S. Kirk and Abigail Sellen. 2010. On human remains: Values and practice in the home archiving of cherished objects. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 17, 3, Article 10 (July 2010), 43 pages. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1806923.1806924 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Bruno Latour. 1990. Technology is society made durable. The Sociological Review 38, S1: 103--131.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Bruno Latour. 2007. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. So Young Lee and Jay L. Brand. 2005. Effects of control over office workspace on perceptions of the work environment and work outcomes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 3: 323--333.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Henri Lefebvre. 1991 The production of space. WileyBlackwell.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Jessica Lingel and Tim Regan. 2014. "it's in your spinal cord, it's in your fingertips": practices of tools and craft in building software. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing (CSCW '14). ACM, NY, NY, USA, 295--304. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2531602.2531614 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Tara J. Liss-Marino. 2014. Sell (it) yourself: Marketing pleasure in digital DIY. Ph.D Dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Susan S. Lukesh. 2014. The Internet of Things. ACM Inroads, 5, 3: 60. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Carolyn Marvin. 1997. When old technologies were new. Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Alice Marwick. 2013. Status update. Yale University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Michael Massimi and Daniela Rosner. 2013. Crafting for major life events: implications for technology design and use. In Proceedings of the 27th International BCS Human Computer Interaction Conference (BCS-HCI '13), Article 34, 6 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Dejan Milojicic, Paul Nikolich and Barry Leiba. 2015. The internet of things: Standards for tomorrow. Ubiquity 2015, November, Article 1, 12 pages. DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2822533Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Vincent Mosco. 2014. To the Cloud: Big Data in a Turbulent World. Paradigm Publishers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Greg Oldham and Yitzhak Fried. 1987. Employee reactions to workspace characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 1: 75.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Howard Risatti. 2007. A Theory of Craft: Function and Aesthetic Expression. University of NC Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Daniela K. Rosner. 2010. Mediated crafts: digital practices around creative handwork. In CHI '10 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '10). ACM, NY, NY, USA, 2955--2958. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1753846.1753894 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Daniela K. Rosner and Kimiko Ryokai. 2009. Reflections on craft: probing the creative process of everyday knitters. In Proceedings of the seventh ACM conference on Creativity and cognition (C&C '09). ACM, NY, NY, USA, 195--204. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1640233.1640264 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Jathan Sadowski and Frank Pasquale. 2015. The spectrum of control: A social theory of the smart city. First Monday, 20, 7.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Nikil Saval. 2014. Cubed: A secret history of the workforce. Doubleday.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Susan Scheiberg. 1990. Emotions on display the personal decoration of work space. The American Behavioral Scientist, 33, 3: 330.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Richard Sennett. 2008. The Craftsman. Yale University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. James P. Spradley. 1979. The Ethnographic Interview. Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovic.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Matthew Stahl. 2014. Unfree Masters: Popular Music and the Politics of Work (Refiguring American Music). Duke University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Anselm L. Strauss and Juliet M. Corbin. 1990. Basics of qualitative research. Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Joshua G. Tanenbaum, Amanda M. Williams, Audrey Desjardins, and Karen Tanenbaum. 2013. Democratizing technology: pleasure, utility and expressiveness in DIY and maker practice. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13), 2603--2612. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2470654.2481360 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Gavin Turner and Jeremy Myerson. 2000. New workspace, new culture. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 23, 5: 45.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Joseph Turow, Lee McGuigan, and Elena R. Maris. 2015. Making data mining a natural part of life: Physical retailing, customer surveillance and the 21st century social imaginary. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 18, 4--5: 464--478.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Mark Weiser. 1994. Building invisible interfaces. Keynote talk. In Proc. ACM UIST. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Meredith Wells, Luke Thelen, and Jennifer Ruark. 2007. Workspace personalization and organizational culture: Does your workspace reflect you or your company' Environment and Behavior, 39, 5: 616--634.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  60. Meredith Wells and Luke Thelen. 2002. What does your workspace say about you? The influence of personality, status, and workspace on personalization. Environment and Behavior, 34, 3: 300321.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  61. Jim Wood. 2010. Designing for an everyday ubicomp with tangible and embodied materials. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on Tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction (TEI '11), 449450. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1935701.1935825 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Amit Zoran. 2015. Hybrid craft: showcase of physical and digital integration of design and craft skills. In ACM SIGGRAPH Art Gallery (SIGGRAPH '15), 384--398. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2810185.2810187 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. The Poetics of Socio-Technical Space: Evaluating the Internet of Things Through Craft

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '16: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2016
      6108 pages
      ISBN:9781450333627
      DOI:10.1145/2858036

      Copyright © 2016 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part 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 components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 7 May 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '16 Paper Acceptance Rate565of2,435submissions,23%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      Upcoming Conference

      CHI '24
      CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 11 - 16, 2024
      Honolulu , HI , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader