82
W. Chu et al.
(6) Internalization and externalization. In the present paper, we focus on interpreting
these theoretical concepts that the above AT models are based on.
Over the past two decades, AT has been widely applied as an analytical tool to
understand the complex real-world human-artefact relation and inform implications
for design [e.g. Glad (2015), Selvefors et al. (2015), Rexfelt and Rosenblad (2006),
Woll and Bratteteig (2018)]. In general, insights from these studies showed that
the descriptive nature of AT can enable design researchers to shift focuses from
purely on analyzing individuals’ needs and characteristics such as age, personality,
and preferences, to the activities that the target user groups carry out, thus arriving
at new knowledge to reframe problems that users encountered within the dynamic
context of human activity (Norman 2006, 2013).
Furthermore, in the field of Human-computer interaction (HCI), activity theory
has already been developed into a structured methodological approach for design
explorations (Clemmensen et al. 2016). The concept of activity-centered design was
thus proposed. Similar to the concept of user-centered design (UCD), the user (or
people) is still the focus of the ACD design (Norman 2005). However, with a broader
focus on the interplay between mediating tools and user activity, contextual background, and disruptions and tensions within the history and development process
of user activity, ACD is regarded as an enhancement of UCD which systematically accommodates both spatial and temporal factors into design considerations
(Kaptelinin and Nardi 2006; Norman 2006, 2013; Gay and Hembrooke 2004).
Despite being widely used in design research, the use of AT and ACD in sustainable design studies and the sustainable design insights that this theoretical lens can
bring to product and service design have been rarely explored (Kaptelinin and Nardi
2012). The next section addresses the development process of our ACD toolkit with
a literature review on the above question.
6.3 ACD Toolkit Development and Literature Insights
An overview of the toolkit development and evaluation methods is illustrated in
Fig. 6.2. In the development phase, we conducted a non-exhaustive literature review
on the use of activity theory in design-focused studies. As mentioned above, the
specific goal of the literature review was to develop a comprehensive understanding
regarding (1) How the key AT theoretical concepts were applied in design research
with a particular focus on interpreting sustainability-related empirical phenomena,
and (2) How these theoretical concepts were used to inform and guide practical
design explorations.
We followed the literature review approach used in an existing study on the use
of AT in HCI (Clemmensen et al. 2016). As we focused the overlapping area of
three different aspects: activity theory, design tools, and sustainability, we narrowed
down the literature search scope and categorized the search terms into three groups:
Group1 (theory-focused)—‘activity theory’, ‘activity-centered design’; Group 2
(design-focused)—‘sustainable design’, ‘design for sustainability’, ‘design tool’,
W. Chu et al.
(6) Internalization and externalization. In the present paper, we focus on interpreting
these theoretical concepts that the above AT models are based on.
Over the past two decades, AT has been widely applied as an analytical tool to
understand the complex real-world human-artefact relation and inform implications
for design [e.g. Glad (2015), Selvefors et al. (2015), Rexfelt and Rosenblad (2006),
Woll and Bratteteig (2018)]. In general, insights from these studies showed that
the descriptive nature of AT can enable design researchers to shift focuses from
purely on analyzing individuals’ needs and characteristics such as age, personality,
and preferences, to the activities that the target user groups carry out, thus arriving
at new knowledge to reframe problems that users encountered within the dynamic
context of human activity (Norman 2006, 2013).
Furthermore, in the field of Human-computer interaction (HCI), activity theory
has already been developed into a structured methodological approach for design
explorations (Clemmensen et al. 2016). The concept of activity-centered design was
thus proposed. Similar to the concept of user-centered design (UCD), the user (or
people) is still the focus of the ACD design (Norman 2005). However, with a broader
focus on the interplay between mediating tools and user activity, contextual background, and disruptions and tensions within the history and development process
of user activity, ACD is regarded as an enhancement of UCD which systematically accommodates both spatial and temporal factors into design considerations
(Kaptelinin and Nardi 2006; Norman 2006, 2013; Gay and Hembrooke 2004).
Despite being widely used in design research, the use of AT and ACD in sustainable design studies and the sustainable design insights that this theoretical lens can
bring to product and service design have been rarely explored (Kaptelinin and Nardi
2012). The next section addresses the development process of our ACD toolkit with
a literature review on the above question.
6.3 ACD Toolkit Development and Literature Insights
An overview of the toolkit development and evaluation methods is illustrated in
Fig. 6.2. In the development phase, we conducted a non-exhaustive literature review
on the use of activity theory in design-focused studies. As mentioned above, the
specific goal of the literature review was to develop a comprehensive understanding
regarding (1) How the key AT theoretical concepts were applied in design research
with a particular focus on interpreting sustainability-related empirical phenomena,
and (2) How these theoretical concepts were used to inform and guide practical
design explorations.
We followed the literature review approach used in an existing study on the use
of AT in HCI (Clemmensen et al. 2016). As we focused the overlapping area of
three different aspects: activity theory, design tools, and sustainability, we narrowed
down the literature search scope and categorized the search terms into three groups:
Group1 (theory-focused)—‘activity theory’, ‘activity-centered design’; Group 2
(design-focused)—‘sustainable design’, ‘design for sustainability’, ‘design tool’,