1. How to Characterize a Research Line for User-System Interaction Prof. dr. Matthias Rauterberg g.w.m.rauterberg@tue.nl http://www.ipo.tue.nl /homepages/mrauterb/ IPO, Center for User-System Interaction TU/e, Eindhoven University of Technology

2. © M. Rauterberg, TU/e Research versus Design Paradigms positivism technical rationality rational problem solving phenomenology constructionism design as reflective practice etc, e.g. “idealism” etc, e.g. “hermeneutic” etc, e.g. “Vienna Circle” etc, e.g. “phase models”

3. © M. Rauterberg, TU/e Results from both Paradigms limits attractors assessment criteriadesign solutions positivismconstructionism

4. © M. Rauterberg, TU/e Comparison of both Paradigms theories and models reality (t 1 )reality (t 2 ) positivism : {theory, model   reality reality (t 1 ) = reality (t 2 ) constructionism : {theory, model   reality reality (t 1 )  reality (t 2 ) abstracting concretisation

5. © M. Rauterberg, TU/e What is User-System Interaction about? system user Working domain Working system Goal: Actual Performance => Desired Performance

6. © M. Rauterberg, TU/e Interface Design or Interaction Design? userinteractionsystem

7. © M. Rauterberg, TU/e Challenges of USI research userinteractionsystem cognitionperception emotionaction architecturefunctionality input/outputdata structure effectiveness efficiency satisfaction ?

8. © M. Rauterberg, TU/e USI Research Line - basic cycle - Design relevant knowledge [empirical] validation Interactive systems synthesisanalysis

9. © M. Rauterberg, TU/e USI link to Industry - marketing cycle - Design relevant knowledge validation Interactive systems synthesisanalysis commercial product market success Science Industry

10. © M. Rauterberg, TU/e USI Research Line - validation cycle - Design relevant knowledge validation Interactive systems synthesisanalysis expert formal method user model real end user empirical validation

11. © M. Rauterberg, TU/e USI Research Line - development cycle - Design relevant knowledge validation Interactive systems synthesisanalysis concept prototype demonstrator real system empirical validation

12. © M. Rauterberg, TU/e Conclusions a coherent and powerful corpus of descriptors and technical terminology a theoretical framework to investigate the interaction space a rigorous validation method to prove the design relevant knowledge