Questioning technology

Outside of the IoT specifically, there is a growing interest in Critical Design, highlighting and responding to the potential challenges in HCI and technology- driven design more widely. There are also several alternative design approaches aiming to exposing problems rather than solving technological issues.6 These areas of design can be characterised by the use of speculation, fictional narratives, political debate, and generally questioning technology (Pierce, 2015). As Pierce (2015, p.8) notes, this work has been presented under various names, including Critical Design, Design Fiction, Adversarial Design, Reflective Design, Ludic

Design and Speculative Design.

Critical Design has been explored since the 1990s; the idea was first defined in this way in 1997 by Anthony Dunne’s PhD thesis, Hertzian Tales: An Investigation

into the Critical and Aesthetic Potential of the Electronic Product as a Post- Optimal Object.This approach, developed by Dunne and Fiona Raby, is

characterised by a design stance that questions and challenges the status quo which considers technological design as a market-focused, instrumental and

commercially-driven practice. Initially this focused on exploration of the

possibilities of the electronic medium, but as further developed, a wider scope of scientific and societal developments were included. Critical Design is described by Dunne and Raby (2002, p.58) as “design that asks carefully crafted questions and makes us think.” In the FAQ section on Raby and Dunne’s webpage, is a section with the question ‘What is critical design?’ 7

6

In the context of UbiComp and HCI, there are several design initiatives, which call upon critical and alternative approaches to design interaction. Examples include: The Interactive Institute in Sweden, Design Informatics at the University of Edinburgh and the Experience Design research group from Folkwang University, Germany to mention a few.

7

Dunne, T & Rabby, F., Critical Design FAQ. Dunneandrabby. Available at:

Critical Design uses speculative design proposals to challenge narrow assumptions; preconceptions and givens about the role products play in everyday life. It is more of an attitude than anything else, a position rather than a method. There are many people doing this who have never heard of the term Critical Design and who have their own way of describing what they do. Naming it Critical Design is simply a useful way of making this activity more visible and subject to discussion and debate.

As Pierce (2015, p.26) indicates, since the introduction of the term by Raby and Dunne, the meaning and usage of Critical Design has been expanded by the design research community, and can described as Post-Critical Design. Raby’s and Dunne’s own approach shifted towards Speculative Design. This is based on the idea that the work is often presented via fictional scenarios (incorporating some kind of speculation in the outcome) as a way to provoke discussion. Frequently these scenarios revolve around new technologies and controversial scientific topics such as synthetic biology. This approach suggests that exhibitions and events are a persuasive means for an engaged dialogue around a subject.

Ludic Design is a proposition where designers explore computational technology through ludic strategies — playfulness.As William Gaver puts it (Gaffney, 2007), a ludic approach recognises that there are “ways of appreciating the world or engaging with the world that aren’t goal oriented”, despite the fact that “more and more technology and design in general is conceived of in terms of promoting task performance”.

Using design as a way to do something other than improve efficiency or achieve specified goals is central to many of these alternative areas of Critical Design and technology, for example Design Fiction, a term coined by Bruce Sterling and by Julian Bleecker. According to Sterling (2009) “when science fiction thinking opens itself to design thinking, larger problems appear. These have to do with speculative culture generally, the way that our society imagines itself through its forward- looking disciplines”. Bleecker (2009, p.6) describes it as “conflation of design, science fact, and science fiction”.

Another critical design approach, with a more overtly political background, is Adversarial Design, which is described by Carl DiSalvo (2012, p.12) as “both a way of doing the work of agonism through designed things and a way of interpreting designed things in terms of their agonistic qualities”. According to DiSalvo (2012, p.12-13), designed objects can “function to prompt recognition of political issues and relations, express dissensus, and enable contestational claims and arguments.” While there is much overlap with other areas of speculative and critical design, DiSalvo emphasises inherent agonism within the work—design which is meant to provoke and even maintain disagreement and debate, following the idea of agonism as central to democracy.

Reflective Design, developed by Phoebe Sengers and colleagues, constitutes another critical approach towards HCI specifically. Based on critical theory, Sengers (2005, p.49) defines reflective design as an approach in which the

designer reflects on unconscious values embedded in technology and the practices that it supports. Sengers (2005, p.55) suggests that designers should use reflection to uncover and alter the limitations of design practice and re-understand their own role in the technology design process. According to Bowen (2007), Dunne and Raby's approach appears to be about asking questions, while Sengers' proposition seems to be more about producing "better answers".