Designing for data inclusion 2 · Designing human-data interaction for better social inclusion...

1
Designing human-data interaction for better social inclusion Annika Wolff The Open University Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA U.K. Annika[email protected] ABSTRACT Society is being increasingly driven by data. Data is seen as an important tool for civic participation and empowerment, allowing citizens to understand and solve their local problems and holding governments more accountable, through transparency of the data upon which decisions are being made [1]. To support this, increasing numbers of datasets are being made ‘open’ and free for anyone to use. However, there is evidence that this data is underused, particularly amongst certain demographics [2]. It is essential to understand a) who exactly are the excluded communities and b) what are the barriers for them when it comes to engaging with data. This knowledge can then be used to start designing for better data inclusion. Currently there is little research that supports understanding why some communities may be reluctant or unable to engage with data. Certainly, there is evidence that levels of data and other digital literacies must play a role, in addition to access to ICT resources. However this cannot be the whole story. One way to understand at least part of the problem is to gain a better perspective on how different marginalized communities would naturally want to engage and interact with the data that exists about them. What concerns or questions do they have about data, what do they want to know and what problems would they solve with it? How do they begin to mobilise around problems that data can inform or help to solve does the question come first, or the data? What tools or methods may communities use beyond the standard data analysis and visualisation techniques? For example what are the roles of physical tools, makingactivities and tangible expressions of datasets or data analysis. How might they help in the sharing of information and ideas? There are a multitude of open questions in this area. These are just a few ideas of possible future research directions in the field of human- data interaction for better social inclusion. This paper presents some research from across several projects that may start to inform some of these questions. Firstly, there is findings from work conducted within a smart city project that was developing new methods to engage children with data about their city, using ideas of tangible interactions which suggests that combining physical manifestations with on-screen tasks can help to build data literacy. Next are observations from physical making sessions with both children and university student designed around making or prototyping wearable technologies, which indicate that physical making stimulates creativity and better design thinking. This reveals some insights into the role of tangible, creative and makeractivities in connecting non-experts with complex data and understanding of the sorts of problems they want to solve, showing that at least for these non-expert audiences interacting with data is about much more than screen-based activities and bar graphs. Next there is a discussion of a community project designed to build networks of community energy champions by engaging energy experts, community engagement experts and local communities around energy issues and the use of ‘lego flowers’ as a way to share stories across diverse communities who were mobilized around a common issue. Finally there is preliminary work in developing a game designed to support communities to understand and start discussing data from their environment. REFERENCES [1] Letouzé, E., Noonan, A., Bhargava, R., Deahl, E., Sangokoya, D., & Shoup, N. (2015, September). Beyond Data Literacy: Reinventing Community Engagement and Empowerment in the Age of Data. Data- Pop Alliance [2] Marijn Janssen, Yannis Charalabidis, and Anneke Zuiderwijk. 2012. Benefits, Adoption Barriers and Myths of Open Data and Open Government. Information Systems Management 29, 4: 258268. http://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2012.716740

Transcript of Designing for data inclusion 2 · Designing human-data interaction for better social inclusion...

Page 1: Designing for data inclusion 2 · Designing human-data interaction for better social inclusion Annika Wolff The Open University Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA U.K. Annika.wolff@open.ac.uk

Designing human-data interaction for better social inclusion

Annika Wolff The Open University

Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA U.K.

[email protected]

ABSTRACT Society is being increasingly driven by data. Data is seen as an important tool for civic participation and empowerment, allowing citizens to understand and solve their local problems and holding governments more accountable, through transparency of the data upon which decisions are being made [1]. To support this, increasing numbers of datasets are being made ‘open’ and free for anyone to use. However, there is evidence that this data is underused, particularly amongst certain demographics [2]. It is essential to understand a) who exactly are the excluded communities and b) what are the barriers for them when it comes to engaging with data. This knowledge can then be used to start designing for better data inclusion.

Currently there is little research that supports understanding why some communities may be reluctant or unable to engage with data. Certainly, there is evidence that levels of data and other digital literacies must play a role, in addition to access to ICT resources. However this cannot be the whole story. One way to understand at least part of the problem is to gain a better perspective on how different marginalized communities would naturally want to engage and interact with the data that exists about them. What concerns or questions do they have about data, what do they want to know and what problems would they solve with it? How do they begin to mobilise around problems that data can inform or help to solve – does the question come first, or the data? What tools or methods may communities use beyond the standard data analysis and visualisation techniques? For example what are the roles of physical tools, ‘making’ activities and tangible expressions of datasets or data analysis. How might they help in the sharing of information and ideas? There are a multitude of open questions in this area. These are just a few ideas of possible future research directions in the field of human-data interaction for better social inclusion.

This paper presents some research from across several projects that may start to inform some of these questions. Firstly, there is findings from work conducted within a smart city project that was developing new methods to engage children with data about their city, using ideas of tangible interactions which suggests that combining physical manifestations with on-screen tasks can help to build data literacy. Next are observations from physical making sessions with both children and university student designed around making or prototyping wearable technologies, which indicate that physical making stimulates creativity and better design thinking. This reveals some insights into the role of tangible, creative and ‘maker’ activities in connecting non-experts with complex data and understanding of the sorts of problems they want to solve, showing that at least for these non-expert audiences interacting with data is about much more than screen-based activities and bar graphs.

Next there is a discussion of a community project designed to build networks of community energy champions by engaging energy experts, community engagement experts and local communities around energy issues and the use of ‘lego flowers’ as a way to share stories across diverse communities who were mobilized around a common issue. Finally there is preliminary work in developing a game designed to support communities to understand and start discussing data from their environment.

REFERENCES [1] Letouzé, E., Noonan, A., Bhargava, R., Deahl, E., Sangokoya, D., &

Shoup, N. (2015, September). Beyond Data Literacy: Reinventing Community Engagement and Empowerment in the Age of Data. Data-Pop Alliance

[2] Marijn Janssen, Yannis Charalabidis, and Anneke Zuiderwijk. 2012. Benefits, Adoption Barriers and Myths of Open Data and Open Government. Information Systems Management 29, 4: 258–268. http://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2012.716740