1. The act of representing or the state of being represented.
2. Something that represents, as:
a. An image or likeness of something.
b. An account or statement, as of facts, allegations, or arguments.
c. An expostulation; a protest.
d. A presentation or production, as of a play.
3. The state or condition of serving as an official delegate, agent, or spokesperson.
4. The right or privilege of being represented by delegates having a voice in a legislative body.
5. A body of legislators that serve on behalf of a constituency.
6. Law A statement of fact made by one party in order to induce another party to enter into a contract.
7. Mathematics A homomorphism from an algebraic system to a similar system of matrices.
Representation (as defined by Hall)
In the studies of culture
Using language to say something meaningful about the world to other people in a meaningful way
Each of the reflective, intentional and constructionist notions of representations emphasizes one particular sort of relationship to meanings attached to objects of change
Differences between design cultures mean differences between meanings attached to objects of change within different cultures
E.g. design specification: data flows vs. working procedures
”In the constructionist perspective, representation involves making meaning by forging links between three different orders of things: what we might broadly call the world of things, people, events and experiences; the conceptual world – the mental concepts we carry around in our heads; and the signs, arranged into languages, which ’stand for’ or communicate these concepts”
Representation (as defined by Potter)
For social psychologists
Representation = description
”A central feature of any description is categorization; a description formulates some object or event as something; it constitutes it as a thing, and a thing with specific qualities”
The description presents something as good or bad, big or small, more violent or less violent, although often with more subtle options
Describing a reporter as a hack or a journalist
Classification (Bowker & Star 1999)
”A spatial, temporal, or spatio-temporal segmentation” of objects of change
≠ ’surface structure’ of objects
Systems of classifications
Categories of these systems are mutually exclusive?
Systems are complete?
Classifications help to include and exclude some meanings in the processes of meaning making
Complete systems of classifications are rare
More implicit classifiers matter (each word I say)
Representation (as defined by Kyng)
In the studies of design
Representations capture intentionally selected qualities of that which is represented and nothing more
Inadequate representations or lack of experience in using representations may lead to unexpected difficulties and confusion
Use of representations in cooperative design efforts
Cooperative work and representations
Understanding possibilities and limitations with respect to objects of change in the ’multicultural’ team
Enable cooperation between users and designers
Enable hands-on explorations
Enable to represent experience with both work and technical possibilities and limitations
Both users and designers need to ”share” representations of design
Representations of the future system
Mock-ups and prototypes
Represent interfaces
Represent the structure and content of the system (e.g. a work plan or a patient record)
When users are carrying out work
No need for technical expertise by users
Concepts with ”family resemblance”
Need to be grounded in work practices of end users
Representations of work
1) Work situation descriptions
(current work situations)
Imply needs grounded on current work situations and enable so called ’revisits’ to current but ever changing work situations
2) Use scenarios (future-oriented)
Represent emerging designs
Indicate how new computer support and changes in work may improve work situations
Recreate and describe a new context for trial
Task outliner mock-up
Mediatory function of representations
They mediate ”the relation between designers and their products, between designers in a team, between the design team and other design teams, and between the design team and the future users” [Bødker 1998]
They mediate construction, that is, the productive relation between team members and objects of change
They mediate cooperation, that is, the representational relation between team members
They mediate conceptualization, that is, the dialectical relation between team members and objects of change
[Adapted from Bertelsen 2000]
Examples of representations (Benyon 2002)
Three approaches for coming together around representations
DESIGNER – representation – user (D-R-U)
USER – representation – designer (U-R-D)
Multiple participants – multiple representations
Approach #1
Human relations vs. tools (and technology)
Design models with user classifications
Empowerment of users: with users, neither for nor by them
Design by doing => mutual learning
Lead by users???
Whose viewpoint emphasized???
Approach #2
E.g. usability trials, as seen by Woolgar (1991)
An evolving technology sets ’parameters’ for user action
Framing ”The User” and the relationship between this user and an evolving technology
How a technology should be ’read’
To configure a user is to ”define, enable and constrain” this user and to produce a configured relationship of this user to an evolving technology
What is a normal and what is a bizarre user?
Lead by both???
In fact, the user and the designer configure each other
Approach #3
”3D”
D ifferent viewpoints
=>
D ealing with diversity
=>
D ecision making based on multiple viewpoints
Different readings and interpretations of representations (Robinson 1991a)
Comments