Page 215 -

8.5 Interview strategies 203

collective groups. Affinity diagrams are often constructed with sticky notes,
using different colors to represent layers in the hierarchy (Beyer and Holtzblatt,
1998). Collecting notes from a series of contextual interviews into a single
diagram leads to a “map” of the problem “terrain”, with hierarchies providing
guidance for understanding the relationships of various concerns that fall under
the topics and subtopics. In the course of analyzing a large set of notes (perhaps
around 1500), members of a research team can build a shared understanding of
a challenging work process (Beyer and Holtzblatt, 1998).
Although the content of their 1998 book is still as relevant as ever,
Holtzblatt and Beyer updated their models with a 2014 revision entitled
Contextual Design Evolved (Holtzblatt and Beyer, 2014). Noting the importance
of interface design for daily life activities conducted on mobile devices, this
revised model adds new criteria including “Cool Concepts” designed to address
factors relevant to this new class of applications, including accomplishment,
connection and sensation (Holtzblatt and Beyer, 2014). This content, together
with expanded examples and guidance on interview analysis methods, makes
Contextual Design Evolved a must-read companion to the original book.

Other interviews aimed at understanding how technologies are currently used
might include technology tours, which ask participants to show researchers how
they use technology at home (Petersen and Baiilie, 2001) or other familiar space.
Technology biographies build upon this approach, asking participants to discuss
past uses of technology and to speculate about desirable future scenarios (Blythe
et al., 2002).
One alternative perspective on interview strategies relies upon artifacts and
context provided by the researcher, not by the subject. External aids aimed at elic-
iting feedback or reactions relevant to the subject at hand are known as “probes”
(Gaver et al., 1999). As the goal of a probe is to promote engagement, it need not
be technological: an interviewer interested in understanding user needs for organiz-
ing photos might ask interviewees to organize a small set of pictures on a table top.
Observations of this process may prove to be significantly informative than a strictly
verbal interview.
Software prototypes can also be used to focus interviews. Technology probes are
simple prototypes that demonstrate new ideas (Hutchinson et al., 2003). Although
they may be interesting as tools, technology probes are primarily designed to ex-
plore possibilities and understand needs and practices regarding technology use. A
study of everyday technologies in family life used two forms of technology probe—a
zoomable space for digital notes on a writable LCD tablet and a tool for capturing
short, shareable videos—to understand how unfamiliar technologies might be used
by family members (Hutchinson et al., 2003).
Interviews aimed at evaluating proposed designs for software tools often go
one step further, asking users to comment on proposed interface designs, either on
paper or as more-or-less functional prototypes. As prototypes become more fully