Patrizia Paci
ABSTRACT
This paper presents a Wearer-Centered Framework (WCF) developed to support designing for good wearability in animal biotelemetry. Firstly, we describe the framework and the systematic process followed to develop it. Then, we report on how the WCF was evaluated with three teams of designers, who used it collaboratively to design a cat-centered tracking collar during dedicated workshops. We discuss our analysis of the designers' dialogues, whose aim was to understand the extent to which the framework informed the designers' thinking. Our findings indicate that the WCF was a useful tool to support the systematic elicitation of wearability requirements. They also suggest that designers could be provided with additional tools to support the WCF's application more effectively.
- ACUMEN-IDEO. Human-Centered Design 201: Prototyping. Retrieved from https://www.plusacumen.org/courses/prototypingGoogle Scholar
- H.D.J.N. Aldridge and R.M. Brigham. 1988. Load carrying and maneuverability in an insectivorous bat: a test of the 5% "rule" of radio-telemetry. Journal of Mammalogy 69, 2: 379--382. https://doi.org/10.2307/1381393Google ScholarCross Ref
- Alan Blackwell and Thomas Green. 2003. Notational systems---The cognitive dimensions of notations framework. In HCI models, theories, and frameworks: toward a multidisciplinary science (1st ed.). Elsevier Science & Technology.Google Scholar
- Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 2: 77--101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oaGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Nancy Burley, Gail Krantzberg, and Peter Radman. 1982. Influence of colour-banding on the conspecific preferences of zebra finches. Animal Behaviour 30, 2: 444--455. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(82)80055-9Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ruth M. Casper. 2009. Guidelines for the instrumentation of wild birds and mammals. Animal Behaviour 78, 6: 1477--1483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.09.023Google ScholarCross Ref
- Michael R. Conover. 2007. Chapter 1: Olfactory predators and odorants. In Predator-Prey Dynamics: the Role of Olfaction. CRC Press, Boca Raton, 7--8.Google Scholar
- Steven J. Cooke. 2008. Biotelemetry and biologging in endangered species research and animal conservation: relevance to regional, national, and IUCN Red List threat assessments. Endangered Species Research 4, 1--2: 165--185. https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00063Google ScholarCross Ref
- John D. Gould and Clayton Lewis. 1985. Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think. Communications of the ACM 28, 3: 300--311.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jan Gulliksen, Bengt Göransson, Inger Boivie, Stefan Blomkvist, Jenny Persson, and Åsa Cajander. 2003. Key principles for user-centred systems design. Behaviour and Information Technology 22, 6: 397--409. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290310001624329Google ScholarCross Ref
- Penny Hawkins. 2004. Bio-logging and animal welfare: practical refinements. Memoirs of National Institute of Polar Research. Special issue 58: 58--68.Google Scholar
- Penny Hawkins. 2014. Refining housing, husbandry and care for animals used in studies involving biotelemetry. Animals 4, 2: 361--373. https://doi.org/doi:10.3390/ani4020361Google ScholarCross Ref
- G.H. Jacobs. 2009. Evolution of colour vision in mammals. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 364, 1531: 2957--2967. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0039Google ScholarCross Ref
- Per Jensen. 2002. The ethology of domestic animals: an introductory text. CABI.Google Scholar
- Niels Jepsen, C. Schreck, S. Clements, and E. B. Thorstad. 2005. A brief discussion on the 2% tag/bodymass rule of thumb. Aquatic telemetry: advances and applications: 255--259.Google Scholar
- Michael P. Jones, Kenneth E. Pierce Jr, and Daniel Ward. 2007. Avian vision: A review of form and function with special consideration to birds of prey. Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine 16, 2: 69--87. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jepm.2007.03.012Google ScholarCross Ref
- Roland Kays, Margaret C. Crofoot, Walter Jetz, and Martin Wikelski. 2015. Terrestrial animal tracking as an eye on life and planet. Science 348, 6240: aaa2478. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa2478Google Scholar
- J. A. Keinath and J. A. Musick. 1993. Movements and Diving Behavior of a Leatherback Turtle, Dermochelys coriacea. Copeia 1993, 4: 1010. https://doi.org/10.2307/1447078Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert E. Kenward. 2000. A manual for wildlife radio tagging. Academic Press. Retrieved from https://www.elsevier.com/books/a-manual-for-wildlife-radio-tagging/kenward/978-0-08-057420-2Google Scholar
- Thomas K. Lameris, Gerhard J. D. M. Müskens, Andrea Kölzsch, Adriaan M. Dokter, Henk P. Van der Jeugd, and Bart A. Nolet. 2018. Effects of harness-attached tracking devices on survival, migration, and reproduction in three species of migratory waterfowl. Animal Biotelemetry 6, 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40317-018-0153-3Google ScholarCross Ref
- Clara Mancini. 2017. Towards an animal-centred ethics for Animal Computer Interaction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 98: 221--233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.04.008Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ji-Ye Mao, Karel Vredenburg, Paul W Smith, and Tom Carey. 2005. The state of user-centered design practice. Communications of the ACM 48, 3: 105--109. https://doi.org/10.1145/1047671.1047677Google ScholarDigital Library
- David B. Morton, Penny Hawkins, Richard Bevan, Kate Heath, James Kirkwood, Peter Pearce, Leah Scott, Greg Whelan, and Anthony Webb. 2003. Refinements in telemetry procedures: Seventh report of the BVAAWF/FRAME/RSPCA/UFAW Joint working group on refinement, part A. Laboratory Animals 37, 4: 261--299.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dennis Murray and Mark Fuller. 2000. A critical review of the effects of marking on the biology of vertebrates. In Research techniques in animal ecology: controversies and consequences, Boitani L and Fuller TK (ed.). Columbia University Press, New York, 15--64.Google Scholar
- Steve North and Clara Mancini. 2016. Frameworks for ACI: animals as stakeholders in the design process. Interactions. https://doi.org/10.1145/2946043Google ScholarDigital Library
- Patrizia Paci, Clara Mancini, and Blaine A. Price. 2017. The role of ethological observation for measuring animal reactions to biotelemetry devices. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Animal Computer Interaction, 5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3152130.3152144Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Preece, Y. Rogers, and H. Sharp. 2015. Interaction design: beyond Human-Computer Interaction. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
- Michael G. Smircich and John T. Kelly. 2014. Extending the 2% rule: the effects of heavy internal tags on stress physiology, swimming performance, and growth in brook trout. Animal Biotelemetry 2, 1: 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/2050-3385-2-16Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kristen A Walker, Andrew W Trites, Martin Haulena, and Daniel M Weary. 2012. A review of the effects of different marking and tagging techniques on marine mammals. Wildlife Research 39, 1: 15--30. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR10177Google ScholarCross Ref
- Christopher D. Wickens, Sallie E. Gordon, and Yili Liu. 1998. An introduction to human factors engineering. Pearson.Google Scholar
- Christopher C. Wilmers, Barry Nickel, Caleb M. Bryce, Justine A. Smith, Rachel E. Wheat, and Veronica Yovovich. 2015. The golden age of biologging: how animal-borne sensors are advancing the frontiers of ecology. Ecology 96, 7: 1741--1753. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/14-1401.1Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rory P. Wilson. 2011. Animal behaviour: The price tag. Nature 469, 7329: 164--165.Google Scholar
- Rory P. Wilson, W. Stewart Grant, and David C. Duffy. 1986. Recording devices on free-ranging marine animals: does measurement affect foraging performance? Ecology 67, 4: 1091--1093. https://doi.org/10.2307/1939832Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rory P. Wilson and Clive R. McMahon. 2006. Measuring devices on wild animals: what constitutes acceptable practice? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 4, 3: 147--154. https://doi.org/10.1890/1540-9295(2006)004[0147:MDOWAW]2.0.CO;2Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Designing for wearability: an animal-centred framework
Recommendations
Understanding the Interaction Between Animals and Wearables: The Wearer Experience of Cats
DIS '20: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems ConferenceAnimals can be negatively affected by wearable tracking devices, even those marketed as ?animal friendly' and increasingly used with companion animals, such as cats. To understand the wearer experience of cats fitted with popular GPS trackers, we ...
Wearer-centered design for animal biotelemetry: implementation and wearability test of a prototype
ISWC '19: Proceedings of the 2019 ACM International Symposium on Wearable ComputersIn this paper we present an approach to designing wearer-centered biotelemetry for non-human (and human) animal wearers. Drawing from fundamental values and principles of user-centered design, we describe a wearer-centered framework to heuristically ...
Designing for wearability in animal biotelemetry
ACI '16: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Animal-Computer InteractionThis research presents a preliminary study conducted on a cat fitted with biotelemetry devices. The aim was to explore the feline's wearability experience of bearing off-the-shelf products. The cat's reactions to the device presence were recorded and ...
Comments