Designers, Users and Justice by Turkka Keinonen

Author:Turkka Keinonen
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Bloomsbury UK
Published: 2017-03-17T16:00:00+00:00

Notes

1Morten Hertzum (2010) has interpreted usability as an inclusive concept that covers widely different research interests and design practices. It includes universal usability, which aims at accessible solutions for everybody; situational usability, which refers to the quality-in-use of a system in a specified situation; perceived usability, which deals with subjective evaluation of a system; hedonic usability, which focuses on joy and pleasure rather than accomplishment-related criteria; organizational usability, which deals with people collaborating in organizational settings; and cultural usability, which addresses cultural differences between users.

2Oosterlaken (2013) speaks about “capability-sensitive design.”

3See, for instance, Sen (1985, 1993, 2000, 2010a), Nussbaum (2000, 2011), Alkire (2005), Robeyns (2005, 2006), and Gasper (2007) for generic discussion on the capability approach; Oosterlaken (2009, 2013) for the application of the capability approach to design ethics; and Pogge (2003), Jaggard (2006), and Reader (2006) for critical stands.

4The utilitarian approach.

5Rawls’ approach to distributional justice.

6Andy Dong (2008; Dong et al,. 2013), Ilse Oosterlaken (2009, 2013), and Murphy and Gardoni (2010) have linked the capability approach to participatory design, product service system design, risk management, and design for all.

7These include financial resources, economics, political practices and institutions, freedom of thought, political participation, social or cultural practices, social structures, social institutions, public goods, social norms, traditions, and habits (Robeyns 2005).

8Peter Corning (2012: 107) says that more than 90 percent of consumers’ income is spent on satisfying the basic needs of subsistence he has listed.

9Robeyns (2006: 371) says that by “having a common theoretical framework that allows for a range of applications … the capability approach opens up a truly interdisciplinary space in the study of well-being, inequality, justice and public policies.” Des Gasper (2007: 336) seconds this opinion by saying that “underdefinition allows everyone to perceive space for themselves in a project. It gives, fittingly, a lot of freedom for people of varied backgrounds to grow out from a small kernel in diverse ways, according to their interests and skills.”

10Searches with “usability” and “capability” as the terms return several hits, but in those capability refers to the organizational capability to develop usable products and does not deal with the capability approach and justice of design (Jokela 2004, Jokela et al. 2006).

11This is the ISO 9126 (1991) definition of usability.

12This is the ISO 9241-210 (2010) definition of user experience.

13See, for instance, Bevan, Kirakowsky, and Maissel (1991), Bevan (1992), and Corbett, Macleod, and Kelly (1993) for early discussions on the definition of usability.

14Martha Nussbaum’s (2011: 84–5) terms for the different capabilities are basic, internal, and combined capabilities. Basic capabilities are ones that a child inherits and naturally learns by being part of a community. Internal capabilities refer to the matured capabilities that the individual has developed with the support of her environment. Combined capabilities are internal capabilities exercised with external provisioning. Des Gasper (2007) speaks about potential that a person is born with, skills that one can acquire, and outcomes that appear with the use of external means.

15When the capability approach is seen as normative.

16Amartya Sen (1993) emphasizes, referring to Adam Smith (1776/2004), that

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.