=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1817/paper1
|storemode=property
|title=Persuasive Technologies for Functional Interaction in Cities
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1817/paper1.pdf
|volume=Vol-1817
|authors=Albrecht Fritzsche,Aida Boukhris,Kathrin Möslein
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/persuasive/FritzscheBM16
}}
==Persuasive Technologies for Functional Interaction in Cities==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1817/paper1.pdf
Persuasive Technologies for Functional Interaction in
Cities
Albrecht Fritzsche1,*, Aida Boukhris1, Kathrin Möslein1
1
Chair of Information Systems I, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg,
Germany
{albrecht.fritzsche, aida.boukhris, kathrin.moeslein}@fau.de
Abstract. The well-being of a city depends on the capabilities of its inhabitants
for functional interaction. We study how persuasive technologies can support
these capabilities on the theoretical background of transactional analysis. First
insights are drawn from research about persuasive technologies in an innovation
lab as a focal point for functional interaction in a city.
Keywords: Transactional Analysis, Functional Interaction, Labs.
1 The City as a Field of Application for Persuasive Technology
The notion of a city is self-referential. It does not depend on an output that is pro-
duced or a purpose that a city serves, but on its own well-being as a systemic entity. A
city is a paradigmatic example of a complex adaptive system [1]. It is exposed to a
perpetual change of its constitutive elements: the buildings, the infrastructure, the
inhabitants and the rulesets that define their interaction. Nevertheless, a city is able to
preserve its coherence. This ability of a city cannot be adequately described as tech-
nical operation; and it cannot be managed by imposing specific behavioral rules on its
functional entities. Recent sociological approaches rather turn the attention to the
phenomena that happen in-between the entities while they change and evolve over
time. These phenomena are addressed by terms like resonance or translation [2, 3].
Research on persuasive technologies has made amazing progress during the last years
[4, 5, 6]. The city, however, creates a new kind of challenge for it. In absence of static
economic or technical structure, it is not enough to look for ways to encourage certain
behavior among people. Instead, it is necessary to support the underlying capabilities
of people to adopt new behavior and react to change without losing touch with each
other. What makes this task particularly difficult is the fact that these capabilities
cannot be described by specific responses to certain stimuli. More likely, they can be
compared to the dynamic capabilities of companies to explore and exploit innovation
[7]. This paper describes how persuasive technologies can support such capabilities
on the basis of a psychological framework drawn from transactional analysis. After a
short description of this framework, we present first insights from its practical appli-
cation.
2 Transactional Analysis and Communicative Capabilities
Transactional analysis studies social behavior as an enactment of relationships [8].
The underlying assumption is that human interaction expresses the attitudes of the
participants towards themselves and one another. If they perceive themselves in a
similar way, a functional cooperation is possible. Otherwise it is highly probable that
the interaction will sooner or later result in a conflict [9]. More importantly, however,
transactional analysis states that human beings will only be able to cope with novelty
and change if they see each other eye to eye as mature, responsible individuals. The
establishment of such relations is the normative goal of the analysis [10].
While transactional analysis was originally introduced as a method of psychoanalysis,
its range of application has later been extended to any kind of behavioral study of
systems and organizations [11]. In particular, transactional analysis has proven to be
quite helpful to gain insight into verbal and non-verbal messages about relationships
in communicative acts and their effect on the outcome [12]. Roughly said, what we
intend to do is therefore to use persuasive technology to encourage an adequate com-
municative behavior among people as a foundation of a healthy interaction.
3 Labs as Focal Points of Functional Interaction in Cities
Cities are much too big and diverse to be addressed exhaustively in one experimental
setting. Each city, however, has focal points of functional interaction in which the
major characteristics of city life become accessible in a closer setting. Traditionally,
this includes town squares, market places, church assemblies and seasonal festivals
that draw people together which give them opportunity to interact as a group on dif-
ferent topics of their choice. During the last years, many cities have systematically
worked on the creation of new focal points for functional interaction, because they
have become aware of their importance for city life. In many cases, these new focal
points have been addressed as labs.
In the city of Nuremberg, such a lab has been created right in the town center near the
pedestrian area. The lab is run by the Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated Circuits. It is
open all week during regular shopping hours and accessible for everyone. Unlike
many other labs, it focusses on commercially oriented innovation projects. Over a
period of three month, the lab is host to different innovation projects at the same time
and invites visitors to contribute. Afterwards, the projects are replaced by new ones.
The subjects of the innovation projects cover a large range of topics, from renewable
energies over security and health to clothing and jewelry.
Although there is always qualified personnel available in the lab to interact with the
visitors and encourage them to engage in the innovation projects, technology also
plays an important role in organizing and supporting the contributions of the visitors.
The technology presents itself in many different forms, from static material artifacts
to different kinds of interactive installations. The visitors are accordingly exposed to a
mixture of different stimuli from human beings and technical devices at the same
time. Just like the city as a whole, the lab confronts visitors with perpetual change and
the need to revise attitudes and adapt in a socio-technical environment. It therefore
provides adequate conditions to study the capabilities of the population for functional
interaction and the potential of technical support.
4 Studying Persuasion Effects on Perceptions of Relationships
Over the past two years, the Nuremberg lab has provided us with numerous opportu-
nities to study the effect of persuasive technologies on the communicative behavior of
the visitors. Due to the real-world setting and the multitude of different topics, our
research has so far been focused on qualitative aspects. In particular, we have been
interested in identifying the major factors of influence that have to be considered in
the design of the technologies. We differentiate the technologies by the form in which
they present themselves to the visitors: static and dynamic, standalone and interactive
as well as pragmatic and semantic/syntactic with respect to the content for which they
serve as a carrier.
Methodologically, transactional analysis suggests four different forms of data collec-
tion: observation of personal behavior and appearance, observation of social interac-
tion and conversation scripts, personal interviews with visitors about their experiences
and their perceptions of the relationships they consider themselves to have with oth-
ers. Since the lab is visited by a large number of people over a longer time, research
approaches based on interviews are hard to pursue. We have therefore collected ob-
servational data. Data collection was structured by the artifact dimensions mentioned
above.
5 First Findings
While detailed results still need more time for further analysis and elaboration, our
general findings already draw a rough picture of the behavioral dynamics on this sce-
nario. In particular, it shows that the effect of technology in the engagement with the
innovation projects in the lab varies a lot between single visitors or couples and visi-
tors in larger groups. Single visitors and many couples generally direct more attention
to the technology and engage more deeply in the innovation activities. After spending
time with technology that allows them to work constructively, they are often happy to
approach others as fellow users. Groups, on the other hand, are rather inspired by
more entertaining technology to start a functional interaction.
Several cases also show that the changes induced by technology take a long time.
Some visitors have to return again and again before they open up to others and accept
them as equal counterparts in an interaction. Once again, it seems to be the usage of
technology as a toolkit to build something and thus experience a certain authority over
the subject matter that supports the development of new behavior. Furthermore, it
seems that multi-sensually accessible technical devices are more likely to provoke
responses than others. Regarding the durability of change, some cases indicate that
new behavioral patterns persist over time, in particular if people get more engaged
with technology. What remains unclear is the level to which these patterns are trans-
ferable to other environments.
6 Conclusion and Outlook
Our research on persuasive technologies for functional interaction in cities is in a very
early stage. Nevertheless, first findings indicate that this topic holds a lot of potential
to provide interesting insights in the future. While there is still a lot to learn about
persuasive technologies in labs, one of the next steps will certainly lead from the lab
environment to other settings of interaction in cities. This also includes portable ap-
plications on smartphones that people carry around wherever they go. Preliminary
studies in this direction have already been undertaken.
Using transactional analysis as a theoretical background for research on persuasive
technologies is a fairly new approach, but it seems to be in line with the contemporary
discourse in sociology about communal activity. Furthermore, it allows us to create
further connections to innovation research and the ability of companies to evolve. We
therefore hope that our approach will enrich research on persuasive technologies in
many different ways in the future.
References
1. Holland, J. H. (1996). A hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. New York:
Basic Books
2. Rosa, H. (2010). Alienation and Acceleration: Towards a Critical Theory of Late-modern
Temporality. Natchitoches: NSU Press.
3. Rössner, M. and Italiano, F. (2012). Translation: an introduction. In: Italiano, F. and Röss-
ner, M. (eds.) Translation. Narration, Media and the Staging of Differences. Bielefeld:
transcript, 9-18.
4. Simons, H.W., Morreale, J. and Bronbeck, B. (2001). Persuasion in Society. Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
5. Fogg, B.J. (2003). Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think
and Do. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
6. Cyr, D., Head, M., Lim, E. and Stibe, A. (2015). The Art of Online Persuasion through
Design; Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Workshop on HCI Research in MIS, Fort
Worth, Texas, USA.
7. Teece, D.J., (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of
(sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal. 28 (13) 1319-1350.
8. Berne, E. (1961). Transactional Analysis in Psychotherapy. New York: Ballantine.
9. Berne, E. (1964). Games People Play. New York: Grove Press.
10. Harris, T. A. (1967). I'm OK, You're Okay. New York: Harper & Row.
11. Stewart, I., Joines, V. (1987) Transactional Analysis Today: A New Introduction to Trans-
actional Analysis. Nottingham and Chapel Hill: Lifespace Publishing.
12. Schulz von Thun, F. (2014). Miteinander reden: Störungen und Klärungen. Psychologie
der zwischenmenschlichen Kommunikation. Reinbek: Rowohlt.