Uhde, Ala i h; D eye , Liana a; Hassenzahl, Ma c
A icle — Published Ve sion
The Wi ness Expe ience In en o y
In e ac ing wi h Compu e s
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Uhde, Ala i h; D eye , Liana a; Hassenzahl, Ma c (2025) : The Wi ness Expe ience
In en o y, In e ac ing wi h Compu e s, ISSN 1873-7951, Ox o d Uni e si y P ess, Ox o d, Iss.
Ad ance a icles, pp. 1-16,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/iwc/iwa 010
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/315673
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Recei ed: May 31, 2024. Re ised: Janua y 3, 2025. Accep ed: Feb ua y 22, 2025
© The Au ho (s) 2025. Published by Ox o d Uni e si y P ess on behal o The B i ish Compu e Socie y.
This is an Open Access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License (h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/), which
pe mi s un es ic ed euse, dis ibu ion, and ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed.
In e ac ing wi h Compu e s, 2025, 1–16
h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/iwcomp/iwa 010
A icle
The Wi ness Expe ience In en o y
Ala i h Uhde1,2,*,Liana a D eye 3and Ma c Hassenzahl4
1College o In o ma ion Science and Enginee ing, Ri sumeikan Uni e si y, Osaka, Japan
2Tokyo College, The Uni e si y o Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
3Be lin Social Science Cen e , Be lin, Ge many
4Ubiqui ous Design/Expe ience and In e ac ion, Uni e si y o Siegen, Siegen, Ge many
*Co esponding au ho : [email p o ec ed].jp
Abs ac
In e ac ions wi h echnology a e pa o social li e, o example in ca és, ains, o pa ks. This social si ua edness no only changes
how use s expe ience hese in e ac ions. I also in luences he si ua ed expe iences o o he co-loca ed people (“wi nesses”). Howe e ,
despi e a la ge body o esea ch on use expe iences, he ela ion be ween an in e ac ion and wi ness expe iences, and ways o design
o hem, emain unde explo ed.To add ess his gap, his pape in oduces he “Wi ness Expe ience In en o y”,a esea ch ool g ounded
in social-in e p e i is heo ies, ha o e s a p agma ic app oach o s udy how in e ac ions wi h echnology a ec wi ness expe iences.
Based on an analysis o eigh in e ac i e echnologies, we illus a e how he Wi ness Expe ience In en o y can in o m he design o
socially si ua ed in e ac ions wi h echnology o a oid nega i e and c ea e mo e posi i e wi ness expe iences. We p o ide guidelines
o applica ions o he Wi ness Expe ience In en o y in u u e esea ch and i s adap able coding empla e. Bo h build on expe iences
om ou own esea ch, bu gi e u u e esea che s and p ac i ione s he lexibili y o adap he ool o he social se ings hey s udy.
RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS
•We in oduce he “Wi ness Expe ience In en o y” (WEI), a quali a i e esea ch ool o analyze and design o wi nesses
expe iences o in e ac ions wi h echnology
•We p o ide a de ailed o e iew o aspec s ha a e ele an o wi ness expe iences h ough he WEI’s coding empla e, o di ec
u u e esea ch
•We illus a e how he WEI can in o m design decisions o imp o e wi ness expe iences using h ee design cases (sma phones,
VR glasses, elec onic ciga e es)
Keywo ds:social si ua ion; esea ch me hod; quali a i e; expe ience design; wi ness expe ience; social p ac ice.
1INTRODUCTION
In e ac ions wi h echnology a e pa o social li e. Ask any ain
commu e o a ime when some passenge “en e ained” e e y-
one else wi h hei phone call. O go o a s age pe o mance and
you will ind ha i hea ily elies on in e ac i e echnologies.
People ake sel ies a c owded sigh seeing spo s, o he s use d ones
o ilm wedding pa ies. Sidewalk encoun e s wi h mo o ized
scoo e s coun as well, jus like sha ing a able in a ca é wi h
a lap op use , o “ aping” in he smoking a ea. Pu di e en ly,
i would be challenging o ind a social ga he ing oday en i ely
una ec ed by in e ac i e echnology.
Gi en his ubiqui y, we would expec he Human–Compu e
In e ac ion (HCI) li e a u e o o e a solid heo e ical g ounding
abou how people expe ience in e ac ions wi h echnology in
social si ua ions. In addi ion, we would expec ools and guide-
lines g ounded in his heo y o in o m design decisions. And
indeed, we do ha e bo h heo y and ools/guidelines (e.g., Dou ish,
2004,Koelle e al., 2018,Ko sgaa d e al., 2022,Rico & B ews e ,
2010,Suchman, 2006). Howe e , we a gue he e ha he wo a e
cu en ly no well in eg a ed. On he one hand, we ha e ex ensi e
heo e ical wo k ha has con ibu ed o a be e unde s anding
o he complex ela ions be ween socially si ua ed in e ac ions
and subjec i e expe iences. This wo k is o en mo e abs ac and
con ibu es high-le el desc ip ions o hese ela ions.On he o he
hand, we ha e a wide ange o ools o assess socially si ua ed
expe iences, which ha e g own ou o p agma ic needs o da a
o in o m decision-making. These end o be de eloped o a
speci ic social se ing wi h a ocus on a speci ic ype o in e ac ion,
which can cause p oblems when ans e ed o o he se ings o
in e ac ions. Some o he indings and guidelines based on hese
assessmen s ha e o e ime u ned ou o be less “gene alizable”
han ini ially hough (Uhde e al., 2022,2023), and he HCI li -
e a u e s uggles o de elop eliable ad ice o design o social
si ua ions.
In his pape , we se o o b idge be ween he heo e ical
wo k and he needs o esea che s and p ac i ione s. This led
us o assemble a esea ch ool based on a combina ion o
exis ing me hods and da a analysis app oaches, wi h suppo i e
ma e ial o esea che s. I is in ended o suppo designing o
and e alua ing socially si ua ed in e ac ions wi h echnology.
We call his ool he “Wi ness Expe ience In en o y” (WEI).
The WEI combines a semi-s uc u ed in e iew app oach wi h
2|In e ac ing wi h Compu e s, 2025
an open e alua ion o ma , suppo ed by an ex ensi e coding
empla e ( he “in en o y”). The in e iew o ma is based on
In e p e a i e Phenomenological Analysis (IPA; Smi h e al., 2009),
a me hod ocused on subjec i e expe iences, which e lec s he
WEI’s g ounding in p e ious (use ) expe ience-o ien ed esea ch
(e.g., Laschke e al., 2013,Uhde e al., 2021). Howe e , we adap ed
he s uc u e o a use -decen e ed esea ch ocus, in o med by
social-in e p e i is heo ies o social si ua edness and Social
P ac ice Theo ies (e.g., Reckwi z, 2002,Sho e e al., 2012,Suchman,
2006,Uhde & Hassenzahl, 2021). Finally, he coding empla e is
based on he indings o ou own ini ial esea ch abou eigh
in e ac i e echnologies ou lined below, and hus p o ides an
in o med s a ing poin o u u e wo k. As he name implies,
he WEI ocuses on “wi nesses”, which s ands o all co-si ua ed
indi iduals who do no di ec ly in e ac wi h a echnology,
bu whose si ua ed expe iences may be in luenced by his
in e ac ion.1As we illus a e below, he WEI can be used lexibly
o s udy a wide ange o in e ac i e echnologies and associa ed
wi ness expe iences, and p o ides conc e e insigh s o imp o e
designs.
In sum, we make he ollowing con ibu ions. Fi s , we in o-
duce he WEI and guidelines on how o use i . We p esen ou
pilo s udy abou eigh common, socially si ua ed in e ac i e
echnologies, which ollowed he WEI in e iew o ma and se ed
o boo s ap he coding empla e. Second, he coding empla e
i sel p o ides a s a ing poin o u he esea ch abou socially
si ua ed in e ac ions wi h echnology, and b ings oge he an
ex ensi e collec ion o aspec s ha can in luence si ua ed expe i-
ences. Thi d, we use h ee p ac ical examples om he pilo s udy
o illus a e how he WEI can in o m he ( e)design o socially
si ua ed in e ac ions wi h echnology.
2BACKGROUND
We will i s ou line he cen al wo k on socially si ua ed expe i-
ences and common issues a ound he concep o “social si ua -
edness” ha mo i a ed he de elopmen o he WEI. To illus a e
he co e p oblems, we s a wi h a e lec ion on exis ing ools and
measu emen -o ien ed app oaches o social si ua edness. This
pa mainly e e s o he “social accep abili y” li e a u e, because
i is he cu en ly mos ho oughly s udied aspec o socially si -
ua ed expe iences. Bu he same a gumen s apply mo e b oadly.
We hen in oduce cen al heo e ical wo k on social si ua edness,
which indica es why i can be di icul o eliably assess socially
si ua ed expe iences using s ic ly s anda dized ools. Finally,
ha ing ou lined he key p oblems wi h bo h measu emen s and
heo y, we sugges a way o in eg a e hem by de ining a po en ial
scope o wha a esea ch ool can meaning ully add ess o in o m
design o he social. This se ed as he ou se o de eloping
he WEI.
2.1 Measu ing Socially Si ua ed,
Technology-Media ed Expe iences: The Case o
Social Accep abili y
Whe he people choose o in e ac wi h a ce ain echnology in
he social does no depend on i s unc ionali y alone. We know
1This use o he e m “wi ness” is in line wi h some ecen wo k (e.g., Uhde
e al., 2022), bu sligh ly di e en om ea lie uses. In pa icula , Ree es (2011)
used he e m “wi ingness” o desc ibe whe he ano he pe son is an “inside ”
o “ou side ” o a g oup whe e an in e ac ion akes place (simila o “ eams”;
Go man, 1959), and whe he hei a en ion is in ended o expec ed. We use
i he e o desc ibe o wha ex en o he people a e awa e o he in e ac ion
happening a all, which may shape hei expe ience e en i hey a e no pa o
he in-g oup.
om examples such as Google Glass and sma phones ha people
o en end up no using a echnology a all, o only unde ce ain
ci cums ances (Koelle e al., 2017,2015,Uhde & Hassenzahl, 2021).
The social accep abili y li e a u e is conce ned wi h why people
in e ac wi h some echnologies in social si ua ions bu no o h-
e s, and how hey expe ience such in e ac ions. One o i s goals is
o de elop design p inciples ha educe non- unc ional ba ie s
o in e ac ion in social si ua ions (e.g., emba assmen o dis u b-
ing o he s; Monk e al., 2004a,b,Mon e o e al., 2010). In mo e
abs ac e ms, he social accep abili y li e a u e looks o ways
o imp o e how people expe ience socially si ua ed in e ac ions
wi h echnology. A de ailed e iew o ha li e a u e can be ound
in Koelle e al. (2020), wi h mo e speci ic discussions o challenges
as seen wi hin he ield. He e, we ocus on h ee inhe en issues
o he social accep abili y app oach, ep esen a i e o esea ch
p ima ily ocusing on measu emen . These include: (1) an isola ed
ocus on measu able elemen s such as he o m o an in e ac ion,
independen o he in e ac ion’s speci ic social si ua edness; (2)
he goal o de elop objec i e measu es, e en i hey may no
meaning ully ep esen he a ie y o (subjec i e) expe iences;
and (3) a aming o social si ua edness d i en by he needs o
measu emen s.
Fi s , om a p ac ical pe spec i e, i would be desi able i
we could isola e si ua ional elemen s o make hem measu able
and compa able. Fo example, social accep abili y esea ch has a
s ong in e es in he o m o an in e ac ion, and se e al s udies
a emp o analyze he o m independen o o he si ua ional
elemen s. This app oach aligns wi h he p oblem aming and he
aspi a ion o de elop gene alizable guidelines o social accep -
abili y. The e a e a ious examples in he li e a u e o sugges ions
o mo e and less “accep able” o ms o in e ac ion (see Koelle
e al., 2020 o an o e iew), assuming ha such o ms come wi h
an inhe en “accep abili y alue”. He e, we ocus on “sub le” in e -
ac ions as an example. Sub le in e ac ions esemble casual and
na u al mo emen s, such as oo apping, o con ol a echnology.
They ha e been sugges ed as a way o inc ease social accep abili y
(Rico & B ews e , 2010).
Al hough such gene alizable design pa e ns and e ec s o he
o m o in e ac ion on peoples’ expe iences would be desi able
(e.g., how accep able hey ind i ), he e a e p ac ical issues. One
eason is ha he o m is no necessa ily he cause o “unac-
cep abili y”, and i is unclea in wha way i con ibu es o i .
In he case o public pho og aphy, o example, a eason o low
social accep abili y could be ha he in e ac ion as such is seen
as in usi e o someone else’s p i acy (see also Koelle e al.,2018).
I someone akes pho os o a s ange , simply making he o m
o in e ac ion mo e “sub le” may no esol e he p oblem, o i
could e en make i wo se. Fo example, “upski ing” pho og aphy
became a g owing p oblem in Japan in he 2000s and manu ac u -
e s eac ed by making he o m o in e ac ion less sub le (wi h an
immu able clicking sound; McCann e al., 2017,Sha on & Koops,
2021). Bu e en i we assume ha he o m is (pa o ) he eason
o low accep abili y, a sub le o m may no be sui able o a
ce ain socially si ua ed in e ac ion (as shown o ace- o- ace
con e sa ions; Pohl e al., 2019,Uhde e al., 2022). Thus, al hough
ideally we could s udy he o m o in e ac ion independen ly, i
ul ima ely needs o be conside ed in ela ion o o he a iables,
which can be in e ac ion-speci ic.
The second issue is ha social accep abili y esea ch ends
o imply an inhe en “ ue accep abili y alue” o a ce ain
echnology wi h i s o m o in e ac ion and o he cha ac e is ics.
Howe e , in p ac ice, people can ha e undamen ally di e en
judgemen s o his accep abili y, and i is unclea how we could
Uhde e al. |3
esol e hei disag eemen . The e is some awa eness o his
p oblem in he social accep abili y li e a u e al eady, which shows
in he concep s o “ea ly” and “la e adop e s” o echnologies (e.g.,
Mon e o e al., 2010). This ca ego iza ion implies ha , a one poin
in ime, some people ( he ea ly adop e s) ind in e ac ions wi h
ce ain echnologies al eady accep able and s a using hem,
while o he s ( he la e adop e s) do no —al hough he g oup
names imply ha hey e en ually will. The p oblem is ha i
such g oups exis , simple accep abili y sco es a e necessa ily
no ma i e. Whose opinion should hey be based on i people
undamen ally disag ee? I also seems p oblema ic ha his
alignmen o people on an “accep ance imeline” depoli icizes
he echnology, al hough he e may be alid a gumen s bo h o
and agains i s adop ion. To an ex en , he accep ance imeline
p esc ibes a seemingly ine i able u u e o adop ion. This, in u n,
con adic s he goal o social accep abili y esea ch o edesign
ce ain cha ac e is ics o echnology, such as i s o m, o make
i mo e accep able. I people e en ually adop he echnology
anyway, independen o i s o m o o he inhe en cha ac e is ics,
he e needs o be some hing going on beyond he echnology i sel
ha leads o his “accep abili y”. In o he wo ds, we canno only
ocus on cha ac e is ics o he echnology i sel wi hou u he
con ex .
An empi ical example o such disag eemen s a ound accep -
abili y can be ound in p e ious esea ch abou wi ness expe-
iences o phone calls on ains. Some passenge s ind o he
peoples’ phone calls “annoying” o “in usi e” (Monk e al., 2004a).
Bu in o he s udies, passenge s enjoyed lis ening in (Lo e, 2001,
No man & Benne ,2014). Pu di e en ly, he same ype o in e ac-
ion can cause opposing expe iences o di e en wi nesses, and
he e is no common ag eemen among hem.
Thi d, as a measu emen -o ien ed app oach, he social accep -
abili y li e a u e educes a social si ua ion o measu able ac o s
ha supposedly cha ac e ize i . Bu he ela ionship be ween
hese “measu ables” and ac ual socially si ua ed expe iences is
no clea .
Some o he simple ools summa ize all social si ua ions in o
one abs ac desc ip ion (e.g., “in public”; Mon e o e al., 2010)o
ely on a single, ep esen a i e si ua ion (e.g.,“on a busy sidewalk”;
Koelle e al., 2018). Simila o he supposed ag eemen among
people desc ibed abo e, such summa ies imply some common-
ali y among “social si ua ions” in how hey in luence si ua ed
expe iences. Howe e , some in e ac ions such as phone calls can
lead o undamen ally di e en expe iences, depending on he
social si ua ion. Fo example, i he g andpa en s call du ing a
amily b eak as , a phone call may lead o posi i e, sha ed wi ness
expe iences (a leas o some amily membe s). In con as , a
phone call in a lib a y could lead o mos ly nega i e expe iences
(Uhde & Hassenzahl, 2021).
Wi hin his measu emen -o ien ed line o hinking, he cu -
en ly mos sophis ica ed app oach o dis inguish be ween social
si ua ions is based on measu able p oxy ma ke s o si ua ions.
Speci ically, he “Audience-and-Loca ion Axes” (ALA) di e en i-
a e be ween six “audiences” who wi ness he in e ac ion (alone,
pa ne , iends, colleagues, s ange s, amily) and six “loca ions”
whe e i is pe o med (home, pa emen o sidewalk, d i ing,
passenge on a bus o ain, pub o es au an , wo kplace; Rico
&B ews e , 2010). The idea is ha such ma ke s could indica e in
which loca ions and wi h which audiences an in e ac ion would
lead o mo e posi i e o nega i e expe iences, and acco dingly
be mo e o less accep able. Following his line o hinking, he
way owa ds imp o ed measu es o socially si ua ed expe iences
would be o add u he ma ke s beyond audiences and loca ions
(e.g., day ime, empe a u e, o noise), un il hey su icien ly “cap-
u e” a social si ua ion.
Howe e , his mo e sophis ica ed app oach is also limi ed. By
so ing audiences and loca ions in o “ca ego ies”, i implies a
ce ain cohe ence wi hin each ca ego y and di e ences be ween
hem. Bu in p ac ice, he e can be d as ic di e ences wi hin
a ca ego y (e.g., wo amily membe s can expe ience he same
g oup call di e en ly). In addi ion, di e en ca ego ies can o e -
lap (e.g., a amily membe can also be a colleague). Thus, he
meaning o a “ amily” audience sco e is no ob ious, and i s
di e ence o a “colleague” sco e no necessa ily meaning ul. The
mo e undamen al c i ique o his app oach is ha i a emp s o
measu e social si ua ions as disc e e, clea ly delimi ed en i ies,
which a e sepa a e om he in e ac ion i sel . The in e ac ion
is modeled o happen wi hin he si ua ion. An al e na i e iew
is o unde s and he in e ac ion as pa o he si ua ion, in e -
wo en wi h o he elemen s (Dou ish, 2004). This b ings us o
he wo k on social si ua edness g ounded in social-in e p e i is
heo ies.
2.2 Theo e ical Wo k on Social Si ua edness
The p e ious sec ion co e ed se e al ways in which i is di icul
o simply measu e social si ua ions and hei ela ion o use
and wi ness expe iences. He e, we will in oduce some o he
heo e ical easons behind hese di icul ies. Suchman (2006)ou -
lined many o hese in he wo k on he si ua edness o e bal
in e ac ions wi h “in elligen ” agen s. A key conce n she aises
is ha he idea o a “si ua ion” as a p e-exis ing and objec i ely
measu able en i y, ha somehow shapes an in e ac ion, does
no ma ch wi h how ac ual in e ac ions and expe iences ela e
o each o he . In e ac ions such as e bal con e sa ions o en
ely on ad hoc ac ions and eac ions. They a e based on ecip o-
cal, subjec i e in e p e a ions and momen a y p edic ions abou
possible consequences o si ua ed ac ion. Expe iences a e hen
shaped e ospec i ely by pos hoc easoning. Fo example, he
leng h o a pause be ween (speech) ac s is con ingen on o he
si ua ional cha ac e is ics. I can ca y a ious meanings ha
may change o e ime and people can in e p e hem “co ec ly”o
no . In p ac ice, i wo speake s s a o alk simul aneously a e
a pause, hey will no ice he p oblem and one o hem will usually
s op alking (Sacks e al., 1974), which allows o a con inued,
meaning ul con e sa ion. The meaning o such si ua ed elemen s
as he leng h o a pause is no objec i ely p ede e mined. I
elies on subjec i e in e p e a ions, an icipa ions o each o he ’s
in e p e a ions, and ad hoc epai wo k.
We can obse e simila pe o mances, in e p e a ions, and
epai wo k wi h non- e bal in e ac ions as well. Fo example,
Go man (1959) has de eloped a ecip ocal model o how humans
in e p e each o he ’s beha io in hei e o s o manage social
in e ac ions. In ha sense, a seemingly simple pe o mance, such
as a mobile phone call on a ain, could be in e p e ed by wi -
nesses o mean many hings. I can be a powe demons a ion o
a pu pose ul iola ion o social no ms. I may also jus be caused
by he cul u al unawa eness o a ou is . O i may be seen as a
p ac ice ha is accep able o e en enjoyable o o he passen-
ge s. Likewise, he pe o me can an icipa e and sugges ce ain
“misunde s andings” ha wo k in hei in e es (e.g., “I’m jus a
ou is who does no know he ules”), which he wi nesses may
again an icipa e and so o h (see Go man, 1959, o an elabo a e
discussion o such p ocesses). In sum, p e ious wo k g ounded in
social-in e p e i is pe spec i es on social in e ac ions highligh
hei undamen al ambigui y. Di e en in e p e a ions o why o
how someone pe o ms an in e ac ion a e c ucial o unde s and
4|In e ac ing wi h Compu e s, 2025
he associa ed expe iences. This makes clea , objec i e analyses
di icul .
Dou ish (2004) discussed his p oblem o si ua edness u he ,
wi h a pa icula ocus on esea ch in HCI. He iden i ied
wo seemingly incommensu able app oaches, as illus a ed
abo e, g ounded in ei he posi i is o phenomenological/social-
in e p e i is esea ch pa adigms. The posi i is app oach
encompasses measu emen -o ien ed wo k such as he social
accep abili y li e a u e. I is mainly conce ned wi h ways o
quan i y si ua ional elemen s, o hen s udy hei e ec s on
expe iences. Such esea ch uses objec i e measu es o conc e e
si ua ional ea u es (e.g., he ALA). Howe e , i s abili y o
meaning ully p edic si ua ed expe iences is limi ed. I conside s
elemen s in isola ion and o e looks hei mu ual dependence,
and he subjec i e, in e p e a ional cha ac e o in e ac ions and
expe iences.
On he o he side, Dou ish posi ions phenomenological / social-
in e p e i is app oaches, which ocus on si ua ed expe iences.
This esea ch concep ualizes in e ac ions wi hin a mesh o si -
ua ed elemen s ha may meaning ully ela e o each o he . How-
e e , hese “meaning ul ela ions” be ween elemen s depend on
he in e ac ions hemsel es. Following his app oach, measu ing
elemen s as independen “ ea u es” o desc ibe a si ua ion is o en
no use ul. To illus a e his poin , hink o a li ing oom wi h a
ca pe ull o Lego b icks as a “si ua ional elemen ”. These can be
ele an o he (pain ul) expe ience o a “walking ba e oo ” in e -
ac ion. Bu hey a e less ele an o “sleeping on he couch”. In
o he wo ds, he ele ance o his pa icula elemen o si ua ed
expe iences depends on he in e ac ion o in e es .
Wi h oday’s compu ing powe , we could s ill y o collec all
elemen s and possible in e ac ions in a gian da abase o c ea e a
compendium o mu ual ele ance. Bu his lea es he p oblem o
si ua ed, subjec i e in e p e a ions unsol ed. The ba e oo walke
may wonde who pu he Lego b icks he e, and whe he hey
ep esen a delibe a e o ense, a unny p ank, o jus ca elessness.
This in e p e a ion (independen o he “ eal” s o y behind he
Lego b icks) can change hei si ua ed expe ience, which u he
complica es how we can s udy hem, leas o all “objec i ely”.
Uhde & Hassenzahl (2021) ex ended his pe spec i e o social
si ua ions. They illus a e he social dynamics and meaning ul
ela ions be ween co-loca ed in e ac ions, pe o med by di e en
people. To ha end, hey sugges a hough expe imen based
on a common, “cons an ” in e ac ion: a mobile phone call. While
keeping he phone call i sel “unchanged” (a leas ini ially), hey
cons uc a ange o social scena ios a ound i , whe e o he peo-
ple pe o m a ious co-loca ed in e ac ions. This highligh s how
hese “wi ness in e ac ions”, independen o he phone call i sel ,
can a ec he expe iences i c ea es. Fo example, a phone call in a
lib a y, whe e o he people ead, would usually be expe ienced as
dis u bing because i dis u bs he eading in e ac ions. Bu du ing
a ock conce , whe e mos people dance and sing, he “same”
phone call would no bo he anyone, because i does no a ec
hei si ua ed in e ac ions (while he phone call i sel would be
s ongly dis u bed). They a gue ha he ela ions be ween co-
loca ed in e ac ions, such as “making a phone call”, “ eading”,
o “dancing” a e key o unde s anding expe iences a ound in e -
ac ions wi h echnology. Thus, as a way o wa d, hey sugges
mo ing away om si ua ion ca ego ies, such as “lib a y” o “ ock
conce ”, and a he ake hese as sho hand o “a si ua ion
whe e people end o ead and wo k”, o “a si ua ion whe e people
dance and sing”. These cons ella ions o in e ac ions de e mine
which o he in e ac ions “ i in” and which will be expe ienced as
dis u bing.
2.3 Social Si ua edness As Cons ella ions o
P ac ices
To analyze such cons ella ions o in e ac ions (o “p ac ices”;
Reckwi z, 2002,Sho e e al., 2012) seems o b ing mo e com-
plexi y, compa ed wi h simple si ua ion ca ego ies. I we wan
o s udy how people expe ience, say, phone calls on a ain, we
now need o conside all o he co-si ua ed in e ac ions, ind ou
how each o hem ela es o he phone call, and how people
in e p e each o he ’s in e ac ions. This will po en ially p oduce
ambiguous da a (e.g., phone calls ha e bo h posi i e and nega-
i e e ec s on wi ness expe iences), which we need o in eg a e
in o some hing use ul. In addi ion, he speci ic cons ella ion o
in e ac ions can change momen a ily, which again ans o ms si -
ua ed expe iences. Thus, his analysis con on s us wi h p ac ical
challenges.
Bu his inc eased complexi y also helps o e come p oblems
elsewhe e. Si ua ion ca ego ies canno accoun o in a-ca ego y
di e ences (e.g., silen s. egula compa men s on a ain), in e -
ca ego y simila i ies (e.g., a ain ha is also someone’s wo k-
place), and ca ego y o e laps (e.g., a es au an on a ain). Bu
he social-in e p e i is app oach can.Simila i ies and di e ences
can be desc ibed based on sha ed and dis inc pa e ns wi hin
he cons ella ion o p ac ices. Fo example, silen and egula
compa men s sha e ce ain p ac ices (e.g., si ing, wo king), bu
no o he s (e.g., making a phone call). I we in oduce a new
in e ac ion wi h echnology and s udy how i ela es o hese
in e ac ions on he ain, he speci ic compa ibili ies and con lic s
can se e as indica o s o si ua ed expe iences ha can ans e
o o he ain si ua ions. Fo example, he insigh ha he new
in e ac ion con lic s wi h speci ic silen compa men p ac ices,
bu no wi h he egula compa men p ac ices, can be aluable
o designe s.
In sum, we ha e ou lined wo di e en app oaches o s udying
socially si ua ed in e ac ions wi h echnology and hei asso-
cia ed expe iences. Bo h come wi h hei own challenges. The
measu emen -o ien ed app oach p o ides easily ob ainable da a,
bu i is o en unclea wha hese da a indica e abou socially si -
ua ed expe iences. The social-in e p e i is wo k highligh s ways
in which in e ac ions and expe iences a e embedded in a mesh
o si ua ed elemen s and in e p e a ions. Howe e , he e is a lack
o ools o make such a social-in e p e i is pe spec i e accessible
o p ac i ione s o in o m design decisions and unde s and expe-
ien ial e ec s o a conc e e, socially si ua ed in e ac ion wi h
echnology. The Wi ness Expe ience In en o y (WEI) we in oduce
in he ollowing is designed o add ess his gap.
3THE WITNESS EXPERIENCE INVENTORY
Gi en he p ac ical di icul ies o he social-in e p e i is
app oach and he p oblems wi h exis ing measu emen -o ien ed
app oaches, we i s se a scope ha we hink a p agma ic ool
can meaning ully add ess o p oduce use ul indings. To ha end,
we made he ollowing decisions o he scope o he WEI:
1) The WEI ocuses on unde s anding he ela ionships
be ween si ua ed elemen s—p ima ily co-loca ed in e ac-
ions o use s and wi nesses—and highligh s subjec i e
in e p e a ions.
2) Ins ead o p esc ibing a ixed se o social si ua ions, we
s a om he expe ien ial ou come. Wi nesses desc ibe si -
ua ions ha led o pa icula ly posi i e and nega i e expe i-
ences in ela ion o an in e ac i e echnology. F om he e,
we y o unde s and how hese expe iences come abou
Uhde e al. |5
and which si ua ional cha ac e is ics seem mos essen ial
o ha expe ience.
3) The goal is no o de i e an o e all “wi ness expe ience
sco e”. Ins ead, he WEI highligh s he a ie y o di e en
wi ness expe iences in ela ion o an in e ac ion wi h ech-
nology, and expe ien ial isks and oppo uni ies.
4) The goal is also no o de elop an all-encompassing, gene al-
izable assessmen o socially si ua ed, echnology-media ed
expe iences. Ins ead, we acknowledge he speci ici ies o
each si ua ion and in e ac ion wi h echnology, which may
be impo an o how wi nesses expe ience i .
5) Finally, he WEI should encou age e lec ion on possible
design decisions and hei impac on di e en (g oups o )
wi nesses. O en, such decisions ha e posi i e e ec s o
some g oups o wi nesses, bu nega i e e ec s o o he s.
The WEI should make such ade-o s appa en and suppo
e lec ion.
In line wi h his scope, he WEI is based on a quali a i e
esea ch app oach using in e iews. This helps examine he
de ailed ela ions be ween a socially si ua ed in e ac ion wi h
echnology and i s su oundings, and keeps i lexible o
unexpec ed si ua ional cha ac e is ics. I also helps unde s and
he easons behind posi i e, nega i e, and ambiguous ela ions
among in e ac ions, o la e in o m design decisions.
We selec ed and adap ed a speci ic in e iew me hod (IPA;
Smi h e al., 2009), because i is al eady es ablished in expe ience-
o ien ed HCI esea ch (e.g., Laschke e al., 2013,Uhde e al., 2021).
I is easy o use wi h limi ed esou ces and a small sample, and
lexible o be adap ed o a ious si ua ions and in e ac ions o
in e es . Fo ou ini ial s udy, i also allowed us o collec da a
in he same way as in ended o u u e uses o he WEI, while
boo s apping he coding empla e desc ibed below o acili a e
u u e analyses.
As a gene al o ma , he WEI ocuses on posi i e and nega i e
wi ness expe iences o an in e ac ion wi h echnology. Pa ic-
ipan s i s desc ibe hei own expe ience as wi nesses. Then
we collec a lis o o he co-loca ed (wi ness) p ac ices and ask
pa icipan s o ela e hem o he in e ac ion, o lea n abou
po en ial o he wi ness expe iences. This o ma co esponds
wi h he social-in e p e i is pe spec i es ou lined abo e (e.g.,
Dou ish, 2004,Uhde & Hassenzahl, 2021).
3.1 In e iew S udy: O e iew
To u n he heo e ical conside a ions in o a p ac ical ool and
es i s use ulness, we an an in e iew s udy ollowing he WEI
in e iew o ma as desc ibed below (see also Figu e 1). This s udy
se ed h ee main goals:
S udy Goal 1: To c ea e ini ial empi ical da a abou he complex
ela ions be ween in e ac ions wi h echnology and
wi ness expe iences
S udy Goal 2: To es and e ine he WEI in e iew p ocedu e,
and o boo s ap he coding empla e, which can be
used as an in o med s a ing poin o he e alua-
ion o u u e wo k
S udy Goal 3: To es how he WEI can be used o p oduce insigh s
o ( e)designing socially si ua ed echnology
3.2 Me hod
3.2.1 Pa icipan s
We ec ui ed 15 pa icipan s h ough an agency ( emale =8,
male =7, meanage =34.73,sdage =14.57, angeage =[18, 60])
in a la ge ci y in Ge many and an he in e iews in one o
Fig. 1. The p ocedu e o he WEI, as used in he s udy and wi h some
ecommenda ions o u u e uses: We had no es ic ed numbe o
wi ness p ac ices in ou s udy and an a ull empla e analysis wi h a
minimal a p io i empla e. In ou s udy, we epea ed he p ocedu e wi h
each pa icipan o wo o h ee in e ac ions.
hei in e iew ooms. Pa icipan s had a ious backg ounds and
occupa ions, including o ice cle ks, high school and uni e si y
s uden s, an elec ician, and a p ojec coo dina o . The in e iews
las ed o a ound 47 minu es on a e age.
3.2.2 P ocedu e
The in e iewe welcomed he pa icipan s o he in e iew oom,
b ie ly explained he pu pose o he s udy and his in e es in
how people expe ience echnologies in social si ua ions. All pa -
icipan s hen signed a consen o m ha in o med hem abou
he anonymous da a analysis, ideo and audio eco ding, and
hei igh o qui he in e iew a all imes wi hou nega i e
consequences.
The in e iews ollowed a semi-s uc u ed o ma , ocused
on wo example in e ac ions wi h echnology and hei associ-
a ed wi ness expe iences. We also p epa ed one backup in e ac-
ion in case pa icipan s had insu icien expe ience wi h one o
he examples and could no desc ibe how hey hink i would
a ec wi ness expe iences. We coun e balanced he choice o
in e ac ions be ween pa icipan s. Fo each in e ac ion, we asked
6|In e ac ing wi h Compu e s, 2025
Fig. 2. Fou index ca ds abou in e ac ions wi h d ones and a ached
s icky no es wi h commen s abou co-si ua ed in e ac ions.
pa icipan s o hink abou pe sonal expe iences hey had as a
wi ness. They desc ibed hei hough s, eelings, and beha io by
epo ing hei expe iences, and h ough ollow-up ques ions in a
ladde ing o ma (Reynolds & Gu man, 1988).
Fo each in e ac ion, he in e iewe showed he pa icipan s
wo pho os o people in e ac ing wi h he echnology and asked i
hey a e amilia wi h his in e ac ion. The pho os se ed as a sim-
ple illus a ion o cla i y he in e ac ion o in e es . I pa icipan s
we e amilia wi h i , he asked hem o desc ibe a si ua ion based
on hei own expe ience whe e his in e ac ion wi h echnology
has led o posi i e expe iences o he su ounding people. I hey
had no such expe ience (e.g., no posi i e wi ness expe ience wi h
a mobile phone call), hey could also desc ibe a posi i e scena io
hey could hink o . O he wise, he in e iewe mo ed on o he
nex case and used he backup in e ac ion i he e was enough
ime le .
While he pa icipan ga e an ini ial desc ip ion o he posi i e
expe ience and social si ua ion, he in e iewe no ed down he
label o he si ua ion used by he pa icipan (e.g., “ca é”) on an
index ca d and hen asked hem o name he i e o six mos
ypical p ac ices people pe o m in his kind o si ua ion. The
in e iewe hen w o e down each o hese p ac ices on a s icky
no e and a ached i o he index ca d (see Figu e 2).
In he nex s ep, he wen h ough each o hese co-si ua ed
p ac ices one by one and asked he pa icipan how hey hink
his p ac ice ela es o he in e ac ion wi h echnology. Al hough
he ini ial expe ience o his si ua ion was posi i e, he ela-
ion o indi idual p ac ices was some imes desc ibed as neu al
o nega i e. The in e iewe hen asked ollow-up ques ions o
be e unde s and how he pa icipan makes sense o his ela-
ion be ween he in e ac ion and each o he o he p ac ices,
and he associa ed expe iences ha un old. A e he pa icipan
had inished hei desc ip ion, he in e iewe summa ized how
he unde s ood he ela ions and checked whe he ha was in
line wi h he pa icipan ’s unde s anding. He hen asked he
pa icipan whe he hey see a way he in e ac ion could be
done di e en ly o educe nega i e o emphasize posi i e wi ness
expe iences. Finally, he asked he pa icipan o name simila
si ua ions ha would lead o simila wi ness expe iences. In o al,
he desc ip ion o one si ua ion ypically ook a ound 10 o 15
minu es.
A e his posi i e expe ience, he in e iewe epea ed he
same p ocedu e o he same in e ac ion, bu his ime asked
he pa icipan o desc ibe a nega i e wi ness expe ience. Finally,
he epea ed he same p ocedu e o he second in e ac i e ech-
nology and, i necessa y, wi h he backup echnology. A e he
in e iew, he in e iewe ga e a sho deb ie ing and answe ed
u he ques ions by he pa icipan be o e hanking hem o
hei pa icipa ion and ending he in e iew session.
3.2.3 Ma e ial: Eigh In e ac i e Technologies
We selec ed in e ac i e echnologies o his s udy o co e a
la ge a ie y o in e ac ions and associa ed wi ness expe iences.
To ha end, we de ined wo dimensions and looked o examples
wi h some a ia ion on hem (see Figu e 3). The i s dimension
was mean o c ea e some a ie y in “no el y” o in e ac ions,
because p e ious wo k a ound ea ly and la e adop e s o echnol-
ogy indica ed ha he empo al dimension may ha e an e ec on
how people expe ience an in e ac ion (e.g., Mon e o e al., 2010).
In addi ion, we selec ed a ange o echnologies be ween mo e
“inwa d” o ien ed and mo e “ou wa d” o ien ed examples. Such
ou wa d-o ien a ion o “pu pose ul isibili y” o an in e ac ion
om he wi ness pe spec i e has been s udied be o e as a cen al
de e minan o hei si ua ed expe iences (Ree es e al., 2005).
Taken oge he , ou selec ion included a mix o less common,
mo e “inwa d” o ien ed echnologies such as Vi ual Reali y (VR)
glasses, mo e “ou wa d” bu unusual echnologies like a d one,
and mo e es ablished echnologies like a sma phone, lap op, and
came a.
3.2.4 Analysis
To analyze he in e iews, we i s ansc ibed hem in Ge man.
These ansc ip s se ed as he da a se o a Templa e Analysis
conduc ed by he i s and second au ho . Templa e Analysis
(King, 2004,King e al., 2018) is a “codebook” a ian o Thema ic
Analysis (B aun & Cla ke, 2006,2021), wi h a pa icula app oach
o he de elopmen o a coding empla e. I is usually ecom-
mended o e y la ge samples whe e he empla e can s eamline
he coding p ocess. Howe e , i seemed pa icula ly use ul in ou
case o h ee easons.
Fi s , Templa e Analysis o e s an es ablished, i e a i e p ocess
ha al e na es be ween indi idual coding sessions and ollow-up
discussions. This allowed us o in eg a e wo indi idual eadings
o he ma e ial (by he wo code s) in o an ag eed e sion.
Second, he Templa e Analysis p ocess con e ges in o a inal
empla e, which se es as a “semisolid” ou come o he analy-
sis (see Figu e 4). In ou s udy, his empla e co e ed he si ua-
ional aspec s ha seemed ele an o wi ness expe iences o
he a ious example in e ac ions in an u ban con ex in Ge many.
As a side bene i , his empla e al eady co e s a solid baseline
o u u e applica ions o he WEI, wi h many ele an aspec s.
Ne e heless, he empla e emains easily adap able, o example
when used in di e en cul u al se ings o wi h di e en in e ac-
i e echnologies. Thus, we conside his semi- lexibili y a use ul
ade-o be ween openness (which is necessa y gi en he a ie y
o social si ua ions) and “in o med de aul s”.
Thi d, Templa e Analysis can be conduc ed wi h an op ional “a
p io i empla e” in case he esea che s al eady ha e pa icula
guiding ques ions. In ou case, we had an ini ial in e es
in posi i e and nega i e wi ness expe iences, si ua ions ha
seem especially (un-)sui able o he in e ac ions, and how
use s and wi nesses eac o he in e ac ions. We we e also
in e es ed in aspec s ha conce n he echnology design and
po en ial ambiguous expe iences. Ou a p io i empla e included
codes acco ding o hese in e es s as a s a ing poin (see
Uhde e al. |7
Fig. 3. The eigh example echnologies used in he s udy, oughly aligned on he wo axes om “inwa d” o “ou wa d” o ien a ion, and om
“es ablished, ypical” o “unusual”. The pho os in he igu e a e he ones used as illus a i e ma e ial in he s udy.
Uhde e al., 2025, o supplemen a y ma e ial o de ails abou
he empla e de elopmen ).
Du ing he analysis, he wo code s i s used he a p io i
empla e o sepa a ely code h ee in e iews ha co e ed all eigh
example in e ac ions. A e his i s ound, hey held a deb ie ing
session o discuss unclea ex passages and any changes o he
empla e, which led o a i s i e a ion o he empla e. Then hey
each coded h ee u he in e iews, ag eed on a second i e a ion
o he empla e, and epea ed his s ep ano he ime o de elop a
hi d i e a ion based on all 15 in e iews. Finally, he i s au ho
used his upda ed empla e o code all 15 in e iews a second
ime. This led o a ew mino changes bo h code s subsequen ly
discussed and ag eed on o he inal e sion o he empla e.
4RESULTS
The inal empla e (see Figu e 4 o an o e iew) p o ides de ailed
desc ip ions o a ious si ua ional elemen s ha can be ele an
o shaping wi ness expe iences. He e, we summa ize he mos
cen al aspec s om ou s udy, gi en he speci ic echnologies
and cul u al se ings, in h ee key hemes. Following his gene al
summa y, we desc ibe h ee design cases o illus a e how he
indings om he WEI can be used o in o m design decisions, and
which align wi h hese hemes.
4.1 O e all Analysis
4.1.1 Ambigui ies
We ha e al eady a gued ha in e ac ions wi h echnology
can lead o di e en wi ness expe iences. Fo example, some
people ind phone calls dis u bing (Monk e al., 2004a)and
o he s like o lis en in (Lo e, 2001). Ou s udy p o ided u he
insigh s in o hese ambiguous wi ness expe iences. We dis-
inguish be ween wi ness- ela ed and use - ela ed aspec s o
ambigui y.
Wi ness- ela ed aspec s: indi idual di e ences, mood, social
oles, and g oup membe ships.
One eason o he ambigui y simply ela es o indi idual di e -
ences among wi nesses. Fo example, one pa icipan desc ibed a
si ua ion whe e she made a phone call in a ca é. A woman nea by
was no ably annoyed by his: “she sa wi h he back owa ds me, and
she was e y annoyed by my phone call. So she u ned a ound again
and again” [I1]. In a di e en si ua ion, wi h a di e en wi ness
bu also in a ca é, he wi ness expe ience was qui e di e en .
The pa icipan made a phone call abou he son who had some
p oblems in school: “ hen she lis ened in and hea d all o ha , al hough
I hough nobody would hea ha . And hen she somehow alked o me
and we ... alked abou i ... we somehow became iends o e his, she
also had a simila issue wi h he daugh e and yes ... ha seems o ha e
come ac oss as ... posi i e” [I1].
Rela edly, he cu en mood o he wi ness can a ec hei
expe ience. One pa icipan desc ibed a scena io o a phone call
on a ain:
“I some imes no ice ha , when I make a phone call somehow, you
look a he o he passenge s a bi , you know? How does he look, is
he elaxed, is he a bi g umpy? [...] People’s us a ion ole ance can
be a bi p oblema ic some imes, you know? I see ha again and again,
you wai o he ain in F ank u , you know? And he ain doesn’
come o is 30 minu es delayed, people a e al eady uming, so i ’s a bi
di icul uh ... o go abou you business, make phone calls e c.” [I10].
Indi idual di e ences and in e p e a ions o o he people’s
mood can be di icul o designe s o add ess. By edesigning he
phone call in e ac ion in hese examples, designe s can suppo
ei he side. They can side wi h he wi nesses who eel dis u bed,
by making he in e ac ion less no able (see e.g., Kimu a e al., 2019,
Li e al., 2019). Bu hey can also suppo he posi i e expe iences
(e.g., Desme & Hassenzahl, 2012). I may be di icul o de elop a
solu ion ha ca e s o bo h g oups o wi nesses.
8|In e ac ing wi h Compu e s, 2025
Fig. 4. O e iew o he hemes, sub hemes, and subsub hemes o ou analysis, which a e included in he coding empla e. See Uhde e al. (2025)o he
supplemen a y ma e ial o ull code desc ip ions and u he de ails.
A di e en ype o ambigui y ela es o he di e en social
oles o wi nesses. One pa icipan desc ibed how he was espon-
sible o se ing up VR glasses o a ac po en ial new employ-
ees du ing a job ai . The candida es could use he VR glasses
and o he s could wa ch hem. Bu his own wi ness expe ience
was di e en because o his ole: “i I am pa o he c ew a
he s and, I need o make su e ha no hing happens o he u u e
candida es. In ha case I ha e a di e en ask han he in e es ed
isi o s who look o a job and see ‘ah, hey do some hing o e he e,
ha seems un, I wan o ha e a look!’ So i ’s di e en , depending
on he a ge g oups” [I6]. This ype o ambigui y can be easie
o add ess. In his case, designe s may p io i ize he expe ience
o he candida es o e he employees. They a e also no in an
inhe en con lic as in he phone call example abo e, and he e
may be s aigh o wa d ways o design a posi i e expe ience
o bo h.
Uhde e al. |15
he WEI b ings hese elemen s back oge he . Th ough he ela-
ions o o example he in e ac ion and su ounding p ac ices,
i can unco e ele an si ua ional cha ac e is ics ha unde pin
wi ness expe iences. We hope ha his wo k inspi es u he
esea ch ha akes a social-in e p e i is s ance on socially si -
ua ed expe iences and helps p ac i ione s in eg a e his pe spec-
i e in hei design p ocess.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The ( ansla ed) in e iew guide and coding empla e can be
ound in Uhde e al. (2025) and he supplemen a y ma e ial. The
in e iew eco dings and ansc ip s will no be sha ed publicly
o p ese e he pa icipan s’ anonymi y. Please con ac he i s
au ho o possibili ies o access hese da a.
Acknowledgmen s
This p ojec was in pa unded by he Deu sche Fo schungs-
gemeinscha (DFG, Ge man Resea ch Founda ion)—G an No.
425827565, as pa o P io i y P og am SPP2199 Scalable In e -
ac ion Pa adigms o Pe asi e Compu ing En i onmen s. I was
inalized wi h unding by Tokyo College, UTIAS, The Uni e si y o
Tokyo. We would like o hank ou colleagues a Siegen Uni e si y
and a Tokyo College o hei aluable eedback, and all pa ici-
pan s o hei pa icipa ion.
Re e ences
Ahls öm, D.,Hasan, K. and I ani, P. (2014) A e you com o able doing
ha ? Accep ance s udies o a ound-de ice ges u es in and o
public se ings. In P oceedings o he 16 h In e na ional Con e ence
on Human–Compu e In e ac ion wi h Mobile De ices & Se ices -
MobileHCI’14, pp. 193–202. ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Bajo unai e, L.,B ews e , S. and Williamson, J. R. (2023) Reali y
ancho s: b inging cues om eali y o inc ease accep ance o
imme si e echnologies in ansi . In P oceedings o he ACM on
Human–Compu e In e ac ion (MobileHCI), pp. 1–28. ACM, New Yo k,
NY, USA.
Baume ,E.P.and B ubake , J. R. (2017) Pos -use ism. In P oceedings
o he 2017 ACM Con e ence on Human Fac o s in Compu ing Sys ems,
pp. 6291–6303. ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
B aun, V. and Cla ke, V. (2006) Using hema ic analysis in psy-
chology. Quali a i e Resea ch in Psychology,3, 77–101. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
B aun, V. and Cla ke, V. (2021) One size i s all? Wha
coun s as quali y p ac ice in ( e lexi e) hema ic analysis?
Quali a i e Resea ch in Psychology,18, 328–352. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238.
Callahan-Lyon, P. (2014) Elec onic ciga e es: human heal h e ec s.
Tobacco Con ol,23, 36–40.
Connelly, S.,Richa dson, T. and Miles, T. (2006) Si ua ed legi -
imacy: delibe a e a enas and he new u al go e nance.
Jou nal o Ru al S udies,22, 267–277. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.
j u s ud.2005.11.008.
da Sil a, C. L. C. A.,Daka ay, H. M.,O’B ien, K.,Mon ie h, D.,Xiao,
N. and Ojcius,D.M.(2021) E ec s o elec onic ciga e e ae osol
exposu e on o al and sys emic heal h. Biome ical Jou nal,44,
252–259. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.bj.2020.07.003.
Desme , P. and Hassenzahl, M. (2012) Towa ds Happiness: Possibili y-
D i en Design. In Zaca ias, M., de Oli ei a, J. V. (eds), Human–
Compu e In e ac ion: The Agency Pe spec i e, ol. 396, pp. 3–27.
Sp inge Be lin, Heidelbe g, Be lin, Heidelbe g.
Dey, A. K. (2001) Unde s anding and using con ex . Pe sonal and Ubiq-
ui ous Compu ing,5,4–7.h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s007790170019.
Dou ish, P. (2004) Wha we alk abou when we alk abou con-
ex . Pe sonal and Ubiqui ous Compu ing,8, 19–30. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1007/s00779-003-0253-8.
Go man, E. (1959) The P esen a ion o Sel in E e yday Li e. Ancho
Books, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Hassenzahl, M. (2010) Expe ience design: echnology o all he igh
easons. Syn hesis Lec u es on Human-Cen e ed In o ma ics,3, 1–95.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/978-3-031-02191-6.
Hassenzahl, M.,Die enbach, S. and Gö i z, A. (2010) Needs, a ec ,
and in e ac i e p oduc s— ace s o use expe ience. In e -
ac ing Wi h Compu e s,22, 353–362. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.
in com.2010.04.002.
Hassenzahl, M. and T ac insky, N. (2006) Use expe ience—a esea ch
agenda. Beha iou and In o ma ion Technology,25, 91–97. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1080/01449290500330331.
Janle , L.-E. and S ol e man, E. (2010) Complex in e ac ion. ACM
T ansac ions on Compu e –Human In e ac ion,17,1–32.h ps://doi.
o g/10.1145/1746259.1746262.
Kimu a, N.,Kono, M. and Rekimo o, J. (2019) So o oce: an ul asound
imaging-based silen speech in e ac ion using deep neu al ne -
wo ks. In P oceedings o he ACM Con e ence on Human Fac o s in
Compu ing Sys ems, p. 11. ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
King, N. (2004) Using empla es in he hema ic analysis o ex . In
Cassell, C., Symon, G. (eds), Essen ial Guide o Quali a i e Me hods
in O ganiza ional Resea ch, pp. 256–270. SAGE Publica ions L d., Los
Angeles, CA, USA.
King, N.,B ooks, J. and Taba i, S. (2018) Templa e analysis in busi-
ness and managemen esea ch. In Ciesielska, M., Jemielniak, D.
(eds), Quali a i e Me hodologies in O ganiza ion S udies, pp. 179–206.
Sp inge , Be lin, Heidelbe g, Ge many.
Koelle, M.,Ali, A. E.,Cobus, V.,Heu en, W. and Boll, S. (2017) All
abou accep abili y? Iden i ying ac o s o he adop ion o da a
glasses. In P oceedings o he 2017 ACM Con e ence on Human Fac o s
in Compu ing Sys ems, pp. 295–300. ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Koelle, M.,Anan hana ayan, S. and Boll, S. (2020) Social accep abili y
in HCI: a su ey o me hods, measu es, and design s a egies.
In P oceedings o he 2020 ACM Con e ence on Human Fac o s in
Compu ing Sys ems, pp. 1–19. ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Koelle, M.,Anan hana ayan, S.,Czupalla, S.,Heu en, W. and Boll,
S. (2018) You sma glasses’ came a bo he s me! Explo ing
op -in and op -ou ges u es o p i acy media ion. In P oceed-
ings o he 10 h No dic Con e ence on Human–Compu e In e ac ion—
No diCHI’18, pp. 473–481. ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Koelle, M.,K anz, M. and Mölle , A. (2015) Don’ look a me ha
way! Unde s anding use a i udes owa ds da a glasses usage. In
P oceedings o he 17 h In e na ional Con e ence on Human–Compu e
In e ac ion wi h Mobile De ices and Se ices—MobileHCI’15,pp.
362–372. ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Ko sgaa d, H.,Lyle, P.,Saad-Sulonen, J.,Klokmose, C. N.,Nouwens,
M. and Bødke , S. (2022) Collec i es and hei a i ac ecologies.
P oceedings o he ACM on Human–Compu e In e ac ion,6, 1–26.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1145/3555533.
Laschke, M.,Hassenzahl, M.,B echmann, J.,Lenz, E. and Digel, M.
(2013) O e coming p oc as ina ion wi h emind. In P oceedings o
Designing Pleasu able P oduc s and In e aces (DPPI’13), pp. 77–85.
ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Li, R.,Wu, J. and S a ne , T. (2019) Tongueboa d: an o al in e ace o
sub le inpu . In P oceedings o he 10 h Augmen ed Human In e na-
ional Con e ence, pp. 1–9. USA. ACM, New Yo k, NY.
Lo e,S.(2001) Space in ade s: Do mobile phone con e sa ions in ade
peoples’ pe sonal space? In P oceedings o he 18 h In e na ional
16 |In e ac ing wi h Compu e s, 2025
Symposium on Human Fac o s in Telecommunica ions, pp. 125–131.
Be gen, No way.
McCann, W.,Pedneaul , A.,S oh , M. K. and Hemmens, C. (2017)
Upski ing: a s a u o y analysis o legisla i e esponses o ideo
oyeu ism 10 yea s down he oad. C iminal Jus ice Re iew,43,
1–20.
Mi chell, R. and Olsson, T. (2017) Ba ie s o b idging in e pe sonal
gaps: h ee inspi a ional design pa e ns o inc easing colloca ed
social in e ac ion. In P oceedings o he 8 h In e na ional Con e ence
on Communi ies and Technologies, pp. 2–11. ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Mi chell, R. and Olsson, T. (2019) Facili a ing he i s mo e: explo -
ing inspi a ional design pa e ns o aiding ini ia ion o social
encoun e s. In P oceedings o he 9 h In e na ional Con e ence on Com-
muni ies and Technologies, pp. 283–294. ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Monk, A.,Ca oll, J.,Pa ke , S. and Bly he, M. (2004a) Why a e mobile
phones annoying? Beha iou and In o ma ion Technology,23, 33–41.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/01449290310001638496.
Monk, A.,Fellas, E. and Ley, E. (2004b) Hea ing only one side
o no mal and mobile phone con e sa ions. Beha iou and
In o ma ion Technology,23, 301–305. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/01449
290410001712744.
Mon e o, C. S.,Alexande , J.,Ma shall, M. T. and Sub amanian, S.
(2010) Would you do ha ? Unde s anding social accep ance o
ges u al in e aces. In P oceedings o he 12 h In e na ional Con-
e ence on Human Compu e In e ac ion wi h Mobile De ices and
Se ices—MobileHCI’10, pp. 275–278. ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
No man, B. and Benne , D. (2014) A e mobile phone con e sa-
ions always so annoying? The ‘need- o-lis en’ e ec e- isi ed.
Beha iou and In o ma ion Technology,33, 1294–1305. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1080/0144929X.2013.876098.
Olsson, T.,Ja us iboonchai, P.,Wo ´
zniak, P.,Paaso aa a, S.,Väänänen,
K. and Luce o, A. (2020) Technologies o enhancing colloca ed
social in e ac ion: e iew o design solu ions and app oaches.
Compu e Suppo ed Coope a i e Wo k,29, 29–83. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1007/s10606-019-09345-0.
Pohl, H.,Mu esan, A. and Ho nbæk, K. (2019) Cha ing sub le in e ac-
ion in he HCI li e a u e. In P oceedings o he 2019 ACM Con e ence
on Human Fac o s in Compu ing Sys ems. ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Reckwi z, A. (2002) The s a us o he “ma e ial” in heo ies o
cul u e: om “social s uc u e” o “a e ac s”. Jou nal o
he Theo y o Social Beha iou ,32, 195–217. h ps://doi.o g/10.
1111/1468-5914.00183.
Ree es, S. (2011) A amewo k o designing in e aces in public
se ings. In Ree es, S. (ed.), Designing In e aces in Public Se ings,
pp. 141–175. Sp inge , London, UK.
Ree es, S.,Ben o d, S.,O’Malley, C. and F ase , M. (2005) Designing
he spec a o expe ience. In P oceedings o he SIGCHI Con e ence
on Human Fac o s in Compu ing Sys ems—CHI’05, pp. 741–750. ACM,
New Yo k, NY, USA.
Reynolds, T. J. and Gu man, J. (1988) Ladde ing heo y, me hod,
analysis, and in e p e a ion. Jou nal o Ad e ising Resea ch,28,
11–31.
Rico, J. and B ews e , S. (2010) Usable ges u es o mobile in e aces:
e alua ing social accep abili y. In P oceedings o he 2010 ACM
Con e ence on Human Fac o s in Compu ing Sys ems, pp. 887–896.
ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Sacks,H.,Scheglo , E. A. and Je e son, G. (1974) A simples sys ema -
ics o he o ganiza ion o u n- aking o con e sa ion. Language,
50, 696–735. h ps://doi.o g/10.1353/lan.1974.0010.
Schmid , A.,Beigl, M. and Gelle sen, H.-W. (1999) The e is mo e o
con ex han loca ion. Compu e G aphics,23, 893–901. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1016/S0097-8493(99)00120-X.
Sha on, T. and Koops, B.-J. (2021) The e hics o ina en ion: e i alis-
ing ci il ina en ion as a p i acy-p o ec ing mechanism in public
spaces. E hics and In o ma ion Technology,23, 331–343. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1007/s10676-020-09575-7.
Sho e, E.,Pan za , M. and Wa son, M. (2012) The Dynamics o Social
P ac ice: E e yday Li e and How I Changes. SAGE Publica ions L d.,
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Smi h, J.,Flowe s, P. and La kin, M. (2009) In e p e a i e Phenomenolog-
ical Analysis: Theo y, Me hod and Resea ch: Unde s anding Me hod and
Applica ion. SAGE Publica ions L d., New Yo k, NY, USA.
S amek, Z.,Sa o, A. J.,Zhou, Z.,Hosio, S. and Ya ani, K. (2023)
Sound a elle : explo ing abs ac ion and en anglemen in im-
b e c ea ion in e aces o syn hesize s. In P oceedings o he ACM
Con e ence on Designing In e ac i e Sys ems (DIS’23), pp. 95–114.
ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Suchman, L. (2006) Human–Machine Recon igu a ions: Plans and Si ua ed
Ac ions (2nd). Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Uhde, A.,D eye , L. and Hassenzahl, M. (2025) Wi ness Expe ience
In en o y (WEI). Coding Templa e and In e iew Guide.
Uhde, A. and Hassenzahl, M. (2021) Towa ds a be e unde s anding
o social accep abili y. In P oceedings o he ACM CHI Con e ence on
Human Fac o s in Compu ing Sys ems Ex ended Abs ac s. ACM, New
Yo k, NY, USA.
Uhde, A.,Laschke, M. and Hassenzahl, M. (2021) Design and app op i-
a ion o compu e -suppo ed sel -scheduling p ac ices in heal h-
ca e shi wo k. P oceedings o he ACM on Human–Compu e In e ac-
ion,5,1–26.h ps://doi.o g/10.1145/3449219.
Uhde, A.,Zum Ho , T. and Hassenzahl, M. (2022) Ob usi e sub-
leness and why we should ocus on meaning, no o m, in
social accep abili y s udies. In P oceedings o he 21s In e na ional
Con e ence on Mobile and Ubiqui ous Mul imedia (MUM’22),p.11.
ACM, New Yo k, NY, USA.
Uhde, A.,Zum Ho , T. and Hassenzahl, M. (2023) Beyond hiding and
e ealing: explo ing e ec s o isibili y and o m o in e ac ion on
he wi ness expe ience. P oceedings o he ACM on Human–Compu e
In e ac ion (MobileHCI),7, 23.
© The Au ho (s) 2025. Published by Ox o d Uni e si y P ess on behal o The B i ish Compu e Socie y. This is an Open Access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License (h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/), which
pe mi s un es ic ed euse, dis ibu ion, and ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed.
In e ac ing wi h Compu e s,2025, 1–16
h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/iwcomp/iwa 010
A icle
