1. The Heterogeneous Home 

  （Ryan Aipperspach, GoodGuide.com, ryanaip@alumni.rice.edu）

  （Ben Hooker, Art Center College of Design, benhooker@gmail.com）

  （Allison Woodruff, Intel Research Berkeley, woodruff@acm.org）

　（ACM interactions, January + February 2009. p.69）  

In the course of conducting research on domestic life [1], we have visited and conducted observations in a number of U.S. homes. Within these homes, we have often observed a certain homogeneity, a tendency toward similarity in place and experience. Our sense of a sometimes uniform and undifferentiated domestic environment resonates with observations made by others as well. For example, the modern housing landscape has been critiqued as offering limited variation in internal form and structure compared with the diversity of household populations [2, 3]. Homes with uniform construction, ceiling height, and lighting are symptomatic of designs that deal with economic constraints by being larger and undifferentiated, rather than smaller but more differentiated [4]. Additionally, fundamental domestic infrastructure, such as central heating and cooling systems that deliver a consistent climate throughout the home, reinforces the assumption that the domestic environment should be consistent and homogeneous.

Even in spatially complex homes, pervasive technology often provides access to the same "virtual environment" throughout the home, creating a homogeneous environment as viewed through the screen. Televisions playing in multiple rooms can create similar landscapes throughout the home. Further, devices such as time-shifting television recorders can subtly homogenize the experience of time by reducing the salience of external temporal structures such as network television schedules [5]. "Anytime, anywhere" networks and devices such as cellular and smart phones can also blur boundaries between work and home, as well as boundaries within the home. Laptops and PDAs connected wirelessly to the office may be placed on a bedside table, providing access to work late at night, and for many people, the experience of truly "coming home from work" is a rare one.

Increased homogeneity in the domestic environment plainly offers attractions such as convenience. For example, uniform access to data and network services offers residents the handy ability to compute in any room in the home and to be near family members while they are working. However, this is a double-edged sword, resonating with concerns of McDonaldization—the process by which modern society takes on the characteristics of a fast-food restaurant [6]. While standardized and uniform services are convenient and seductive, they are also often associated with limited variation and reduced quality. These issues resonate with our own intuition, based on our experience with design and observation, that homogeneity is often associated with a less fulfilling domestic experience.

Findings from environmental psychology and restorative environment theory also suggest potential disadvantages of homogeneous home environments [7]. Restorative environments are important for reducing mental fatigue resulting from stressful situations or intense thought, and inspection of the characteristics of restorative environments suggests that homogeneous domestic environments may not be sufficiently restorative. As Tabor writes, digital screens are "sleepless, fidgety, and demanding [8]." They "discourage that mental state of still coherence—achieved when we stare into a flame, gaze idly from a window or watch shadows lengthen—which rebuilds the self."

In contrast with more homogeneous environments, we also sometimes noticed interesting variation within the homes we studied. For example, sustainable "green homes" designed to take advantage of sun and wind for heating and cooling have strong temporal variation based on natural forces [9]. As another example, many Jewish households use technology to help them observe the Sabbath as a day of rest, providing a completely different experience from the rest of the week [10]. While these variations are associated with specialized purposes, they inspired us to consider how other consciously designed variations might manifest themselves in homes for the broader population.

Based on these observations, we introduce the concept of the "heterogeneous home," a diverse and dynamic domestic environment. In this vision we explore the interaction between technology and architecture in the home and consider how the two can be jointly designed to create a rich environment that suits the complexities and variety of life in the home. In so doing, we hope to articulate new design opportunities, as well as to encourage critical reflection on existing trends and assumptions.

To demonstrate that this heterogeneous home framework offers a fertile design space for a wide variety of new objects and environments, we created a designsketchbook. In spirit, our efforts are similar to work such as Gaver and Martin's workbook of inspirational design proposals to explore the design space of information appliances [11]. The sketches we developed are not necessarily literal design proposals, but rather are intended to engage the reader with ideas ranging from highly speculative concepts to humorous suggestions to very simple product ideas.

To generate the design sketches, we engaged in a collaborative dialogue with each other, drawing inspiration from our own backgrounds in computer science, design, architecture, and qualitative research, as well as incorporating our own analysis of existing commercial products and research concepts and prototypes. We also considered properties of restorative environments in generating design sketches. For example, environments that provide a sense of "being away" are refreshing and reduce mental fatigue [7], so we explored mechanisms that support separation between work and home. As another example, environments with fascinating patterns that effortlessly hold one's attention are also restorative [7], so we explored designs that expose engaging patterns.

Bachelard writes, "We have our cottage moments and our palace moments [12]." We also have our working moments and our relaxing moments; our public moments and our intimate moments; and our active moments and our reflective moments. It is important to support clear differentiation of such diverse experiences in the home while also acknowledging the complexities of domestic life that tie these experiences together. In this work we have sought to explore these issues holistically, considering how different aspects of the home such as architecture and technology can be jointly designed to create a dynamic and rich environment. The solutions we propose highlight opportunities to design for variety and suggest a range of technologies and spaces that might make up the heterogeneous home.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to environmental psychologist Sally Augustin for introducing us to restorative environment theory and for providing valuable feedback on this work. We also thank Paul Aoki, John Canny, and Shona Kitchen for helpful discussions. Ryan Aipperspach performed this work as a graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley. Ben Hooker performed this work as a visiting researcher at Intel Research Berkeley.

References

1. Woodruff, A., K. Anderson, S. D. Mainwaring, and R. Aipperspach. "Portable, But Not Mobile: A Study of Wireless Laptops in the Home." In Pervasive Computing 5th International Conference, Pervasive 2007, Toronto, Canada, May 13–16, 2007, edited by A. LaMarca, M. Langheinrich, and K. N. Truong, 216–233. New York: Springer, 2007.

2. Ahrentzen, S. "Choice in Housing." Harvard Design Magazine 8 (summer 1999): 1–6.

3. Hanson, J. and B. Hiller. "Two Domestic 'Space Codes' Compared." In Decoding Homes and Houses, 109–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

4. Gallagher, W. House Thinking. New York: Harper Collins, 2006.

5. Brown, B. and L. Barkhuus. "The Television will be Revolutionized: Effects of PVRs and Filesharing on Television Watching." In the Proceedings of CHI 2006, 663–666. New York: ACM Press, 2006.

6. Ritzer, G. The McDonaldization of Society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press, 1993.

7. Kaplan, R. and S. Kaplan. The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

8. Tabor, P. "Striking Home: The Telematic Assault on Identity." In J. Hill's Occupying Architecture. London: Routledge, 1998.

9. Woodruff, A., J. Hasbrouck, and S. Augustin. "A Bright Green Perspective on Sustainable Choices." In the Proceedings of CHI 2008, 313–322. New York: ACM Press, 2008.

10. Woodruff, A., S. Augustin, and B. E. Foucault. "Sabbath Day Home Automation: 'It's Like Mixing Technology and Religion.'" In the Proceedings of CHI 2007, 527–536. New York: ACM Press, 2007

11. Gaver, W. and H. Martin. "Alternatives: Exploring Information Appliances through Conceptual Design Proposals." In the Proceedings of CHI 2000, 209–216. New York: ACM Press, 2000.

12. Bachelard, G. The Poetics of Space. Boston: Beacon Press, 1969.

Authors

Ryan Aipperspach is on leave from the University of California, Berkeley, where he studied at the Berkeley Institute of Design. There his focus was on studying and developing portable domestic technologies. He is currently the user experience lead at GoodGuide.com, a website to help people find safe, healthy, and green products by providing credible social, environmental, and health impact information about everyday products. Ryan holds a B.S. in computer science from Rice University and an M.S. in computer science from the University of California, Berkeley.

Ben Hooker is an artist and designer, and a faculty member in the media design program at the Art Center College of Design. Although his background is in screen-based multimedia design, for the past few years most of his projects have centered on collaborations with architects, industrial designers, and computer scientists working in the field of human computer interaction. The result of these collaborations is a body of work that explores the consequences of intangible computer-generated "data landscapes" merging with real, physical spaces. He has a B.Sc. in electronic imaging and media communications and an M.A. in computer-related design from the Royal College of Art.

Allison Woodruff is a researcher at Intel Research Berkeley. Her primary interests include environmentally sustainable technologies, technology for domestic environments, mobile and communication technologies, and ubiquitous computing. Prior to joining Intel, She worked as a researcher at PARC from 1998 to 2004. She holds a B.A. in English from California State University, Chico; an M.S. in computer science, and an M.A. in linguistics from the University of California, Davis; and a Ph.D. in computer science from the University of California, Berkeley.

Footnotes

The complete sketchbook is available at: 

http://interactions.acm.org/content/XVI/hooker.pdf

Figures

Figure.

---

A growing number of people have noted the increasing homogeneity, or uniform and undifferentiated nature, of the domestic landscape, for example in critiques of suburban housing development [1]. These discussions resonate with our own experiences in our research on the relationship between technology and space in the home, including studies of where people and laptop computers spend time [2]. We believe that this homogeneity results in a less fulfilling domestic experience, creating environments that are not well adapted to the complexities and variety of life in the home. We have found it useful to consider these discussions about the homogeneity of the domestic environment along three dimensions: space, technology, and time.

Spatial Homogeneity. Several authors have considered the uniformity of the modern housing landscape. Hanson [3], in an analysis of a housing development in England, found that even when there was variation in the external appearance or size of houses, the internal logic or structure of the homes was similar. Ahrentzen [1] argues that the residential landscape in the United States “remains homogeneous in form, goals, and context,” offering primarily variations on the “suburban single-family home” even though only one quarter of the United States population consists of married couples with children.

One example of homogeneity within the home is the Great Room, or an open living, cooking, and eating space in the center of the home that is increasingly prevalent, especially in suburban American homes. Gallagher [4] points out that, while the great room was initially part of a larger ecology of rooms, such as an adjoining but separate office, it is often realized as an undifferentiated landscape in the center of the home. This is a symptom of design that does not account for the complexities of life in the home, as opposed to design that is influenced by common patterns of living such as those embodied in Alexander’s design patterns [5]. Similarly, homes with uniform construction, ceiling heights, and lighting are symptomatic of designs that deal with economic constraints by being bigger and undifferentiated, rather than smaller but more differentiated [4].

Technological Homogeneity. We believe that current ubiquitous technologies, such as television screens, laptop computers, PDAs and cellular telephones, can further limit the heterogeneity of the home. For example, having a television in every room (sometimes even in the bathroom [6]) can create similar landscapes throughout the home. Likewise, having anytime, anywhere data access through a cellular phone or BlackBerry can blur boundaries by allowing the same information to be accessed from anywhere in the home. The increased prevalence of convergent devices, such as Media Center PCs, alternately creates a single, centripetal, focus for media consumption of the home. Even in homes that might be spatially complex, the pervasiveness of technology provides access to the same “virtual environment” from everywhere in the home, creating a homogeneous environment as viewed through the screen.

Temporal Homogeneity. Modern homes also blur temporal boundaries, such as the boundary between work and home, breaking down divisions of time that help to structure the day. Laptops and PDAs connected wirelessly to the office can sit on a bedside table, providing access to work late at night, and for many people the experience of “coming home from work” is a rare one indeed. Other devices such as time-shifting television recorders or television series purchased on DVD can more subtly homogenize the experience of time in the home by reducing the prevalence of external temporal structures, like network television schedules, in domestic life. Additionally, fundamental infrastructure of the home itself, such as central heating and cooling systems, reinforces the assumption that the domestic environment should be consistent and homogeneous.

We believe that this increasing domestic homogeneity can be problematic. To illustrate this point, we consider restorative environments, described by cognitive psychologists Kaplan and Kaplan [7]. Restorative environments are environments that help to reduce the mental fatigue resulting from situations that deplete people’s limited attention. Studies have shown that restorative environments increase the capacity for directed attention, or the ability to be selective in thought and attention, that is depleted during stressful activities or intense thought. For example, in a study of inner-city children living in identical high-rise apartments, Taylor et al. found that children with greater views of nature performed better on tests of concentration, impulse inhibition, and delay of gratification [8]. Ulrich found that views of nature through a window helped patients to recover from surgery [9]. While restorative environments are often considered in the context of natural, outdoor settings, the concepts apply to other environments as well, such as open urban spaces [10], monasteries [11], and museums [12].

A closer inspection of the characteristics of restorative environments suggests that the homogeneous domestic environment is not sufficiently restorative. Kaplan and Kaplan frame environments in terms of their ability to either help or hinder people in dealing with the psychological costs of managing information. In particular, they frame restorative environments in terms of their ability to support the needs of understanding and exploring information. People have a desire to understand the environment around them, and a lack of understanding can result in stress. However, people also want to explore environments and uncover new information and ideas. A restorative environment is one that successfully balances these competing needs; it is coherent enough to promote understanding but complex enough to promote exploration. For example, large expanses of open prairie are less restorative because they are too undifferentiated, and regions of dense vegetation seem confusing because they lack a clear focus. Other environments, like spread out tree-cover with discernible trails are more restorative, promoting exploration while still offering a sense of order.

There are four hypothesized properties of the environment that make it likely to cause a restorative experience:

– Being away, or being physically or conceptually different from the

everyday environment;

– Extent, or having scope and coherence that allow one to remain

engaged;

– Fascination, or containing patterns that effortlessly hold one’s

attention; and

– Compatibility, or fitting with what one wants to do.

In light of these factors, the homogeneous domestic environment becomes problematic. The ability to get away is limited by missing boundaries, for example between work and home, that make it difficult to separate different tasks. These blurred boundaries, along with centripetal technologies like television screens or computers that rarely move, can collapse the extent of the domestic environment onto a few focal points within the home. This uniform environment also lacks the diversity of patterns crucial for supporting fascination.

In addition to creating homogeneity in the physical environment, multi-purpose computing devices often interrupt us [13] or enable us to easily follow tangents through data, creating a complex virtual environment with too many potential paths for exploration. This unordered complexity of the virtual environment, combined with a homogeneous physical environment, makes it difficult to enter into physical and virtual configurations that are well suited to focusing on a particular task, limiting the compatibility between people and their environments.

Thus, some technologies in the home limit the restorative complexity of the physical environment and create an insufficiently coherent virtual environment. As Tabor writes [14], digital screens are “sleepless, fidgety, and demanding.” They “discourage that mental state of still coherence – achieved when we stare into a flame, gaze idly from a window or watch shadows lengthen – which rebuilds the self.”

In the pages that follow, we offer an alternative vision for technology and domestic space that promotes complexity and coherence, a vision of the heterogeneous home. This book is the result of a collaboration designed to fuse multiple perspectives drawn from computer science and design. We have worked to consider the relationship between theory and practice across our respective disciplines, and the result is a series of studies considering different aspects of the heterogeneous home. Each section includes a combination of critical analyses, abstract design explorations, and specific design proposals. These multiple perspectives are intended to encourage reflection and to suggest potential directions for further research and exploration.

[1] Ahrentzen, S.: Choice in Housing. Harvard Design Magazine 8 (Summer 1999) 1-6

[2] Woodruff, A., Anderson, K., Mainwaring, S.D., and Aipperspach, R.: Portable, But Not Mobile: A Study of Wireless Laptops in the Home. In: Proc. Pervasive ‘07 (2007) 216-233

[3] Hanson, J. and Hiller, B.: Two domestic “space codes” compared. In: Hanson, J.: Decoding Homes and Houses. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003) 109-133

[4] Gallagher, W.: House Thinking. Harper Collins, New York (2006)

[5] Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., and Silverstein, M.: A Pattern Language. Oxford University Press, New York (1977)

[6] Weinbach, J. and Kalb, P.E.: The Type-A Bathroom. The Wall Street Journal (February 3, 2006)

[7] Kaplan, R. and Kaplan, S.: The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective. Cambridge University Press (1989)

[8] Taylor, A.F., Kuo, F.E., and Sullivan, W.E.: Views of Nature and Self-Discipline: Evidence from Inner City Children. Journal of Environmental Psychology 22, 1-2 (2002) 49-63

[9] Ulrich, R.S.: View Through a Window May Influence Recovery from Surgery. Science 27, 224 (1984) 420-421

[10] Thwaites, K., Helleur, E., and Simkins, I.M.: Restorative Urban Space: Exploring the Spatial Configuration of Human Emotional Fulfillment in Urban Open Space. Landscape Research 30, 4 (2005) 525-547

[11] Ouellette, P., Kaplan, R., and Kaplan, S.: The Monastery as a Restorative Environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology 25, 2 (2005) 175-188

[12] Kaplan, S., Bardwell, L.V., and Slakter, D.B.: The Museum as a Restorative Environment. Environment and Behavior 25, 6 (1993) 725-742

[13] Fogarty, J., et al.: Predicting Human Interruptibility with Sensors. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, TOCHI, 12, 1 (2005) 119-146

[14] Tabor, P.: Striking Home: The Telematic Assault on Identity. In: J. Hill. Occupying Architecture. Routledge, London (1998)

1.1 HOUSE VERSUS HOME

Laptops, the Internet, cell phones, and BlackBerries make it possible to bring work home, providing alternative possibilities for time shifting and working from home that can have positive implications for working parents or for reducing the negative impacts of commuting. However, this ability blurs the distinction between home and work and can make the home “just another place to work,” breaking down the spatial and temporal distinctions between work and home. In our studies, participants have spoken to us about the challenge of balancing work and home life, describing how they check email late at night or spend too much time working from home. Others [1] speak of their efforts to make their home office a separate place, in particular by enforcing boundaries with their children.

While work is moving into the home, the home is also moving beyond the physical house – into cars or to third places [2] like coffee shops. In some homes, for example in New York or Tokyo, kitchens are becoming vestigial as nearby restaurants and take-out shops expand the home [3]. The home is even moving into virtual spaces as people spend increasing amounts of time in online environments – home pages, online communities, networked video games, or virtual worlds like Second Life.

Exploring the gradations between house and home, both in physical and virtual spaces, might help to enhance the heterogeneity of the home, providing residents the opportunity to move smoothly between different environments like home and work while still affording them some boundary between different parts of their lives. As one possible scenario, we imagine a house that is bigger than the home inside, perhaps in the form of a work-at-home entryway or parlor, creating a more pronounced, but still permeable, work/home boundary.

[1] Gallagher, W.: House Thinking. Harper Collins, New York (2006)

[2] Oldenburg, R.: The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Community Centers, General Stores, Bars, Hangouts, and How They Get You through the Day. Paragon Books, New York (1989)

[3] Suzuki, A.: Do Android Crows Fly Over the Skies of an Electronic Tokyo?: The Interactive Urban Landscape of Japan. Architectural Association Publications, London (2004)

[4] Sellen, A., Harper, R., Eardley, R., Izadi, S., Regan, T., Taylor, A.S., and Wood, K.R.: Situated Messaging in the Home. In: Proc. CSCW ’06 (2006) 383-392

Microsoft HomeNote is a situated electronic display that coordinates hand written and SMS text messages among household residents. Most users chose to place the display in their kitchen, a center of domestic activity. We imagine that similar displays might fit into other parts of the house, such as the work-at-home entryway, providing a means of coordination as residents enter and leave the home.

[5] Microsoft Socio-Digital Systems Group. Online, http://research.microsoft.com/sds/

A wall-mounted device that prints SMS text messages onto clear labels that can be placed on a nearby paper calendar, Text2Paper provides a means for bridging the divide between electronic and paper-based displays. Resonant with our proposal for a printer near the front door, it provides another avenue for information to flow out of and around the home, decoupled from electronic devices.

[6] NIA Architects. Online, http://www.niaarchitects.co.uk/livework/2what.htm

NIA architects propose three types of spaces that allow people to work from home while maintaining different degrees of boundaries: live-with, live-near, and live-nearby. Each one provides distinctions between home or living space and working space.

[7] Kazuyo Sejima (http://www.sanaa.co.jp/) highlights the importance of spaces for transitioning between the home and the outside world. For example, she designed an apartment that inverts typical spatial configurations, containing a windowless bedroom but a sunlit washbasin with a view. The basin provides a restorative environment for getting ready in the morning before leaving the home to enter the world.

[8] Due to the limited size of domestic spaces, some Japanese book shops have small study spaces equipped with computers and other supplies that can be rented and used as a work space, an example of a part of the home that is not part of the house. Similarly, some university students can be observed “moving into” their library study carrels.

[9] Atelier Hitoshi Abe: Megahouse. In: Hutt, D. and Jaschko, S. (eds.): Open House: Intelligent Living by Design. Vitra Design Museum, Weil am Rheims, Germany (2006) 100-105

Atelier Hitoshi Abe envision an interconnected system that makes use of the “reservoir of empty rooms in a city” to create a timeshare home spread throughout the city. Users are able to rent sets of rooms for periods of hours or months, creating their own distributed house that can adapt and change over time. Thus, the distinction between city, house, and home becomes more subtle and multifaceted, responding to an increasingly mobile urban culture.

[10] Goffman, E.: The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Doubleday, New York (1959)

Some Open Questions

How does the work/home boundary relate to the public/private boundary of the house? Is it possible to design a work-at-home entryway that is also the front stage [10] of the home? Could this be accomplished, for example, through the use of built-in fittings and fixtures in the entryway of the home? How do we accommodate artifacts such as cell phone chargers and laptop bags that are left at the entryway to the home?

【図中の文章（左側のページの上から）】

・The most extreme example of separating the “house”from the “home” is a bunker-like home free of online technology and an attached technology-rich antechamber. The antechamber is filled with organizational tools such as calendars, e-mail, timetables, or weather information where one could equip both mentally and physically for leaving the house; and the home is kept free from devices that are connected to the outside world. The antechamber is a connective space, and the home is kept as a reflective space.

・A more moderate proposal is a home whose floor plan is structured to create a more pronounced house/home division by promoting a particular narrative of space.

・An alternate plan suggests a spiral journey into the house, with the more private, home-focused spaces at the end of the spiral. The entrance might include more work-related technology, with the core including more intimate technology.

・Here, a work-at-home space is positioned at the entry into the home. Residents must pass through an outdoor corridor to move from the entryway into the living space of the home, emphasizing the threshold between house and home.

・The antechamber space is a potential location for a suite of electronic objects, furniture, fixtures, and fittings which support the occupants of the house as they come and go, moving from house to home and back again.

・A small printer that can be hung on a coat hook by the front door. Residents could send files such as maps or shopping lists to the printer to act as a reminder when they leave the house.

・One example of a space that is house but not home is the work-at-home entryway, a region at the entrance to the house that is physically and technologically distinct from the rest of the house. Residents might pass through the entryway on their way in and out of the home, providing an opportunity to quickly check email, print out directions, or look something up on the way through. The entryway might also provide a place to leave work artifacts, such as laptops or telephones where they are available for use if needed but do not actually have to enter the home itself. During a day off, if it becomes necessary to “run into the office,” it is possible to step into the entryway, which might even have a small desk and chair, to work without needing to bring work home.

・Fold-up e-mail shelf with a recessed keyboard and small display, for people who want to check e-mail on the way in and out of the home but don’t want an “always on” e-mail device like a BlackBerry.

1.2 HYBRID HOMEMAKING

While examples such as the work-at-home entryway provide boundaries between work and home spaces, there is certain housekeeping work that cannot be separated from the space of the home. However, we point out that home-making is not the same as house-work – rather, homemaking is housekeeping that involves making a “good home.” Although there has been extensive discussion of problems around issues such as division-of-labor in the home [1], the physical labor of housekeeping such as cleaning and cooking can sometimes be pleasurable because it involves visibly and viscerally making the home a better place. Some have even lamented the introduction of “labor saving” domestic technologies because they can make housework less rewarding [2]. Other practices, such as washing the dishes together as a family [3], can combine housekeeping activities with work that enriches the social experience of the home. Less productive housekeeping activities, such as pottering in a garden shed, can be restorative in their own right [4].

Key to the enjoyment of domestic work is the idea of living processes [5], actions that are enjoyable in and of themselves, as opposed to actions that are enjoyable only because of the end they achieve. Living processes can be enjoyable because they involve physical activity (such as working in a garden on a sunny day) or social interaction (such as sorting a music or family photo collection together). Kaplan points out that the Zen emphasis on paying attention to simple activities of daily life, like washing dishes or sweeping, can result in restorative experiences [6]. We now consider the idea of homemaking in the virtual home – What might be equivalent living processes for managing virtual space?

We propose that it is important to support management and maintenance activities in the design of domestic technologies, incorporating the physical and social activities that can make traditional homemaking rewarding. In contrast to, for example, software that requires digital photos to be uploaded and labeled as soon as they come off of the camera, we consider different qualities of virtual storage and access that are more compatible with information ecologies [7, 8] in the home. Affording different opportunities to physically interact with the virtual home might allow us to be more reflective about and to discuss our electronic domestic artifacts as we manage them, making the process more enjoyable and meaningful.

[1] Cowan, R.S.: More Work for Mother: The Ironies of Household Technology from the Open Hearth to the Microwave. Basic Books Inc., New York (1983)

[2] Wyche, S.P., Sengers, P., and Grinter, R.: Historical Analysis: Using the Past to Design the Future. In: Proc. Ubicomp ‘06 (2006) 17-21

[3] Aipperspach, R.: Supporting the Process of Living in the Home: Lessons from Architecture. In: Proc. Workshop on Nurturing Technologies in the Domestic Environment at Ubicomp ’06 (2006)

[4] Wyche, S.P., Taylor, A., and Kaye, J.: Pottering: A Design-Oriented Investigation. Extended Abstracts CHI ‘07 (2007) 1893-1898

[5] Alexander, C.: The Nature of Order: An Essay on the Art of Building and the Nature of the Universe (v.2. The Process of Creating Life). The Center for Environmental Structure, Berkeley, CA (2002)

[6] Kaplan, S.: Meditation, Restoration, and the Management of Mental Fatigue. Environment and Behavior 33, 4 (2001) 480-506

[7] Crabtree, A. and Rodden, T.: Domestic Routines and Design for the Home. JCSCW 13, 2 (2004) 191-220

[8] Elliot, K., Neustaedter, C., and Greenberg, S.: Time, Ownership and Awareness: The Value of Contextual Locations in the Home. Proc. Ubicomp ‘05 (2005) 251-268

[9] Taylor, A. S., Harper, R., Swan, L., Izadi, S., Sellen, A., and Perry, M.: Homes that Make us Smart. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 11, 5, (2007), 383-393

Taylor and Swan found that physical artifacts often live temporarily in “clutter bowls,” spaces for objects that might be important or might be disposable, awaiting sorting and archiving at some later date. They propose the Picture Bowl, an equivalent space for digital data that can house photographs and videos from digital cameras and camera phones before they are sorted and placed on a computer. A related concept is the Digital Shoebox (http://research.microsoft.com/sds/), which provides a long-term physical storage space for digital media.

[10] Dunne, A. and Raby, F.: Cricket Box. In: Weeds, Aliens and Other Stories. Online, http://www.dunneandraby.co.uk (1994-1998)

Dunne and Raby propose The Loft, a lead-clad box on top of a ladder, providing “a place to store precious magnetic mementoes such as answerphone messages, audio cassettes or floppy discs away from potentially harmful electromagnetic fields.” Similar to the attic, which provides a place to store and protect important household objects, the Loft provides a special place for storing digital memories and protecting them from decay.

[11] Kaye, J., et al.: To Have and To Hold: Exploring the Personal Archive. In: Proc. CHI ’06 (2006) 275-284

In a study of personal archiving, Kaye et al. observed many different practices. These practices served a range of needs beyond facilitating later retrieval, such as building an identity or sharing artifacts with others. Often these practices involved the management of a mix of digital and analog media, such as physical laptops stored on a shelf next to other media, kept around for sentimental reasons.

[12] Cyworld. Online, http://www.cyworld.com (see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyworld)

The Korean web community site, CyWorld, provides users the ability to design and furnish their own virtual-physical home, a “miniroom.” This personal space can be managed and organized much like the space of a person’s physical home. Some users even create minirooms that literally mirror their physical home.

[13] Apple iPhoto Books. Online, http://www.apple.com/ilife/iphoto/features/books.html

Apple’s iPhoto and iTunes software allows users to create physical artifacts, such as printed photo albums or CDs of MP3s, from virtual media. This process is a hybrid between digital archiving and traditional scrapbook or photo album construction. Digital photos are taken and managed online, but the output of the process is a tangible artifact: a bound book with printed photographs on its pages.

[14] Gemmell, J., Bell, G., and Lueder, R.: MyLifeBits: A Personal Database for Everything. Communications of the ACM 49, 1 (2006) 88-95

MyLifeBits, which seeks to record everything a person experiences, is an extreme example of a personal archive. The fate of this data and how it is integrated into homemaking activities poses provocative questions about the relationship between physical and virtual space, such as how virtual memories might manifest themselves in the physical space of the home.

[15] Robertson, G., et al.: Data Mountain: Using Spatial Memory for Document Management. In: Proc. UIST ’98 (1998) 153-162

Some Open Questions

How can we integrate findings about the different affordances of search and spatial information retrieval (e.g. [15]) within the context of managing domestic space? The physical home is limited in space. Should the virtual home be limited as well, in order to prevent it from becoming overwhelming and to encourage the occasional cleaning and pruning of information? Or should it be unbounded, limitless, and searchable?

【図中の文章（左側のページの上から）】

・“I’ll just put this stuff in the (virtual) attic.”

・There are certain artifacts that are associated as much with the house as with its inhabitants, such as old furniture, mementos, knick-knacks, and other artifacts. We propose that as the number of virtual data sources increases, virtual data can take on similar characteristics. This virtual data might be managed and archived in the same way as physical artifacts in the home.

・People are often selective about which objects they allow over the home’s threshold. Virtual storage spaces associated with a home can add additional dimensions and flexibility to this process. For example, the scanner/shredder is a device that moves semi-junk mail (information that might be useful but that isn’t worth taking up physical space in the home) to a virtual storage space in one easy action.

・Sending data to the virtual attic is more like putting artifacts in a room or cupboard than like dragging them into a computer folder. Virtual attics, basements, or corner closets might have similar properties to their physical equivalents, with limited capacities and spatially organized information.

・New opportunities for virtual home-making activities are emerging as a result of the ubiquity of digital media devices and the possibility of simple ad-hoc networking.

・After dinner, instead of watching a movie, a family might create a joint photo album of a vacation, supporting collective reflection. Contributions from individual family member’s photo archives could be uploaded to a shared authoring screen.

・“…Here’s a better one.”

・“I hate that picture of me!...”

・We suggest electronic equivalents of socially shared home-making activities.

・We are increasingly surrounded by devices with sensing and recording capabilities, creating the possibility of benevolent surveillance of our domestic activities. For example, a camera mounted at the entrance to the home or embedded in a robotic pet might capture a unique perspective on the activities of the home. These records could become as much a part of the home as traditional photographic records in photo albums and scrapbooks.

・The “domestic virtual space” could be accessed and manipulated via devices beyond the desktop computer screen, such as book-like devices with e-ink pages. These devices might promote reflection about the data in the home, like browsing the dusty corners of the attic or the basement.

1.3 DEVICE TOURISM

The heterogeneous home is of course related to Weiser’s [1] vision of pads, tabs, and boards: a diverse set of computing devices that integrate seamlessly into the environment. We propose a variant of that vision informed by the goal of creating a restorative environment that is neither too homogeneous nor too complex. While Weiser describes “invisible” technology that integrates seamlessly into the environment, we suggest that this invisibility can create a more homogeneous environment by limiting the ability of people to create boundaries and to tune the extent and manner in which technology is integrated into their homes. Instead, we propose the idea of tourist objects, portable technological objects that support “seamless interaction but seamful technology” [2].

Tourist objects are single-purposed, portable electronic devices that take on many heterogeneous forms such as books, robots, or portable PDA-like pads and tabs. The devices have homes or “parking places” where they naturally return (for example to charge their batteries), creating a flow of devices around the home, such as objects that occasionally visit an otherwise technology-free bedroom. They are similar to furniture whose use is flexible but that lives in a particular place within the home. Like books and furniture, tourist objects can be straightened up, rearranged, and tidied. Because of their diverse and portable forms, tourist objects are able to move into more places in the home than, for example, laptops, which we have observed to be limited to a relatively small number of places within the home [3].

We suggest that tourist objects can help to create a more heterogeneous spatial environment in the home without heavy-handed enforcement of the use of different types of technology in different parts of the house. Tourist objects are more heterogeneous than convergent devices such as Media Center PCs, but the fact that they have parking places within the home prevents them from creating an overly complex or cluttered environment.

[1] Weiser, M.: The Computer for the 21st Century. Scientific American 265, 3 (1991) 94-104

[2] Oulasvirta, A.: Notes on Seams, Seamfulness and Seamlessness. Online, http://www.hiit.fi/u/oulasvir/Haninge (2004)

[3] Woodruff, A., Anderson, A., Mainwaring, S.D., and Aipperspach, R.: Portable, But Not Mobile: A Study of Wireless Laptops in the Home. Tech. In: Proc. Pervasive ‘07 (2007) 216-233

[4] Mantei, M.M., et al.: Experiences in the Use of a Media Space. In: Proc. CHI ‘91 (1991) 203-208

[5] Dunne, A. and Raby, F.: Cricket Box. In: Weeds, Aliens and Other Stories. Website, http://www.dunneandraby.co.uk (1994-1998)

The Cricket Box is a drawer for collecting and playing back garden sounds. Placed in the garden during the day, it records everything that happens there. It is brought into the bedroom in the evening, where it is opened, allowing the sounds that it recorded during the day to spill out as its owners fall asleep. It suggests one possibility of a tourist object that might be allowed into an otherwise technology free bedroom on special occasions or as part of a daily ritual.

[6] Heimspiel. IDEO. Website, http://www.ideo.com/work/item/heimspiel/ (2003)

One possible manifestation of the technology free bedroom is technology that “lives” in the door at the boundary of the room. By opening and closing the door, the level of connection with technology (and with the rest of the home) can be adjusted. For example, artificial light might be brought into the room via a set of lights embedded along the edge of the bedroom door.

[7] Woodruff, A., Anderson, A., Mainwaring, S.D., and Aipperspach, R.: Portable, But Not Mobile: A Study of Wireless Laptops in the Home. Tech. In: Proc. Pervasive ‘07 (2007) 216-233

Tourist objects rely on infrastructure in the environment to support them when they visit various locations in the home. For example, we observed people with reconfigurable furniture, such as a nested ottoman or an adjustable coffee table, that supported the use of laptop computers in different locations in the home. This furniture allowed computers to be used in comfort but could be folded back and put away when the laptops moved elsewhere.

Some Open Questions

How do tourist objects relate to the debate on device convergence? Do they complement other convergent devices, or do they suggest that most devices in the home should remain differentiated?

【図中の文章（左側のページの上から）】

・“You’re not allowed upstairs!”

・Some devices might be able to go anywhere in the home. Other devices might be limited as to how far they can stray from their charging pads, either by software or by physical characteristics.

・Charging pads are a necessary limitation of portable electronic devices, but as a result they provide devices with a place where they live in the home.

・The technology free bedroom...

・“We keep the bedroom technology-free but, as a treat, at the weekends we like to watch a movie in bed.”

・Robot dog/projector fusion device

・Electronic books are one possible form for tourist devices. They combine ambient spine displays with more specific information and interaction possibilities on screens within their pages. Like traditional books, they can sit on a shelf that can hold many devices without looking too cluttered.

・The increasing quantity of electronic devices suggests that in addition to becoming smaller, they will have to become stackable, foldable, and packable.

・Low-profile charging shelf and book-like tourist objects

・One realization of book-like tourist objects is a set of devices that provide live links to remote places, like an enhanced travel log. As opposed to being viewed through computer screens that can draw our attention away into seemingly disconnected virtual worlds, books can move about the environment, building stronger connections between the physical space of the home and the remote places they provide a connection to. Books are an interesting form for media spaces [4 (overleaf)], creating an environment with more opportunities for reflection and happenchance congruencies or disconnects between the activities in the home and in remotely connected places.

1.4 THE TEMPORAL HOME

Temporal heterogeneity is important in providing structure to people’s lives, for example through the changing of the seasons or through holidays during the year. However, there are a number of factors that limit temporal heterogeneity [1], including some factors in the home. Home infrastructure has in some cases diminished seasonal changes in space use. For example, central heating and air conditioning have enabled the entire space of the home to be climate controlled, resulting in diminished variations in space use during the year, such as the loss of the hearth as the center of the home during the winter. More recent changes such as mobile network technology have resulted in blurring boundaries between work and home, supporting an increasingly prevalent culture of busyness [e.g. 2], of always working and being active, as opposed to exploring a range of temporal possibilities. Hochschild [3] has argued that, at least for working parents, the home has become a site for work, always with too much to do.

There are exceptions to patterns of temporal homogeneity. For example, many Jewish households observe the Sabbath as a day of rest, providing a completely different experience at the end of the week during which they avoid activities that initiate change in the world around them, such as cooking or driving, but instead spend time having extended meals and discussion with family and friends [4]. Those who live in “green homes” designed to take advantage of sun and wind for heating, cooling, and collecting energy are often much more connected to temporal patterns of the environment, becoming aware of patterns of rain and drought, warm and cold weather, and light and dark as the seasons change.

We propose using technology to reify various temporal patterns, either enhancing existing natural patterns or bringing new patterns into the home, in order to provide a temporal rhythm to life in the home. Related to this concept are technologies that capture the history of the home, helping to create a continuum between past and present within the home. These temporal rhythms would create a more heterogeneous environment and encourage reflection about the temporal patterns of life in the home. In addition to spatial complexity which creates restorative environments, we suggest that temporal complexity might also make the home a more restorative environment.

[1] Lynch, K.: What Time is this Place? MIT Press, Cambridge (1976)

[2] Frissen, V.A.J.: ICTs in the Rush Hour of Life. The Information Society 16 (2000) 65-75

[3] Hochschild, A.: The Time Bind: When Work Becomes Home and Home Becomes Work. Metropolitan/Holt, New York (1997)

[4] Woodruff, A., Augustin, S., and Foucault, B.: Sabbath Day Home Automation: “It’s like Mixing Technology and Religion”. In: Proc. CHI ’07 (2007) 527-536

[5] Wexler, A. and Wexler, E.: The Vinyl Milford. Online, http://www.allanwexlerstudio.com/architecture/project/11.html (1994)

Low overhead patio furniture: Allan Wexler proposes furniture that can be used both inside and outside of a garden shed, creating different possibilities for space use depending on the time of year and the weather.

[6] Hofman Dujardin Architects: Bloomframe. Online, http://www.hofmandujardin.nl (2002-2007)

A fold out balcony designed by Hofman Dujardin Architects provides apartment dwellers with a patio that can be deployed on nice days, changing “opening the window” into “folding out the patio” and providing the opportunity to adjust the boundary between the inside and the outside of the home.

[7] Mozer, M.C.: Lessons from an Adaptive House. In: Cook, D. and Das, R. (eds.): Smart Environments: Technologies, Protocols, and Applications. J. Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ (2005) 273-294

In discussing his Adaptive House, Mozer describes how his daily temporal patterns co-evolved with his house. The house had an automated heating and cooling system that would anticipate when he was coming home and begin running so that the house was at the appropriate temperature when he returned home. If he was running late at work, he would feel a desire to make it home because he knew that the house was preparing itself for his return.

[8] Gliding Rooms. FutureSpace Corporation. Online, http://www.fs-c.com/

Like the fold out balcony, the entire bedroom in some houses can slide out from under the roof, allowing inhabitants to sleep under the stars when the weather is nice.

[9] Iwamoto, L., and Scott, C.: Fog House. Iwamotoscott Architecture. Online, http://www.iwamotoscott.com/ (2001)

IwamotoScott’s Fog House is situated on a hill in California that is often foggy in the morning and sunny in the afternoon. The house is designed to make use of this natural weather pattern to enforce public/private boundaries in the home. In the morning when people are getting ready for the day, the private part of the house is disconnected from the rest of the house by a screen of fog; later in the day this screen drifts away, integrating the two halves of the house.

[10] Woodruff, A., Augustin, S., and Foucault, B.: Sabbath Day Home Automation: “It’s like Mixing Technology and Religion”. In: Proc. CHI ’07 (2007) 527-536

Technology can help to augment social temporal patterns. Many Orthodox Jewish households use technology such as timers on lights and appliances to facilitate the unique flow of time on the Sabbath. Some automation systems create sophisticated lighting configurations on particular holidays that happen only once a year.

Some Open Questions

What is the difference between seasonal versus temporal heterogeneity? That is, do restorative patterns need to be seasonal, cyclical, and predictable; or can they reflect one-time activities, such as journeys? Can artificial temporal patterns created by technology be compelling? Would they seem arbitrary and thus annoying? Do the patterns presented by technology need to have their foundation in real temporal patterns from other parts of life?

【図中の文章（左側のページの上から）】

・“During the summer months, we take our patio furniture out of the shed and store away the electronic displays.”

・While some visions for the future of the home propose built-in, wall-mounted displays, the temporal patterns of domestic life could be enhanced by displays that are brought out and put away depending on the season, much like garden furniture. For example, during the winter months when there are fewer daylight hours it might be more desirable to spend time immersed in virtual worlds, whereas during the summer months it might be more desirable to connect with the immediate physical surroundings.

・Electronic patio furniture. This fold-up table contains a large battery and a wireless network booster, acting as a “base camp” for other activities. For example, it might get wheeled out to a gazebo when the weather is nice, allowing for 2 or 3 days of laptop power.

・Devices which accentuate temporal rhythms. “The Weekend” light is a sign that is illuminated from Friday evening until late Sunday night, resembling an “on air” sign from a radio station. The sign acts as a visible reminder to the inhabitants that it is the weekend (and that the weekend provides an opportunity to live differently from the rest of the week).

・Increasingly, markers of temporal structure, such as a weekend marked by chiming church bells and quiet streets, are being replaced by a 24 hour, always open, connected, and available society. “The Weekend” light serves as a blunt reminder of these temporal patterns and the importance they play in adding diversity to our experiences.

・“When we have guests, we like to extend the sunset by an hour or so.”

・Some devices might enable people to “tune” the temporal rhythms they experience, creating local hybrids of natural, technological, and social temporal phenomena. Here, a device consisting of an array of lights is used to augment or simulate the light from a setting sun, allowing inhabitants to create a sunset that lasts longer than is really the case. Devices like this one make it possible to adjust how in or out of sync the activities of the home are with the natural world outside.

1.5 AUGMENTED OUTSIDE

Most literature on restorative environments focuses on natural settings, and much of the work considers human-made outdoor settings such as urban parks or foliage outside of windows in an effort to promote increased well-being in urban environments. Generally, watching the activity of the outside world, even through a window, is a restorative experience [1]. Some firms have even begun to dramatically bring natural environments inside, such as designing space for trees, open windows, and skylights inside of manufacturing plants [2].

For the most part, however, digital data remains inside the home, viewed through traditional screens such as laptops, desktops, televisions, and PDA displays. Often, this digital data is viewed through the same screens that are used for work, for example on a shared laptop computer. We suggest bringing digital data to the outside of the home, in the same way as the natural world is increasingly being brought in.

We propose the creation of artifacts outside the window and around the home which provide a venue for contemplatively “gazing out” at digital information or for walking around a digital garden. They might provide information about the outside world viewable by looking outside, in the same way that people currently look outside to see the weather or how busy the street is. These artifacts might provide an alternate view on data collected within the home, or they might bring in data from outside the home – from the local community or beyond. Objects in the augmented outside could also provide a means for connecting outward to the community by providing a venue for the data of the home to be “on stage” [3] in the same way that gardens and artifacts displayed in the front window tell others about what is important to a household [4]. Finally, these objects might also explore interactions between technology and the natural outdoor environment, such as electronic gardens or park spaces.

[1] Farley, K.M.J. and Veitch, J.A.: A Room with a View: A Review of the Effects of Windows on Work and Well-Being. Institute for Research in Construction, National Research Council Canada, Technical Report RR-136 (2001)

[2] McDonough, W. and Braungart, M.: Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things. North Point Press, New York (2002) 74-76

[3] Goffman, E.: The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Doubleday, New York (1959)

[4] Hanson, J. and Hiller, B.: Two Domestic “Space Codes” Compared. In: Hanson, J.: Decoding Homes and Houses. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003) 109-133

[5] Gaver, W.: The Video Window: My Life with a Ludic System. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 10, 2-3 (2006) 60-65

The Video Window includes a video camera on a pole high above the home that is connected to a screen mounted next to the window. The screen provides an alternate perspective on the surrounding neighborhood. However, unlike our proposals, the system brings outside images into the home, rather than presenting them on a display outside the window.

[6] Schab, J.: Observations on the Single-Family House. In: Sherman, R. (ed.): Re: American Dream: Six Urban Housing Prototypes for Los Angeles. Princeton Architectural Press and Los Angeles Municipal Art Gallery Associates (1995) 105-110

Jennifer Schab describes the living room as a Panopticon, providing views back into the home through mirrors and family portraits, into the neighborhood through the window, and into the world through the television screen. The augmented outside supplements these views, providing additional context and information about the community and broader world that can be viewed through the window.

Some Open Questions

How might one configure and interact with displays that are outside of the window? Through control panels, remote controls, or cellular phones? What types of data would the augmented outside show? How does one decide what belongs outside and what belongs inside the home? How do these decisions relate to privacy and the ability of others to see the space outside of the home? How do electronic artifacts outside of shared living spaces relate to the community inside? Which members of an apartment complex would “own” the objects outside of the building? Who would maintain them or place data on them?

【図中の文章（左側のページの上から）】

・Keeping the physical screen and its content “outside” of the home provides a different experience than looking at screens inside the house. Some individuals are very cautious of admitting new items into their homes, and being able to “close the drapes” on a screen is qualitatively different than, for example, “switching off the television.”

・People sometimes use television with the sound turned down low as comfort or as a connection and assurance that “something is going on in the outside world.” Technology viewed out the window can provide a similar kind of connection, providing access to information in the same way that views outside can be used to check the weather or see the types of activity happening on the street.

・An external screen linked to a live camera in a local park adds foreground activity to a panoramic view. Because the screen shows local imagery, as opposed to video from a far away place, it provides additional, comprehensible detail that enhances the existing view. This view might enhance the restorative experience of looking out the window while creating a stronger sense of connection to the surrounding environment. When not in use, the screen can be rolled to one side if required.

・Views such as this one blur the distinction between the landscape itself and external, processed views of the landscape.

・The air traffic control balcony speaker receives and plays back radio communications between air traffic controllers and the pilots of aircraft passing overhead. The device would typically be positioned outside like a window box – its location near the airplanes passing overhead would add a new dimension to the view out the window while still retaining comprehensibility.

・Like a chiming clock tower in the distance, displays outside the window give additional character to seemingly repetitive everyday events, such as planes passing overhead or children playing in the park. The view out the window becomes a resource for commentary and reflection – a curated view of the world outside.

・Electronic window box

・“In the evenings, when most of the long-haul flights depart, I like to watch the planes dispersing from the airport. I can hear the pilots calling in their route plans and signing off before they head out over the ocean.”

・Electronic displays might augment existing foliage around the home, creating a hybrid vista including natural and technological displays.

1.6 PHYSICAL SPACE FOR VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES

The relationship between the home and the community, especially the immediate physical community, is declining [1]. Modern households in America generally entertain less frequently in their homes, volunteer less outside their homes, and are involved in fewer activities, such as sports or other clubs. The activities generally increasing in prevalence are passive activities such as watching television, going to movies, and attending sporting events. Additionally, as communication technologies such as cellular phones and online communities (such as MySpace, Second Life, etc.) have enabled the maintenance of connections with a distributed set of people, dependence on spatially proximate communities has decreased [2]. These virtual communities are also important in light of the fact that one in four households in the United States consists of people living alone [3].

While we do not suggest that these distributed communities are any better or worse than more traditional local communities, we do suggest that the physical manifestation of community is important in establishing a heterogeneous domestic environment. Just as the use of metaphors of space and place in virtual communities has been successful [4], bringing those virtual communities into actual physical spaces may be similarly useful.

The most important physical objects in many people’s homes are reminders of friends and family, such as photos, or representations of their standing within the community, such as awards and plaques [5]. As virtual communities composed of friends, family, and broader groups become increasingly prevalent and multi-faceted, we propose that these communities might similarly profit from a physical manifestation in the home. Network technology of course affords the possibility that, rather than being representations of community, technology in the home can create actual connections to these communities.

Key to our proposal is the ability of people to control exposure to the community. The home is a private place, and one of its key roles is to provide sanctuary from the outside world [6]. We do not suggest “always on” connections to community from within the home. Rather, our proposals focus on the ability to create varying levels of connection, such as the ability to “open the doors” onto a virtual community as the outside world quiets down at night.

[1] Putnam, R.: Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon and Schuster, New York (2001)

[2] Boase, J. and Wellman, B.: Personal Relationships: On and Off the Internet. In: Perlman, D. and Vangelisti, A.L. (eds.): Handbook of Personal Relations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2006)

[3] Ahrentzen, S.: Choice in Housing. Harvard Design Magazine 8 (Summer 1999) 1-6

[4] Harrison, S. and Dourish, P.: Re-Place-ing Space: The Roles of Place and Space in Collaborative Systems. In: Proc. CSCW ‘96 (1996) 67-76

[5] Csikszenthmihalyi, M. and Rochberg-Halton, E.: The Meaning of Things: Domestic symbols and the Self. Cambridge University Press (1981)

[6] Dovey, K.: Homes and Homelessness: In I. Altman and C. Werner, eds.: Home Environments (Human Behavior and Environment, v.8). Plenum Press, New York (1985) 33-64

[7] Babwin, D.: Technology to Serve up Virtual Family Dinners for Elderly, Caregivers. USA Today (December 23, 2006)

The Virtual Family Dinner, under development by Accenture, detects when an elderly person who lives alone is preparing a meal, determines which family members living in other areas might be available, and notifies them of the opportunity to share dinner together. The goal of the system is to provide the benefits of social dining to families that can’t physically be near each other more than a few times during the year.

[8] Toyo Ito: Egg of Winds (1990-1991)

Similar to cabinets that allow people to open a door onto virtual communities in the evening, Ito’s Egg of Winds is transformed at night from an undifferentiated sculptural construct into a connection to the virtual world, displaying television feeds from around the city. It provides an alternate view of the virtual city, visible only at night.

[9] Paulos, E. and Goodman, E.: The Familiar Stranger: Anxiety, Comfort, and Play in Public Spaces. In: Proc. CHI ’04 (2004) 223-230

Similar to technologies that connect mobile phone users with “familiar strangers,” people they regularly pass by as they travel around the city, other mobile devices might provide a gradient into new virtual communities. Rather than requiring users to explicitly join a new social network or online chat site, patterns and connections are allowed to emerge as people go about their daily lives.

[10] Epigraph. Microsoft Socio-Digital Systems Group. Online, http://research.microsoft.com/sds/

Much like the neighborhood bulletin board, with screen space reserved for each member of the community, Epigraph provides each member of the household with a portion of the screen that they can customize with images and messages.

Some Open Questions

What types of communities would people want to link to? Would physical connections to virtual communities be most appealing to people that you never see in person or to people that you regularly see? How do these connections relate to privacy within the home? Would virtual connections be one-way, looking out from the home? Or would they be two-way connections between homes, with privacy enforced by mutual accountability?

【図中の文章（左側のページの上から）】

・“Sometimes I invite my friend from across the country over for dinner.”

・“I love to curl up and read a book as the lights come on and everyone starts to log on.”

・Just as looking out the window to “see what’s going on” in the local neighborhood can provide comfort and a sense of connection to the community, physical representations of virtual communities provide increased connection by representing activity in the virtual neighborhood.

・Displays might provide direct communication channels, or they might show abstracted information, such as an array of lights that switch on and off as people enter or leave a household’s favorite online space.

・Doors, dividers, and partitions provide a physical means of controlling the level of accessibility between different spaces of the home. Similarly, cupboard doors might also be used to control the level of connection to virtual communities that border on the physical space of the home. For example, a person living alone might have a video neighbor for dining – a partner, friend, or acquaintance who can virtually take a seat at the dinner table. Most of the time, the video screen would be behind a closed door, but on special occasions or particularly quiet evenings the door might be opened for dinner and a chat afterwards.

・The semi-public spaces in buildings provide an interesting place for intervention, allowing for the display of information that might build connections within the local physical community or for the creation of a parallel set of connections to “virtual neighbors” who have some sort of affiliation with the local community.

・Like physical environments, connections to virtual communities might be limited in size in order to prevent them from becoming overwhelming. For example, a display with limited screen space, a small partition of which is reserved for each person in the community, could function as a neighborhood bulletin board. Other screens might be entirely curated by a single person or organization, such as a rotating museum exhibit or other commentary, providing opportunities for more extended reflection (e.g. over a period of weeks) than is typical in dedicated museum spaces or while browsing online collections.

1.7 THE FRACTAL HOME

In [1], Crompton presents the concept of fractal space, or environments that appear bigger than they actually are because of the numerous opportunities they afford for variations in human occupancy. The complexity of an environment is captured by its “fractal coefficient.” Typical examples of highly fractal space include homes that provide many hiding places for children playing hide-and-go-seek or museums filled with collections of different textures and shapes. Crompton observes that different spaces can have different fractal coefficients for different people. For example, a living room might be more fractal for children who are willing to sit on the floor and are small enough to sit in multiple positions in chairs than for adults who make use of a smaller range of seating options.

Crompton’s work inspired us to consider a home that has a range of spaces with different fractal coefficients in different locations or for different occupants. For example, instead of being a smart home [2] the home might be a semi-smart home, with some areas having significant amounts of technology and others having none. Similarly, spatial complexity might be varied to create a range of complex and undifferentiated places within the home:

Variation in technological and spatial complexity within the home acknowledges the relationship between the virtual and physical spaces we inhabit and gives the people who live in a home a choice about the amount of stimulation they receive from the virtual and physical world. This complexity with understandable choice is a key component of restorative environments, as was discussed in the introduction. Rather than containing one “right” space for every activity, the heterogeneous home enables people to explore different aspects of the domestic environment as their moods and needs change. As Bachelard [3] writes, “we have our cottage moments and our palace moments.” We also have our working moments and our relaxing moments; our public moments and our intimate moments; and our active moments and our reflective moments. It is important to acknowledge these complexities of domestic life. All of the solutions we have proposed define points within the spectrum of fractal complexity that is possible in the home, and our goal is to suggest the range of diverse technologies and spaces that might make up the heterogeneous home.

[1] Crompton, A.: The Fractal Dimension of the Everyday Environment. Environment and Planning B 28 (2001) 243-254

[2] Harper, R.: Inside the Smart Home. Springer, London (2003)

[3] Bachelard, G.: The Poetics of Space. Beacon Press, Boston (1994) 63

【図中の文章（左側のページの上から）】

・A room with high spatial complexity and low virtual complexity

・A room with low spatial complexity and high virtual complexity

・While the increasing availability and precision of sensing technology suggests the possibility of a fully smart home, the need to create boundaries and “take a break” from technology suggests a semi-smart home with different densities of sensing devices in different rooms. Making these sensing configurations explicitly visible provides inhabitants with the ability to tune the level of exposure to technology that they desire.

・The addition of electronic furniture might help to create an  environment that is at the extreme end of both spatial and virtual complexity. For example, a table with a scanner surface would create digital representations of any objects placed on it, allowing them to become part of the virtual space of the home.

・In this plan the living room has a high degree of sensing technology while the bedrooms and bathrooms have a lower resolution sensor arrangement.

・A “fractal mansion,” a sprawling building offering a gradient of spaces with different physical and virtual complexity.

・The opportunity for fractal space exists in homes with varying spatial resources. Large “fractal mansions” are certainly a possibility, with many different rooms for different activities, moods, seasons, or desires for connection with technology. However, the ability to reconfigure space, either virtually or physically, could also create a “fractal studio apartment.” For example, a moving partition would make it possible to try out different sizes and divisions of rooms in a small apartment, perhaps making adjustments to capture more sunlight in the bedroom during lazy weekend mornings or to make more space for virtual connections via electronic devices during a particularly cold and gloomy winter.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank the following people for their inspiration and feedback:

Ken Anderson

Paul Aoki

Sally Augustin

Maria Bezaitis

Kurt Brown

John Canny

Jay Hasbrouck

Shona Kitchen

Dawn Nafus

This work was funded in part by the

Mobile Times project at Intel Research.

CONTACT INFO

Ryan Aipperspach

The Berkeley Institute of Design and Intel Research Berkeley

ryanaip@alumni.rice.edu

Ben Hooker

Intel Research Berkeley (Visiting Faculty)

ben.hooker@gmail.com

Allison Woodruff

Intel Research Berkeley

woodruff@acm.org