The master thesis “Designing for Slow Reflection: Using a Physical Artifact to Reflect on Screen Exposure” was written by Dimitra Gkounta and Hasini Wijayantha, from the Master’s Programme in Human Computer Interaction and User Experience at the Umeå University in 2025. It explores how design can encourage people to think more deeply about their screen habits before going to sleep. In the current world, where most echnologies are designed to be fast and efficient, the authors experiment with slow technology; a design approach that promotes patience, reflection, and awareness instead of instant gratification.

Their research question is clear:

How can slow technology design qualities be implemented in an artifact to foster reflection on screen exposure before sleep?

To explore this, they used a Research through Design approach and created a low-fidelity prototype figurine that changed it’s appearance based on participants self reported screen time and sleep quality over the span of three days. The figurine represented the users behaviour visually through torn clothes or dirt (representing poor sleep or excessive screen time) or a neat appearance (representing healthier habits).

Pre-Evaluation

The figurine is well documented in this thesis. The authors describe its material, design choices, and the reasoning behind each visual change, such as torn clothing or posture adjustments. Photos and diagrams show the figurine in different stages of transformation thus painting a clear picture of the development process. It is also explained why the figurine was kept low-fidelity, giving a very well documented impression overall.

Though it is not publicly accessible the detailed explanation of the process would allow an interested party to recreate a similar setup.

The theoretical arguments and the practical implementation align convincingly which can be seen by a clear representation of three slow technology qualities (explicit slowness, ongoingness, and pre-interaction). There is a deliberate delay between data reporting and visual change (explicit slowness), the figurines gradual deterioration (ongoingness), and the morning audio journaling (pre-interaction). Though some participants reacted poorly to the delayed feedback, that just confirmed the expected challenge of introducing slowness into an environment that is accustomed to fast-technology.

Overall the documentation is clear and comprehensible. Each methodological step is described in detail, easy to follow and participant quotes give quick insight into how the figurine was perceived.

In my opinion, the quality of this thesis fully meets the standards expected of a master’s thesis and could be used as a shining example. It demonstrates a strong link between theory and design, creative experimentation, and careful reflection.

Main Evaluation

Overall Presentation Quality
The thesis is professionally presented and well structured. There is a clear line leading from theory to practice and both the term slow technology and the design process of the figurine are explained well. The thesis reads very easily without loosing its scientific tone which was a pleasant surprise.

Degree of Innovation
I think this work is highly original, at least I haven’t seen anything similar before. It combines slow technology with self tracking through data which is very interesting. The delayed feedback approach was very new to me since most technologies focus on near instant feedback and quick responses. The figurine also introduced a certain ambiguity to the data which is a refreshing idea, hopefully leading to more meaningful engagement. Overall the thesis provided a fresh perspective by focussing on designing for reflection rather than efficiency.

Independence
The authors show strong independence and creativity. They designed and created the figurine themselves, developed the study setup, and critically reflected on their own design choices. And though it was not without its challenges (e.g. participant misinterpretation), they adjusted their method accordingly.

Organization and structure
This thesis is organized very logically. Each section builds upon the previous one and has a clear focus. The transitition from theory to practice is clear and the documentation of both design and analysis is easy to follow. Photos of the figurine add to an easily digestable reading experience.

Communication
The writing style is professional yet clear and easy to understand. Concepts like explicit slowness, ongoingness, and pre-interaction are well explained. In my opinion the authors successfully combined technical language with narrative elements such as participant quotes which made the whole thesis engaging to read.

Scope
The scope fits the level of a master thesis. The project focuses on a specific, manageable question and a small user group of six participants. My only critique would be that the study frame was very short (three days) and could’ve been expanded.

Accuracy and Attention to Detail
The study reads very careful and precise. The theoretical foundation seems solid and the design and analysis are documented in such detail, that it makes it easy to understand how the figurines transformations came about.

Literature
This thesis makes great use of literature by connecting classical theories of reflection (Schön, 1987) with more recent studies on slow design and personal informatics. The authors also situate their project in a broader research context by showing how their study fills a gap in applying slow technology in self-tracking before sleep.

Overall Assessment

This thesis was super interesting to read, gave plenty of new perspective, food for thought, and was overall a thoughtful piece of research. It had a strong theoretical foundation, a creative new concept and a more than sufficiently reflective analysis. I think the application of slow technology principles, through a physical figurine into personal informatics is innovative and refreshing and made for an engaging read. A minor weakness is the short duration of the study, which limits insight into long-term behavioral change and could question the validity of the study outcome. Still, this thesis offers some inspiration for designers/researchers who want to rethink the role of slowness and reflection in todays fast paced environment. Slowing down could actually help us see ourselves more clearly.

Take-away: Vortrag von Kerstin Röse – „Digital Exclusion“

Der Vortrag von Kerstin Röse beim World Usability Congress war für mich ganz spannend, weil er ein Thema behandelt hat, das man im UX/UI-Design oft vergisst: ältere Menschen als Zielgruppe. Wir designen meistens neue Interfaces, informieren uns über die neusten KI Modelle oder das Internet of Things, dabei gibt es gleichzeitig eine ganze Generation, die sich von dieser „digitalen Welt“ ausgeschlossen fühlt oder gar keinen Zugang hat. Eigentlich ein Thema, dass uns in Betracht unserer Großeltern auch bewusst ist, aber es war trotzdem interessant, noch ein paar empirischere Daten und noch mehr sensibilisierung zu dem Thema zu bekommen. Jedenfalls ging es im Vortrag um digitale Exklusion, speziell bei Menschen ab 65 Jahren, und was wir als Designer*innen dagegen tun können.

Röse hat in ihrem Talk den Satz gesagt: „Every generation will get their silverliners.“ – also, jede Generation bekommt irgendwann ihre „Silberrücken“, ihre älteren Menschen, die mit den technologischen Entwicklungen Schritt halten müssen. Sie hat auch schön gezeigt, wie sich die digitale Interaktion über die Jahrzehnte verändert hat – von Kommandozeilen über grafische Interfaces bis hin zu KI Inputs meist über Sprache. Ich hab mich gefragt, welche technische Neuerung wohl kommen wird, wenn ich ein silverliner bin und mit der Weiterentwicklung kämpfe.

Ein zentrales Thema war, dass digitale Transformation nur dann erfolgreich ist, wenn sie alle einschließt. Damit hat sie deutlich gemacht, dass digitale Teilhabe nicht nur ein soziales, sondern auch ein wirtschaftliches Thema ist. Anscheinend gewinnt man nämlich nur so Konzerne dazu, Inklusion zu betreiben: Wenn ältere (oder anderwertig beeinträchtigte) Menschen ausgeschlossen bleiben, verlieren sowohl sie als auch Unternehmen wichtige Potenziale. Und schließlich geht es immer um den Umsatz.

Ein weiterer wichtiger Punkt war die Studie „D21 Digital-Index 2020/21“, die sie zitiert hat. Darin wurde untersucht, was sogenannte „Offliner“ – also Menschen, die das Internet nicht nutzen – motivieren würde, doch digital aktiv zu werden. Die Ergebnisse waren so:

• 23 % würden sich mehr trauen, wenn ihnen jemand zeigt, wie es funktioniert.
• 20 % wünschen sich einfachere Bedienung.
• 19 % würden sich überzeugen lassen, wenn sie einen klaren persönlichen Nutzen sehen.

Diese Zahlen zeigen ziemlich deutlich, dass es beim Thema „Digital Inclusion“ nicht nur um Technik geht, sondern um Verständnis, Empathie und gute Kommunikation. Als Designer*innen sollten wir besondern bei der “einfachen Bedienung” einwirken können – indem wir Produkte schaffen, die intuitiver sind, Vertrauen aufbauen und Menschen Schritt für Schritt begleiten. Den letzten Punkt mit “persönlichen Nutzen” verstehe ich nicht ganz. Wenn sie eh keinen Zweck für an einem digitalen Gerät sehen, weil sie ihr Leben ev. mithilfe von Verwandten oder offline Medien regeln können, dann seh ich auch keinen anderen Nutzen, außer kommerz, den Offlinern unbedingt das Internet aufzubürden.

Was ich aus dem Vortrag wiedermal mitgenommen habe, ist vor allem: Design hat Verantwortung. In meiner Masterarbeit wird es wahrscheinlich nicht um ältere Menschen oder Barrierefreiheit im Web gehen, aber ev. um die Benachteiligung von Frauen in Kunst und Wissenschaft, und der Grundtenor “Exklusion” bleibt auch hier derselbe.

Hier der Link zu der Studie:

https://initiatived21.de/uploads/03_Studien-Publikationen/D21-Digital-Index/2020-21/d21digitalindex-2020_2021.pdf

Es kommen bei dem Digitalisierungsindex jährlich Zahlen raus, in wie weit die Digitalisierung in Deutschland fortgeschritten ist.

Yesterday in class, we did a simple, yet for me, annoying exercise: write continuously for seven minutes, starting with the phrase “I am writing my master’s thesis about…” No stopping, no editing, no thinking too much … just writing. 

What began as a stream of random thoughts quickly turned into something more revealing. I switched from English to German almost instantly, because it felt more natural — and maybe also because the topic touches something personal. I found myself writing about how religion, especially Catholicism, still influences me, and how my relationship with it has changed over time. 

I realized that my thesis isn’t just about “religion and millennials” in an abstract sense. It’s about the tension between belief and institution, between faith and church. I wrote about how many of my friends have turned away from religion, how the Church has lost credibility, and yet how my personal faith still gives me strength. That contradiction — being supported by something that many reject — feels like the heart of what I want to explore. 

During those seven minutes, I also wrote about my uncertainty: How can I make this topic interactive? How can I visualize something as internal and emotional as belief? I imagined a projection inside St. Stephen’s Cathedral, a space that already carries so much symbolic weight. But what would I actually project? What is the question behind the light? 

By the end of the exercise, I was exhausted and a little frustrated. Seven minutes can feel endless when you’re forced to confront your own thoughts without a filter.  The writing helped me see that I don’t need to have all the answers yet.  

This small exercise reminded me that creative research isn’t only about collecting data or designing interfaces. It’s also about listening to yourself, about noticing what questions keep returning, even when I tried to avoid them. Question like: Can faith exist without the institution of the Church? But my topic includes the topic of distance as well. Maybe something i should focus more on and something i can work with in my interactive part. 

Dissclaimer: AI was used here for a better wording