by tobias.schittenkopf -

Impulse #4 Learning from Emily Campbell – AI UX Podcast Episode (Dive Club)

Lately I listened to the Dive Club episode with Emily Campbell. Emily is known for Shape of AI, a collection of design patterns for AI products, and her experience gave me a clearer understanding of what makes AI UX both exciting and challenging. While I am really against writing my Thesis about anything involving AI as I am sick and tired of it, this episode helped me reflect on what skills matter in the future of design. Some key insights that stayed with me in no particular order.

Trust as a design goal
Emily talks about how AI systems often behave in an “agentic” way – meaning they make decisions, give suggestions, or perform tasks on their own. Because of this, users can feel uncertain or even anxious. She explains that trust becomes a central design element.
Designers need to focus on transparency: showing what the AI is doing, why it is doing it, and how users can stay in control. I found this helpful because it connects with classic interaction design, but adds a new layer of responsibility.

The rise of AI UX patterns
One of the parts I enjoyed most was the discussion about AI pattern libraries. Emily explains how patterns can support designers who work with unpredictable systems. These patterns help structure prompts, guide outputs, and define how the system communicates.
Creating or analysing AI UX patterns could help designers build safer, clearer interfaces. It suggests that AI UX is becoming mature enough to have shared vocabulary and best practices.

What strong AI UX designers look like
Emily also describes the qualities she looks for in people joining AI design teams. Beyond visual design skills, she values curiosity, comfort with uncertainty, and strong empathy. Good AI designers should understand how systems behave and anticipate user worries or confusion.
I found this inspiring because it shows how the role is evolving. AI UX is not only about screens; it is also about system thinking and ethics.

Whats in it for me

This episode helped me to rethink areas of my research. I now see the importance of studying the relationship between trust, transparency, and pattern-based design. AI systems challenge traditional usability rules, but they also create opportunities to design new interaction models.
This could support safer and more predictable experiences – and while I don’t really want to have my thesis ai related, It helped me broaden my field of Idas and open up my mind.

Listening to Emily Campbell made me realise that AI UX is not a small branch of design – it is probably becoming a core part of how digital products work. The future of interaction design will require us to understand machine behaviour as much as human behaviour.

Link to the Podcast Episode

by sara.waldenberger -

IMPULSE.01 // Neurodiversity and Design

For this blog post I would like to share some thoughts about a talk about accessibility and neurodiversity and add some personal observations I made spending time with my sister.

Side info: My sister (25) is neurodivergent and struggles to use digital interfaces. Because they are part of every day life she has learnt to deal with the difficulties in her own way but often requires help by my parents, me or my brother.

In October we visited the World Usability Congress (WUC) where I attended the talk by Alide von Bornhaupt about designing for neurodivergent people.

In my experience the term “accessibility” the context of digital design is a highly relevant topic in Design Conferences (as it should be). But the talks usually focus more on physical restrictions or disabilities and less on psychological accessibility. Thankfully, in recent years neurodivergence is talked about more openly and resources are more widely spread.

This is why Alide’s talk stood out to me in the agenda of WUC. She started out her talk with telling her audience why keeping neurodivergent people in mind when designing with some numbers:

  • every 5th person is neurodivergent
  • 300 000 inhabitants in Graz –> 61 000 people in Graz are neurodivergent

A tram ticket in Graz is 3,50 €. If buying a tram ticket is not possible / challenging for this group of people this could mean more than 213 000 € loss in revenue for the tram company.

I’m aware that Alide used this example to put the whole topic into a business perspective, especially for people that need to convince stakeholders to shine a light on neurodiverse people. Nevertheless I found this example kind of hilarious because buying tickets for public transport is something my sister struggles with a lot. Taking the train to visit me in Graz and going on the tram to my appartement has been challenging every time she visited me in the last year. But because she she has no other option than to buy the ticket, nobody is losing money.

Neurodiversity can be many different things like ADHD, autism, dyslexia. Neurodivergent people often struggle with energy because they mask certain behavioral patterns to not seem different. My sister particularly struggles with reading and comprehending patterns that seem straight forward to allistic patterns. She gets overwhelmed with the “simple” task of buying a ticket and has to seek help from her family. This makes her less independent of her own life and reliant on help from others.

Of course the ideal solution would be to have testing pool of neurodiverse people to evaluate their struggles and needs. But this can be challenging because half of neurodivergent adults are not diagnosed and neurodiversity is so individual. This is why Alide emphasises to test digital products with lots of people. Because the more people you test with, the more neurodiverse people you test with.

https://goodwinliving.org/embracing-neurodivergence-understanding-and-celebrating-different-minds/

As mentioned in previous blog posts, my research topic (nationwide eHealth tool) needs to be something that is designed for everyone. In my thesis I really want to focus on the aspect of designing for neurodiversity. Because technology is evolving so rapidly and even allistic (neurotypical) people are struggling to keep up I really hope to meet the needs of people like my sister when designing tools to make everyday life simpler to navigate through.

No AI was used to create this blog post.

by arinze.onyebuchi -

IMPULSE #3: Interesting read from the chapter “The Need for Ethics in Design” from The Ethical Design Handbook and how we can effectively implement ethics in our work

I started reading “The Ethical Design Handbook” by Trine Falbe, Martin Michael Frederiksen, and Kim Andersen (it was one of the very first resources I discovered and noted down in the initial gathering process that led to the choice of my thesis topic) and now, I treat it as an ongoing, dip-in resource rather than a straight-through textbook. It is framed as a practical guide for leaving dark patterns behind and making ethical design part of everyday digital product work, not just a side note. For my thesis on helping people manage their digital footprints, this book feels like a toolkit I can slowly mine: I can pick the chapters that match my current questions, use them, and then come back later when a new angle opens up.​

Right now, I’m really chewing alot on the second chapter “The Need for Ethics in Design”, because it sets up why ethical design has to be more than simple legal compliance. The authors walk through consequences of unethical design and show how dark patterns, aggressive tracking, and manipulative interfaces damage trust and harm users. They also introduce ethical principles like non-instrumentalism, self-determination, responsibility, and fairness, and connect them to familiar frameworks such as Privacy by Design. Reading this as a preparatory part of my future thesis work, is really helping me sharpen the language to better describe what bothers me about many current products and services: which currently treat people purely as data sources or conversion targets, this very action breaks those core principles and undermines users’ ability to effectively understand and shape their digital footprints.​

What feels especially useful is how concrete the book tries to be. It is not just “be nice to users” as an abstract value statement; it tries to build an actual working framework, including tools like the Ethical Design Scorecard and “ethical blueprints” for real design processes. The scorecard is meant to assess how a product performs on different ethical dimensions, with weighted criteria. For my thesis, this sparks a very practical idea: I could adapt or extend such a scorecard specifically around footprint-related questions like what data is collected, how transparent the flows are, how easy it is to revoke or change consent, and whether users can see or manage their historical data in meaningful ways.​

This chapter also acknowledges that change has to happen inside teams and businesses, not just in individual designers’ heads. Later parts of the book (which I plan to read next) focus on “creating positive change” and “the business of ethical design”, arguing that ethical practices can be aligned with sustainable business models instead of being framed as a cost. That connects well with my thesis constraint of balancing business needs with user autonomy: if I can borrow some of the arguments and models from these chapters, I can show how ethical digital footprint management is not just “good for users” but also part of a long-term, trust-based product strategy.​

As an ongoing read, I see myself using this book in two ways. First, as a language and framework source: the principles and scorecard approach help me structure the “ethical requirements” part of my thesis more clearly. Second, as a bridge to practice: the blueprints and case-studies can inform how I generally approach projects/work in my career to more genuinely support user agency instead of nudging people into over-sharing and not giving them effective ways to manage what has been overshared. ​

Here is the official site for The Ethical Design Handbook, which includes the table of contents, the ethical design scorecard, and downloadable blueprints that expand on the tools discussed in the book:
https://ethicaldesignhandbook.com​

Smashing Magazine’s book page gives a good high-level overview of the book’s goals, including how it aims to help teams replace dark patterns with honest patterns while still supporting business KPIs:
https://www.smashingmagazine.com/printed-books/ethical-design-handbook/​

Finally, this Smashing Magazine article announcing the handbook’s release explains why the book was written and emphasizes the need for practical, long-lasting solutions to move companies away from manipulative design and towards sustainable, ethical digital footprints:
https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2020/03/ethical-design-handbook-release/​

Disclaimer: This blog post was developed with AI assistance (Perplexity) to help with structuring and phrasing my reflections.

by florian.prasse -

Impulse #2: Computer Vision in UI/UX

After diving into Picard’s vision of emotionally intelligent systems, I now found a more technical and practical perspective on how computer vision is already reshaping UI testing. The research paper Computer Vision for UI Testing: Leveraging Image Recognition and AI to Validate Elements and Layouts explores automated detection of UI problems using image recognition techniques, something highly relevant for improving UX/UI workflows today.

Img: Unveiling the Impat of Computer Vision on UI Testing. Pathak, Kapoor

Using Computer Vision to validate Visual UI Quality

The authors explain that traditional UI testing still relies heavily on manual inspection or DOM-based element identification, which can be slow, brittle and prone to human error. In contrast, computer vision can directly analyze rendered screens: detecting missing buttons, misaligned text, broken layouts, or unwanted shifts across different devices and screen sizes. This makes visual testing more reliable and scalable, especially for modern responsive interfaces where designs constantly change during development.

One key contribution from the paper is the use of deep learning models such as YOLO, Faster R-CNN, and MobileNet SSD for object detection of UI elements. These models not only recognize what is displayed on the screen but verify whether the UI looks as intended, something code-based tools often miss when designs shift or UI elements become temporarily hidden under overlays. By incorporating techniques like OCR for text validation and structural similarity (SSIM) for layout comparison, the testing process becomes more precise in catching subtle visual inconsistencies that affect the user experience.

Conclusion

This opens a potential master thesis direction where computer vision not only checks whether UI elements are visually correct but also evaluates user affect during interaction, identifying frustration, confusion, or cognitive overload as measurable usability friction. Such a thesis could bridge technical UI defect detection with affective UX evaluation, moving beyond “does the UI render correctly?” toward “does the UI emotionally support its users?”. By combining emotion recognition models with CV-based layout analysis, you could develop an adaptive UX testing system that highlights not only where usability issues occur but also why they matter to the user.

Source: https://www.techrxiv.org/users/898550/articles/1282199-computer-vision-for-ui-testing-leveraging-image-recognition-and-ai-to-validate-elements-and-layouts

by arinze.onyebuchi -

IMPULSE #2: Reflecting on the panel discussion Privacy design, dark patterns, and speculative data futures – What if we designed for better data futures on purpose?

The panel at CPDP 2022 on “Privacy design, dark patterns, and speculative data futures” brings together researchers, regulators, and designers to talk about how current interfaces manipulate people, and how speculative design and foresight could help us imagine and build better data futures. This panel was moderated by Cristiana Santos (University of Utrecht, Netherlands) and had speakers like Régis Chatellier, Stefano Leucci, Dusan Pavlovic, Arianna Rossi and Cennydd Bowles.

The core things discussed on this panel is very close to my thesis: on one side, dark patterns and privacy-invasive mechanisms quietly exploit users; on the other side, there is a growing push for transparency-enhancing technologies and privacy-by-design approaches that could give people more control over their digital footprints.​​

One of the clear threads in the discussion is that dark patterns are not accidents; they result from deliberate choices, business pressures, and a lack of ethical guardrails in the design process. Panelists talk about building description schemas and datasets to systematically identify and classify deceptive patterns in interfaces, especially around privacy choices and access to personal data. For my thesis, this reinforces the idea that “ethical design” cannot stay abstract. If I want to help people manage their digital footprints, I need to treat dark patterns and their opposites as concrete, nameable design patterns and counter-patterns that can be recognised, tested, and avoided.​​

Another important topic is how law, design, and foresight can work together. Several speakers stress that legal tools and enforcement alone are too slow and reactive to address fast-moving interface manipulation. They argue that designers and product managers hold a lot of power over whether an interface is deceptive or respectful, and that speculative methods can be used to anticipate future harms and design for better outcomes before those harms become normal. This fits directly with my research interest in “effective” ethical design: effectiveness here means not just compliance, but the ability of interfaces to prevent foreseeable harm to users’ data and autonomy.​​

Speculative design appears in the panel as a practical method, not just an art-school exercise. One example the discussion connects to is the use of speculative enactments and design fiction to help designers explore tensions between business goals and privacy rights. By staging hypothetical interfaces and futures, designers can see how certain patterns might feel manipulative or disloyal before they are deployed at scale. For my thesis, this suggests a concrete technique: using speculative prototypes to make digital footprints and their consequences visible, then inviting users or stakeholders to react to these “what if” scenarios.​

The panel also raises a warning: speculative design can become trendy and superficial if it is done without a clear purpose or connection to actual decision-making. For ethical design, this means that speculative scenarios should feed into real processes like data protection impact assessments, design reviews, or pattern libraries, instead of staying as cool concept visuals. This is a useful constraint for my own work: any speculative interface I use in my thesis should be clearly tied to decisions about what data is collected, how consent is handled, and how users see and control their footprints.​​

For my research, this impulse does three things. First, it nudges me to explicitly frame dark patterns as “disloyal” design choices that work against users’ interests, especially in how their data is captured and used. Second, it shows that privacy-by-design and speculative design can be combined: speculative futures can help define the guardrails and desirable directions for ethical interaction patterns around digital footprints. Third, it highlights that designers and product teams must be at the center of this work, not just lawyers and regulators, which strengthens my argument that interaction design is a key lever for meaningful digital autonomy.​​

Some accompanying links:

Here is a link to the full panel video, which serves as the core resource for this impulse and gives the complete discussion on privacy design, dark patterns, and data futures:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbP_SjtGdkk​

This conference program entry and description provide context on how the panel fits into a broader event on privacy and data protection, including its goals and questions around law, design, and foresight:
https://researchportal.vub.be/files/97144098/2022.05.22_CPDP2022.pdf​

Finally, this related article on “Rationalizing Dark Patterns” explores how designers themselves rationalize or reproduce dark patterns in privacy UX, and proposes speculative enactments as a tool for more critical, privacy-aware design practice, which aligns well with the panel’s themes and my thesis:
http://www.ijdesign.org/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/4117/972​

Disclaimer: This blog post was developed with AI assistance (Perplexity) to help with structuring and phrasing my reflections.

by elina.dorzhieva -

IMPULSE4. Immersive Art Isn’t New, And It Isn’t About Tech: What Rafael Taught Me

I recently watched a talk on YouTube called Immersive Installations? Digital Experiences in the Exhibition, with Mollie Dent-Brocklehurst, Felice Grodin, Rafael Lozano-Hemmer, and moderated by Brian Droitcour. Out of all the speakers, Rafael Lozano-Hemmer completely captured my attention. I didn’t expect to feel so inspired or emotionally affected by an online discussion, but his work and the way he talks about art really stayed with me.

Before this, I knew his name but not much about him. Rafael Lozano-Hemmer is a Mexican-Canadian artist who works somewhere between architecture, technology, and performance. He represented Mexico at the Venice Biennale, has exhibitions all around the world, and his works are in MoMA, Tate, MUAC and many more. But honestly, it wasn’t the biography that impressed me, it was the way he thinks.

Border Tuner

The first thing that really moved me was his project Border Tuner (2019). This installation connected people across the US–Mexico border using controllable bridges of light. When two people pointed their lights at each other and the beams intersected, a communication channel opened and they could talk.

This idea is simple but incredibly emotional. Families who were separated got to speak, people flirted through light, strangers made jokes, shared feelings, or told stories. The installation didn’t just enable communication, it created a moment of human connection in a place normally associated with division and politics.

This reminded me that art can and should be political, and it can be political in a very human, poetic way. It doesn’t have to scream; sometimes it just needs to open a space.

You Can Never Predict the Public

Another project he mentioned was Vicious Circular Breathing (2013), a sealed glass room where visitors are invited to breathe the air that previous visitors have breathed. To me, the concept sounds honestly quite nasty, and Rafael admitted that he thought people would refuse to participate. But surprisingly, every single visitor wanted to experience it. People lined up for it.

For him, that unpredictability is one of the things he loves most:
the artwork changes based on how the public responds.
 You can never fully control or expect it, and that’s exactly what gives the installation life.

This thought stayed with me because in interaction design we often try to predict every user behavior. But maybe the beauty lies in not predicting everything, in letting people transform the work.

Immersive Art Is Not New

One important point Rafael made was that immersive art is actually not something new. Engaging, participatory art has been around for decades. What’s weird is when museums pretend this trend is suspicious or “too modern,” while at the same time people are spending eight hours a day on screens.

The world changes, and museums should naturally evolve with it. Ignoring immersive digital experiences is almost like ignoring reality. I liked how calmly he explained this, it felt obvious, yet refreshing to hear.

The Cutting Edge of Immersive Installations? Poems.

One part of Rafael’s talk that really stayed with me was when someone asked him what he thinks is currently the “cutting edge” in immersive installations. And instead of mentioning VR, AI, lasers, or anything futuristic, he just said: poem reading.

His point was that the future of immersive art is not about technological development. It’s not about using the newest toy or the most complex software. Technology shouldn’t be the point of the artwork. It should only be there to help express the idea.

And then he said something that I absolutely loved because it was so honest and funny:
he basically admitted that the only reason he works with technology is because he “can’t write shit.”

I found this extremely grounding. It reminded me that interactive art shouldn’t try to look impressive just because of technology. What matters is the thought behind it. The message. The emotion. The reason the piece exists.

Advice for Young Artists: Start Small

At the end, someone asked how young artists should begin. His answer was simple but very practical:
start small and prototype.
Make something tiny first. Play with it. Test it. And then bring that prototype to museums, companies, or organizations. If you try to do it the opposite way, you’ll spend all your time searching instead of creating.

I found that advice really motivating, because it makes the whole process feel much more doable. You don’t need a huge team or a massive budget to begin, you just need a small idea and the courage to try.

Final Thoughts

Rafael’s talk genuinely inspired me. It made me reflect not only on immersive installations but also on my own approach to interactive technologies in art. His examples were emotional, political, poetic, and deeply human. And his way of thinking, valuing meaning over novelty, unpredictability over control, and simplicity over technical showing-off is something I want to carry into my own work.

https://www.lozano-hemmer.com/vicious_circular_breathing.php

https://www.lozano-hemmer.com/border_tuner__sintonizador_fronterizo.php

AI was used for corrections, better wording, and enhancements.

by elina.dorzhieva -

IMPULSE3. Discovering New Senses: What I Learned from 100 More Things Every Designer Should Know About People

I recently finished reading 100 More Things Every Designer Should Know About People by Susan Weinschenk, and honestly, it turned out to be one of the most fascinating design books I’ve read in a while. It’s very simple on the surface, just “facts about people”, but so many of them made me stop and think about how much design actually influences us and how little we understand about the way humans perceive the world.

The book covers everything from how to make people pay attention to specific parts of a design, to what makes people buy things, to how different colors and styles work differently for different genders. But the parts that surprised me the most were the ones about human perception.

For example, I had no idea that some women are tetrachromats, meaning they have four cones in their eyes instead of three. They literally see more colors than most people, but they don’t even know it, because the entire world is designed for “normal” vision. This idea blew my mind a bit. It made me think about how much design assumes an “average user” who doesn’t really exist.

Another thing that shocked me was the fact that movement improves memory. I always thought you had to sit still and concentrate to learn something. But apparently if you walk around or move while learning, you actually remember better. This really made me reflect on museums and how often they expect visitors to stand still, read, stare—and then somehow magically absorb information. Maybe movement should be part of learning.

One thing that made me genuinely happy was the chapter about daydreaming. According to the book, mind wandering is actually very important for creativity. I always noticed that I come up with better ideas when I’m just staring at a wall, spacing out, not forcing myself to think. I thought it was just me being weird or unproductive. But it turns out this is how our brain forms new connections. So now I feel like my way of thinking isn’t wrong—it’s actually useful.

But the part that really grabbed my attention more than everything else was fact number 100. It was about how our brain processes sensory information unconsciously, and that it doesn’t really care where the information comes from. The example was David Eagleman’s “vest” that sends vibration patterns to the body. After some time, without special training, people could understand what the vibrations meant. So the vest basically created a new sense.

This idea amazed me. That we can literally create new senses. That the brain is ready to learn new types of information if we just feed it signals in a consistent way.

It feels almost like science fiction, and I can’t believe this was already happening ten years ago. I haven’t heard much about this vest since then, which is strange, because to me this opens so many possibilities.

For my master thesis, I’m working with interactive technologies in art and museums, and this idea of creating new senses suddenly feels extremely relevant. If the brain doesn’t care where information comes from, then why should art experiences be limited to audio guides and screens?

If people can “learn” a new sense simply through exposure, then maybe museums could help visitors experience art in more immersive and emotional ways. Not just by showing more information, but by expanding perception.

https://dokumen.pub/100-things-every-designer-needs-to-know-about-people-9780136746911-0136746918.html

AI was used for corrections, better wording, and enhancements.

by elina.dorzhieva -

IMPULSE2. A Visit to CoSA: Interactive, Playful, and Sometimes Overwhelming

I visited CoSA in Graz twice this year, first during the free museum night, and later as part of our gamification class. Both times, I was struck by how different this museum feels compared to traditional exhibitions. CoSA is built around interactivity: projections, physical installations, mixed-reality elements, and playful tasks that invite visitors to touch, move, and explore. It’s clearly targeted at a younger audience, probably Gen Z and younger, and it embraces that energy fully.

During my first visit, I went through the financial literacy exhibition, and things went downhill pretty quickly. Very early in the experience, I interacted with a rotating “helicopter” screen that projected information in a spinning, vibrating way. It was visually interesting, but also extremely disorienting. I immediately felt dizzy, and the motion sickness stayed with me for the rest of the day. Normally, I would blame my own system for being sensitive, but after reflecting on inclusive design in my previous blog post, I realized how important it is to account for this. If I struggled, there are definitely people who would struggle even more. Interactivity is exciting, but not every body reacts the same way, and this is something experience designers often forget when creating “wow effects.”

Another challenge I noticed throughout the museum was the amount of information. Many exhibitions were packed with text, explanations, and tasks. As much as it hurts to admit it as a Gen Z person, I found it genuinely hard to focus and stay engaged for long. It reminded me that attention itself is a design material, and designing for young people may require clearer prioritization, pacing, or layering of content.

Despite that, there were moments where CoSA really shined. My favorite installation was a hospital-like scenario where you could assess a patient, analyze blood samples, and make a diagnosis. Another one was a car-building station where you could assemble different parts, load your custom vehicle into a game, and actually drive it. Both experiences captured my attention from start to finish, and they had something important in common: almost no text. They were intuitive, tactile, and driven by action rather than reading.

But even here, I noticed a tension: without the audible explanations from the museum guide, it wasn’t always clear how to start or what the goal was. And this raised a bigger design question in my mind:
How do you balance clarity and playfulness?
 Too much text makes everything feel heavy and academic. But no explanation at all can make visitors feel lost. The sweet spot is somewhere in between, and it’s something I want to think more about in my own design practice.

Overall, even though my experiences at CoSA were mixed (and influenced by dizziness, energy levels, and mindset), I still appreciated the museum for what it tries to do. It’s rare to see exhibitions that encourage touch, movement, experimentation, and play. With a bit more balance between interaction and guidance, and more sensitivity to different types of bodies and perception, CoSA could become an even stronger example of how museums can evolve for younger generations.

And next time, I’ll try to visit without triggering my motion sickness first.

by elina.dorzhieva -

Impulse 1.When Responsibility Meets Reality: What I Learned About Inclusive Design at WUC Graz

This year at the World Usability Congress in Graz, one of the talks that stayed with me the most was “When Responsibility Meets Reality: Strategies for Making Inclusive Design Happen” by Nina Hundhausen, Strategic Designer and Accessibility Lead at Deutsche Telekom.

As someone working in interaction design, I spend a lot of time thinking about user needs, empathy, and human-centered experiences. But this talk pushed me to look at inclusive design not only through a design lens, but as something deeply political, organizational, and cultural.

What I appreciated most was how honestly she described the gap between intention and execution. Designing inclusively isn’t just about adding guidelines on top of a project or checking off WCAG requirements at the end. It’s about changing mindsets, shifting team cultures, and making accessibility a shared responsibility instead of a niche specialty. She showed how inclusive design only works when everyone, from product managers to developers, feels ownership and understands why accessibility matters beyond compliance. Her examples from Deutsche Telekom made this feel very real: sometimes progress happens through structured processes, and sometimes through small, persistent conversations that gradually build awareness.

My main takeaway from the talk was that inclusive design becomes possible only when it becomes human. It’s not about designing for “edge cases,” but designing for real people with real lives and remembering that we all move through different levels of ability throughout our lives. I also realized how important it is, as a designer, to advocate for inclusion even when the environment isn’t perfectly set up for it. We can start small, ask the right questions early, and make accessibility part of the normal design conversation instead of an afterthought.

Listening to Nina made me reflect on my own process. I often think about users’ emotional and physical needs in interaction design, but accessibility is something I still tend to treat as a “later” step. Her talk reminded me that accessibility isn’t a separate layer, it’s part of creating meaningful, humane experiences from the very beginning. And even if we can’t solve everything at once, taking responsibility in the small moments can already move a team toward more inclusive outcomes.

AI was used for corrections, better wording, and enhancements.

by arinze.onyebuchi -

IMPULSE #1: Reflecting on the book “Designing Interactions” – What responsibility really hides behind an interface?

I got a week with Bill Moggridge’s “Designing Interactions”(huge thanks to Prof. Baumann) and it felt like sitting in a long, honest conversation with the people who built the interfaces we now use everyday. The interviews and case stories walk through the shift from early graphical interfaces and the mouse, all the way to mobile devices, games, and speculative futures, and you start to see how every design decision quietly teaches users how to think about technology. For my thesis on ethical design and digital footprints, this book is a reminder that interaction design is never neutral; it always shapes what users notice, what they ignore, and how aware they are of the traces they leave behind. Some chapters really highlight the ​importance of how design shapes how humans leave digital footprints and it really opened further curiosities.

The early GUI stories around the mouse and the desktop metaphor are a good reminder of how much power metaphors have. Designers were not only drawing icons; they were defining how people imagine “working” inside a computer, using windows, folders, and simple interactions. Translating this to my thesis, I realize current privacy banners, “activity” views, and history logs are also metaphors that teach people what a digital footprint is. If the interface hides most of the trail or wraps it in vague language, users will assume there is not much going on. That is already a design decision, not an accident.​

The chapter “From the Desk to the Palm” is where the digital footprint issue becomes impossible to ignore. These chapters walk through how interactions left the desk and moved into pockets, hands, and everyday routines. Once devices became mobile and always connected, data stopped being something people “entered” and became something that is constantly generated in the background. For my work, this underlines a key ethical challenge: people are not always consciously “using” a product when their data is being collected. Ethical interaction design must therefore find ways to surface what is happening in the background without overwhelming people.​

Then “Adopting Technology” stories highlight the negotiation between what is technically possible and what is acceptable or understandable for users. Designers keep running into constraints and tradeoffs, and those constraints end up shaping the final product. I see a clear parallel here with privacy-by-design: if ethical constraints and data-minimization rules are built into the process early, they can shape the interaction in the same way as technical limits. This helps me think of ethics not as an add-on checklist, but as part of the design brief.​

Also, the “People and Prototypes” chapter gives me a practical hook. He describes a process grounded in talking to people, building quick prototypes, and iterating under constraints. For my thesis, I can borrow this structure and explicitly define “ethical constraints” around data collection, consent, and transparency, then test them through prototypes. Instead of just saying “this design is ethical,” I can show how those constraints influenced specific interaction choices.​

There is also value in the more future-focused material. The speculative and “alternative nows” work shows designers imagining other ways technology could fit into society, not all of them comfortable. This inspires me to think about what a future interface would look like if it treated digital footprints as something to be clearly seen and managed, rather than hidden. For example, could a product visualize data trails in real time, or let users rehearse different “data futures” depending on the choices they make?​

For my thesis, this impulse leads to three concrete moves: first, to treat metaphors and mental models as central when designing how people understand their digital traces. Second, to adopt a “people, prototypes, constraints” process that includes ethical and privacy constraints from the start. Third, to use speculative scenarios to question today’s defaults and imagine interfaces that actively help people manage their footprints instead of quietly expanding them.

​
Some relevant accompanying links:

Here is a link to the publisher’s page for “Designing Interactions”, which gives a clear overview of the structure, chapters, and focus of the book:
https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/655668/designing-interactions-by-bill-moggridge/9780262134743​

For another perspective, this review summarises the key themes and interviews in the book and helps me cross-check which parts are most relevant to interaction design practice and my thesis:
https://www.pdma.org/page/review_designing_int​

Lastly, this introduction to interaction design offers a concise explanation of how interaction design shapes user behavior and expectations, which supports my argument that design decisions influence how people understand their digital footprints:
https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/book/the-encyclopedia-of-human-computer-interaction-2nd-ed/interaction-design-brief-intro​


Disclaimer: This blog post was developed with AI assistance (Perplexity) to help structuring and phrasing my reflections.