Designing Urban Noticing Probes for Community Animals and Cohabitation in Türkiye

Research Background and Problem

• What problems or challenges did the authors identify?
  This study aims to address the anthropocentric bias in urbanization processes by proposing design tools that focus on the interaction relationships of multiple species, particularly urban community animals. Traditional Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) design often centers on human needs and experiences, neglecting the role of non-human participants (such as animals and plants) in urban environments.

• Why is this problem important?
  In urban environments that emphasize human needs, community animals (such as stray cats and dogs in Turkey) are often overlooked or treated unfairly. This not only leads to a reduction in ecological diversity but also exacerbates the power imbalance between humans and other living beings. By redefining community animals as "community members," this study explores how design can promote interspecies coexistence, thereby establishing a more equitable and sustainable urban ecosystem.

• Research Motivation and Related Work
  Drawing on the "Arts of Noticing" theory, the authors reexamine community animals from a non-human perspective, aiming to design HCI tools that align with the principles of multispecies justice. Related research has applied the "Probes" method to environmental observation (e.g., monitoring bird or insect behavior), but most solutions remain human-centered. This study seeks to design probe tools that deconstruct anthropocentrism and embed "community animals" into urban design practices.

Solution

• What methods or solutions did the authors propose?
  The authors proposed a "Three-Layer Noticing Framework" and designed three types of urban noticing probe tools: Tag, Diary, and Sensory Frames.

1. Tag Probes: Utilize existing market technologies (e.g., smart tags) to track the movements of community animals and record environmental interactions.
2. Diary Probes: Employ physical and digital diaries to document daily interactions between humans and animals.
3. Sensory Frames Probes: Combine "walkshop" experiences with sensory frame tools (e.g., hand-shaped or eye-shaped frames) to guide participants in observing animal interactions through multiple senses.

• What is innovative about this solution?

  1. Decentering Humans: Systematically shifting the design focus to include not only human experiences but also the daily behaviors and needs of community animals.
  2. Multi-Layer Noticing Framework: Emphasizing "Noticing Into," "Noticing For," and "Noticing Through" community animals, forming different depths of participatory observation.
  3. Low-cost, visually oriented probe tools that promote interspecies community interaction and environmental sensitivity.

• What are the implementation steps and key technologies used?

  1. Contextual Tag Probes: Use smart tags to record the movement paths of community cats, extending from physical behavior to digital platform analysis.
  2. Diary Probes: Design physical and digital diaries to encourage participants to document weekly interactions with community animals, including activity locations, animal behaviors, and participants' feelings.
  3. Sensory Frames Probes: Use sensory frame tools and host walkshops to guide participants in multisensory recording of community animal-environment interactions, followed by collective sharing and discussion.

Research Outcomes

• What specific outcomes were achieved?

  1. The probe tools helped participants reexamine their relationships with community animals and enhanced their awareness of interspecies interactions.
  2. Sensory Frames successfully integrated walkshops, guiding participants to expand from single visual observation to multisensory interaction.
  3. Diary probe records revealed that participants' interactions often focused on giving behaviors (e.g., feeding), highlighting human-dominated power dynamics.

• What advantages does it have compared to existing solutions?

  • Shifts attention from humans to multiple species, demonstrating a more inclusive and participatory design approach than traditional HCI methods.
  • Multisensory tools (e.g., "sensory frames") create a more multidimensional approach to noticing, helping participants perceive hidden or unnoticed interaction relationships.
  • Combines dynamic (e.g., walking), visual, and feedback tools to construct a design framework centered on "contextualized noticing."

• What were the experimental or evaluation results?

  • Tag probe image feedback enhanced participants' insights into community animal behaviors but also revealed privacy and ethical concerns.
  • Sensory Frames probes increased the diversity of sensory recordings, with participants expanding their observations to include more types of non-human entities (e.g., plants and birds) through auditory and olfactory senses.
  • Diary probes highlighted human tendencies toward close relationships with community animals, such as "feeding" and "paying special attention to certain animals," revealing imbalances in power dynamics.

• Limitations and Future Directions

  • Limitations: Participant backgrounds (e.g., mostly female animal enthusiasts) may limit the generalizability of the findings; camera capabilities were limited in nighttime recording; mechanisms for non-human cooperative participation are not yet fully developed.
  • Future Directions:
    1. Continue optimizing sensory frame tools and collaborate with urban residents in co-design efforts.
    2. Explore the roles of community animals in research, including cooperation and power status.
    3. Develop "reciprocal noticing processes" through design to further balance power issues in interspecies noticing.

In summary, this study provides significant theoretical guidance and practical cases for designing inclusive, diverse, and multispecies coexistence tools in HCI research, while challenging traditional human-centered interaction norms.