Will's Research Experiences

My research in user experience has been to develop a more conceptual, theoretically grounded understanding of user experience. Working from a background informed by phenomenology and intentionality, the notion of experience is grounded by the concept of intentionality where a user's experience is always oriented towards some object in the world; it is always about that object (Husserl, 2001). As we engage with the world, our intentional relations with the world change because the world exerts its own intentionality towards us: a technological intentionality (Ihde, 1990). Our navigation in this world then is largely made up by this dynamic relationship and coming to grips with this situation requiring a user to learn from their experience. I want to take this perspective that has been thoroughly developed in the philosophy of consciousness and analyze our interactions with interactive artifacts through this lens. Standard usability problems can be made more nuanced by using the theory of breakdown (Winograd & Flores, 1986) to analyze for instance what causes users to struggle to use and subsequently work around games they use (Ryan & Siegel, 2009).

Relevant selected papers I have worked on include:

1. Stolterman, E. , Jung, H., Ryan, W., and Siegel, M. A. (2013) Device Landscapes: A New Challenge to Interaction Design and HCI Research. Journal of Korean Society of Design Research, 26(2), 2 - 29.
2. Ryan, W. (2011). Learning-in-use of Interactive Artifacts. Ph.D. Dissertation.
3. Jung, H., Stolterman, E., Ryan, W., Stroman, T., & Siegel, M.(2008). Toward a framework for ecology of artifacts: How are artifacts interconnected surrounding a personal life? In Proceedings of 5th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. 201-210. Lund, Sweden.
4. Ryan, W., Stolterman, E., Siegel, M., Jung, H., Stroman, T., Hazlewood, W. R. (2009). Device ecology mapper: A tool for studying users’ecosystems of interactive artifacts. In Extended Abstracts of Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 4327-4332, Boston, MA.
5. Ryan, W., & Bardzell, J. (2007). Using Player Breakdown as a Lens for Understanding the Development of Literacy in Video Games. In Games, Learning, and Society. Madison, WI.
6. Ryan, W., & Siegel, M. (2010). Learning-in-use of interactive artifacts: A longitudinal study analyzing the learning experience. In Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Design & Emotion, Chicago, IL.

Video games have become a pervasive part of our culture and have pushed the development of both hardware technology as well as providing new ways of interfacing with technology. Manovich (2002) argues that video games are one of two industries that have pushed technology to the state it is today—the other being defense technology. I find video games to be a particularly interesting form of learning to use interactive artifacts. Although we have genres which generally separate the types of expectations that will be placed on a user by a game, each game is encapsulated to provide a novel experience for a user requiring a great deal of learning to make each experience meaningful—this is one of the components of games that make them so fun. So, my research in this area has been to understand the human dimension of games, but also to make that knowledge useful for game designers to walk the balance between games that are too easy providing no challenge and games that are two complex that become overwhelming.

Relevant selected papers I have worked on include:

1. Ryan, W., & Gilson, Z. (2013). Transforming game narrative through social media: A case study of the Mass Effect universe in Twitter.DiGRA Conference 2013. Atlanta, GA.
2. Ryan, W., & Siegel, M. A. (2009). Evaluating interactive entertainment using breakdown: Understanding embodied learning in video games. In DiGRA 2009. London, England. Available at DiGRA Digital Libraries.
3. Castronova, E., Cummings, J., Emigh, W., Fatten, M., Mishler, N., Ross, T., & Ryan, W. (2009). Case study: The economics of Arden. In Special Issue of Critical Studies in Media Communication. 26(2), 165-179.
4. Bardzell, J., Bardzell, S., Birchler, C., & Ryan, W. (2007). Double Dribble: Illusionism, mixed reality, and the sports fan experience. In Proceedings of International Conference on Advances in Computers for Entertainment Technology. 216-219. Salzburg, Austria.
5. Bardzell, J., Ryan, W., & Bardzell, S. (2006). Radical game play: The confrontation between machinima platforms and filmmakers. (Unpublished).
6. Bardzell, J., Bardzell, S., & Ryan, W. (2006). Virtual events in metaverse worlds: The intersection of interfaces, leisure, commerce, and persistent groups. (Unpublished).
7. Bardzell, J., Bardzell, S., & Ryan, W. (2006). The video game tutorial: Narrative, HCI, and virtual learning. (Unpublished).

My early research career has been inspired by the importance of design and the design process. As countless authors have noted, it is impossible to separate the design of an artifact and its use (Petersen, 2002; Croon Fors, 2006; Willis, 1999). To understand completely the interaction and use of any interactive artifact, an account of the design of these artifacts must be included. I am interested in a more practical side of software design. There are unique aspects to every field of design, but many of the lessons apply across and my work in this area includes lessons from designers of all sorts.

Here is some of the work I have written in this area:

1. Ryan, W., & Charsky, D. (2013). Integrating Serious Content into Serious Games. In Proceedings of Foundations of Digital Games 2013. Chania, Greece.
2. Ryan W., Hazlewood, W. R., & Stolterman, E. (2009). Breaking the mold: Problem setting through evocative designs. In Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Design & Emotion, Chicago, IL.

Branding is an area I have ony recently gotten involved with. It has all focused on branding through social media. In particular, I have been focused on the area of using social media to communicate a brand to an audience. This integrates aspects of both interaction design and branding together. This work has forced me to focus on aspects of brand identity as well as branding tone and messaging. I have also begun looking at branding communities.

Here is what we have worked on so far:

1. Ryan, W., Peruta, A., & Chouman, S. (2013). Social media and the transformation of brand communication. Academic Mindtrek 2013, Tampere, Finland.
2. Peruta, A., Ryan, W., & Engelsman, R. (2013). Social media branding strategies for higher education. International Journal on Technology, Knowledge, and Society, 9(1), 11-23.
3. Peruta, A., Ryan, W., & Acquavella, G. (2012). Social media branding: Comparing brand Facebook pages and website. In Proceedings of International Conference on Communication Media, Technology, and Design 2012. Istanbul, Turkey.

Research-Industry Chairperson

• Foundation of Digital Games Conference 2012: Poster Session Chair
• Foundation of Digital Games Conference 2012: Proceedings Chair

Research-Industry Peer Reviewer

• Foundation of Digital Games Conference 2014
• International Journal of Technology, Knowledge, and Society 2013
• Interacting with Computers Journal 2011-2012
• Computers in Entertainment Journal 2012
• IEEE International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health 2011
• IASDR Conference 2011
• CHI Conference 2008-2012
• CSCW Conference 2011
• Design and Emotion Conference 2010
• ACE Conference 2008
• Sandbox Symposium Conference 2007
• Virtual Reality Journal special issue on "VR in the e-Society" 2006

Research-Industry Mentor

• Foundation of Digital Games Conference 2012 Doctoral Consortium

Research-Industry Student Volunteer

• Participatory Design Conference 2008
• Informatics Goes Global: Methods at a Crossing 2006

College-wide Committee Member

• Human Subjects Review Board 2013-2014

1. Husserl, E. (2001). Logical Investigations. New York: Routledge.
2. Ihde, D. (1990). Technology and the Lifeworld: From Garden to Earth. Bloomington, IN: Indiana UP.
3. Winograd, T. & Flores, F. (1986). Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
4. Ryan, W. & Siegel, M. (2009). Evaluating interactive entertainment using breakdown: Understanding embodied learning in video games. In DiGRA 2009. London, England.
5. Manovich, L. (2002). The Language of New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press.
6. Petersen, M. G. (2002). Designing for Learning in Use of Everyday Artefacts. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Aarhus, Denmark.
7. Croon Fors, A. (2006). Being-with Information Technology: Critical Explorations Beyond Use and Design. Ph.D. Thesis. Umeä University, Sweden.
8. Willis, A. M. (1999). Ontological Designing. In Proceedings of the Design Cultures, Conference of the European Academy of Design, Sheffield, UK.