Animistic design: how to reimagine digital interaction between the human and the nonhuman

References

• Ackermann, E. 2005. “Playthings That Do Things: A Young Kid's ‘Incredibles’!” IDC 05 Proceedings. Interaction Design and Children, New York, ACM, 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• van Allen, P., and McVeigh-Schultz, J. 2013. “AniThings: Animism and Heterogeneous Multiplicity.” CHI 2013, New York, ACM Press. 2247–2256.
   Google Scholar
• Beran, T., A. Ramirez-Serrano, R. Kuzyk, M. Fior, and S. Nugent. 2011. “Understanding How Children Understand Robots: Perceived Animism in Child–Robot Interaction.” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 69 (7–8): 539–550. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2011.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogost, I. 2012. Alien Phenomenology, or What it's Like to be a Thing. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bohm, D. 1986. “Time, the implicated Order and Pre-Space.” In Physics and the Ultimate Significance of Time: Bohm, Prigogine and Process Philosophy, edited by David R. Griffin, 177–208. Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crampton Smith, G. 2007. “Foreword.” In Designing Interactions, edited by B. Moggridge, vii–xx. London: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• De Landa, M. 2002. Intensive Science and Virtual Philosophy. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G. 1991. Bergsonism. New York: Zone Books.
   Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G., and F. Guattari. 1988. A Thousand Plateaus. Capitalism and Schizophrenia. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G., and F. Guattari. 1994. What is Philosophy? London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Dourish, P. 2001. Where the Action is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dunne, A., and F. Raby. 2013. Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eggers, D. 2014. The Circle. New York: Vintage Books.
   Google Scholar
• Franke, A. ed. 2010. Animism 1. Kunsthal Antwerp: Sternberg Press/Extra City.
   Google Scholar
• Franke, A. ed. 2011. Animism. Modernity Through the Looking Glass. Köln: Verlag der Buchhandlung Walther Konig.
   Google Scholar
• Franzen, J. 2015. “ Left to Our Own Devices.” New York Times, October 4, BR1.
   Google Scholar
• Grosz, E. 2008. Chaos, Territory, Art. Deleuze and the Framing of the Earth. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hollan, J., E. Hutchins, and D. Kirsh. 2000. “Distributed Cognition: Toward a New Foundation for Human-Computer Interaction Research.” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 7 (2): 174–196. doi: 10.1145/353485.353487
   Google Scholar
• Hookway, B. 2014. Interface. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuniavsky, M. 2004. “Animist User Expectations in a Ubicomp World: a Position Paper”. Lost in Ambient Intelligence workshop. CHI2004. http://orangecone.com/archives/2007/03/animist_user_ex.html
   Google Scholar
• Kuniavsky, M. 2010. Smart Things. Ubiquitous Computing, User Experience Design. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1999. Pandora's Hope. Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 2014. “Agency at the Time of the Anthropocene.” New Literary History 45: 1–18. doi: 10.1353/nlh.2014.0003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laurel, B. 2008. “Designed Animism.” In (Re)Searching the Digital Bauhaus, edited by T. Binder, J. Löwgren, and L. Malmborg, 251–274. London: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Marenko, B. 2009. “Object-Relics and their Effects: For a Neo-Animist Paradigm.” Objects & Communication. MEI ‘Mediation and Information’ (edited by B. Darras and S. Belkhamsa), 30–31: 239–253 (Centre of Image, Research, Culture and Cognition, University Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne). Paris: Editions de l'Harmattan.
   Google Scholar
• Marenko, B. 2014. “Neo-Animism and Design. A New Paradigm in Object Theory.” Design and Culture 6 (2): 219–241. doi: 10.2752/175470814X14031924627185
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marenko, B. 2015a. “Digital Materiality and the Intelligence of the Technodigital Object.” In Deleuze and Design, edited by B. Marenko, and J. Brassett, 107–138. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marenko, B. 2015b. “When Making Becomes Divination: Uncertainty and Contingency in Computational Glitch-Events.” Design Studies (Special issue: Computational Making. Edited by T. Knight and T. Vardoulli) 41 (Part A): 110–125.
   Google Scholar
• Massumi, B. (ed.) 2002. A Shock to Thought. Expression after Deleuze and Guattari. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McVeigh-Schultz, J., J. Stein, J. Watson, and S. Fisher. 2012. Extending the Lifelog to Non-human Subjects: Ambient Storytelling for Human-Object Relationships. New York: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Mitew, T. 2014. “Do Objects Dream of an Internet of Things?” The Fibreculture Journal 23: 1–25.
   Google Scholar
• Mori, M. 1970/2012. “The Uncanny Valley.” Translated by K. F. MacDorman and N. Kageki. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine 19 (2): 98–100. doi:10.1109/MRA.2012.2192811
   Google Scholar
• Morozov, E. 2013. To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism. New York: Public Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Morrison, S. 2010. “Google CEO Envisions a ‘Serendipity Engine’.” Wall Street Journal. Accessed October 28, 2015, from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703882404575520390567286252.
   Google Scholar
• Munster, A. 2013. An Aesthesia of Networks. Conjunctive Experience in Art and Technology. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• O'Reilly, J. 2015. “Milieu and the Creation of the Illustrator: Chris Ware and Saul Steinberg.” In Deleuze and Design, edited by B. Marenko, and J. Brassett, 191–218. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pariser, E. 2012. The Filter Bubble. London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Rod, J., and D. Kera. 2010. “From Agency and Subjectivity to Animism: Phenomenological and Science Technology Studies (STS) Approach to Design of Large Techno-Social Systems.” Digital Creativity 21 (1): 70–76. doi: 10.1080/14626261003654558
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schön, D. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. London: Maurice Temple Smith.
   Google Scholar
• Standage, T. 2014. “When Smart Becomes Spooky. Phones Turn into Mind-Readers.” The Economist. The World in 2015. 115–116. Accessed October 28, 2015, from http://www.economist.com/news/21631910-phones-turn-mind-readers-when-smart-becomes-spooky.
   Google Scholar
• Stengers, I. 2005. “Introductory Notes on an Ecology of Practices.” Cultural Studies Review 11 (1): 183–196. doi: 10.5130/csr.v11i1.3459
   Google Scholar
• Turkle, S. 2015. Reclaiming Conversation: The Power of Talk in a Digital Age. London: Penguin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Project videos
   Google Scholar
• AniThings
   Google Scholar
• Five scenario videos: http://www.philvanallen.com/animism-interaction-design/
   Google Scholar
• Little Data Wranglers
   Google Scholar
• Scenario: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7e7XkeEnW8
   Google Scholar
• Data as actant: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9xrfpc139g
   Google Scholar