client/audience

AImpower

timeframe

Aug 2023 - Dec 2023

role

UX Designer

Project Manager

Developing Empathy in Young Designers: Enhancing Designer-User Interactions in the HCD Process

a meta-research devised to explore young designers' empathetic processes during user interactions and to offer guidance in fostering empathy in the HCD process

Abstract

The development of empathy between young designers and participants stands as a pivotal hurdle in the human-centred design process. We hope to find a solution to help young designers make meaningful connections with their users and extract deeper, more heartfelt, and transferable insights to generate design solutions in a well-grounded and progressive manner. Leveraging an array of qualitative research techniques, such as ethnographic studies and cultural probes, we've laid a robust groundwork for developing our solution tailored to the emerging young designers.

Our research project created a tangible tool called the Empathy Deck that aims to foster empathy-building during direct in-person interactions between designers and participants. It included checklists for designers and a deck of art therapy cards intended to be used prior to designer-user interactions, providing designers with a practical tool for building empathy and fosters ongoing reflection and understanding of empathy in the human-centred design process.

Background

Empathy is highlighted as one of the most crucial and valuable qualities for UX designers. Despite existing research paradigms and methods, applying empathy theories to real-world situations can be challenging due to the complex relationships between designers and users. Therefore, our project focuses on helping designers extract deeper, more heartfelt, and transferable insights to solve problems in a well-grounded and progressive manner by cultivating empathy. Looking into current literature, we identified the following key aspects related to empathy theories and research on empathy-building.

Theory

Empathy has long been a significant focus in psychology research, with several existing theories. One of the most widely accepted theories distinguishes between two types of empathy: cognitive and affective empathy. In the context of design, empathy aligns with the perspective of designers working with end-users to create better design outcomes by understanding their emotions and feelings. Studies have shown that incorporating the well-established understanding of empathy in psychology can enhance the effectiveness of design practice and user studies. (Chang-Arana, 2022).

Paradigms

Empathy is vital in design, and researchers have developed frameworks to understand it better. Kouprie and Sleeswijk Visser's (2009) framework identifies two components: affective and cognitive. Affective involves emotional responses, while cognitive involves perspective-taking. Empathy includes sub-components such as empathic concern, personal distress, perspective-taking, and fantasy. It's important to note that empathy is not solely an individual trait but also influenced by the situation and context (McQuiggan and Lester, 2006). Thus, understanding situational and cultural factors is critical in empathizing with users.

Principles

High-level principles have been proposed to foster empathy in HCI practices. Kouprie and Visser (2009) suggest that designers should immerse themselves in the user's context without judgment. Designers can also use personas or simulation techniques like role-playing to step into the user's experiences. However, Bennett and Rosner (2019) propose living the experience with the user by partnering with them to continuously attune understanding while recognizing knowledge asymmetry. Designers should reflect on which end-users they can empathize with, to what extent, and how personal values influence it, recognizing their empathic boundaries. Heylighen and Dong (2019) suggest accounting for embodiment to assess when and how designers should empathize. By following these principles, designers can create more empathetic, understanding, and effective user-centered designs.

Existing Solutions and Technologies

The existing solutions and technologies provide a systematic structure and high-level, qualitative methodologies for fostering empathy and generating sensation. For instance, empathy maps are widely used visualization tools for fostering understanding and empathy for end-users (Siegel & Dray, 2019). Another physical user journey installation for generating sensations used in Lallemand et al.’s (2022) study allows stakeholders to gain a deeper understanding of users' experiences. Besides, strategies such as sensory design are also frequently employed to simulate how different user populations interact with products (Pratte et al., 2021).

Informed Research and Design Methods

An ethnography study gathered more design-relevant and practical information, pushing for innovative ideas and products (McDonagh & Thomas, 2010). Co-design was mentioned as a promising approach, allowing for the development of a different kind of capital and perspective, with designers from various backgrounds providing more voices and perspectives. In another digital-mediated user research that aims to nurture empathy between UX designers and users, the research team employed a participatory design approach to generate new design knowledge by conducting an ideation workshop with a design agency (Lachner et al., 2018). Besides, participatory design can provide practical value for the research topic.

Design Objectives

From the literature, in design practice, affective and cognitive empathy can be utilized to foster empathy and improve designer-user interactions. However, existing solutions such as empathy maps, physical installations, and sensory design have limitations and lack generalizability. To be specific, empathy maps are regarded as high-level and oversimplified, the physical installation is expensive as well as project-specific, and the sensory design seems to be more product-oriented, making it inappropriate for promoting empathy in general human interactions. Furthermore, as McQuiggan and Lester stressed, empathy is heavily based on context, so a more sustainable and widely applicable empathy-enhancing solution is needed.

Given the limitations of current methods and the characteristics of empathy itself, we hypothesized that there would be space for us to design for designers with goals of enhancing their empathetic behaviours and promoting in-the-moment interaction with their users. Our project aims to design for designers to enhance their empathetic behaviours and promote in-the-moment interaction with users. We explore how structures, methodologies, and tangible toolkits can be applied to help designers generate empathy in the HCD process.

Process and Methods

To answer the research question above, several processes and methods have been carried out, including 4 contextual interviews, 2 ethnographic studies, and 1 cultural probes study.

Pre-study Research: Contextual interviews

Before carrying out the chosen research method, we first conducted 4 semi-structural contextual interviews with 4 student designers, who were all recruited through our personal connections.

The interviews lasted for 45-60 minutes, during which participants were asked questions from a prepared protocol about their design experiences, and were encouraged to share personal perspectives on performing empathy in the design space. The whole process were recorded after obtaining permissions, and important notes were also taken down. The interview transcripts were annotated and important quotes and notes were put down on an affinity diagram to perform further data analysis.

Due to the essence of the project being a meta-design-research, our users, the designers, will be referred to as “designers”, and their users will be referred to as “participants” or “users”.

Method I: Ethnographic study

As for Method I, we conducted two rapid ethnographic studies. Specifically, we went to one co-design session (student designers n=2) and one museum ethnography session (student designers n=2), both of which were studies from other groups in INFO 4400.

Before each session, a pre-session survey was distributed to designers to gather information on their personalities, design background, and relationships with users. An empathy quotient test was also incorporated to probe their affective level of empathy. Ethical concerns were also addressed ahead to obtain consent from users. As for the specific process, in the co-design session, one of our researchers participated in the sessions while two researchers observed and documented how designers and participants establish empathy during their interactions. Written notes and video recordings were collected. In the museum study, two of our researchers participated in the session, during which notes, audio recordings, and photos were collected. Post-session feedback was also collected from our researchers who participated in the study.

Following the sessions, the data analysis process involved extracting and clustering insights related to human interaction and empathy from field notes taken during the co-design session. With the use of an affinity diagram, these insights were then analyzed and summarized into themes, along with additional insights and themes identified during the analysis of the museum ethnographic study. Verbatim quotes from videos and audio recordings were additionally used as supporting evidence.

Method II: Cultural Probes

From our first research method, we realized that empathy is a complex concept with affective and cognitive components that can manifest differently in various contexts due to complex factors. Given the remaining questions and potential design space identified in the findings of Method I, we want to look into more detailed rationale from designers beyond how they behave in professional settings. From undergone both methods, we aim to develop a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of people’s tendency and deliberate decisions related to emphasizing with others, including why and why not people transmit signal of active listening, the co-dependence of affective and cognitive components on empathizing behaviors, and how situational factors influence cultivation of empathy, to inform the final design.

A one-week cultural probes study was applied as the second method where three student designers were recruited from INFO4400 and through personal connections. Again, ethical concerns and privacy protection were stated before the study began. Once participants have given their consent, they will receive a probe kit with which they will be instructed to record and reflect on moments when they found themselves empathizing with other individuals outside of the design rooms. Materials in the kit were made or utilized to encourage participants to empathize and observe empathy in various relationships. After a week of use, all the kits were recycled. Our group went through the probes to collect the drawing, reflections and decorations created by the users as well as additional photos that users captured. With the help of an affinity diagram, we conducted a content and thematic analysis to identify commonalities and differences in participants' experiences and synthesized the findings into insights and implications for designers seeking to foster empathy in user interactions.

The Probe Kit

A camera* to take live photos of situations, general environment, or specific things that make them feel empathy in the moment. Our team encourages participants to take live photos as they can capture more than just a quick snapshot of a moment, allowing a few seconds of the experience to relive, making it easier for participants and researchers to understand what inspired the feeling of empathy.
An audio recorder* to record instant audio memos that reflect on an experience of empathy, such as why they felt empathy and what they were feeling. The intentions behind the audio recordings is that voice can sometimes be a powerful indicator of one’s emotions, which can offer researchers more valuable insights into how the participants feel.
A leaf of a calendar printout with dates of the week of the study for end-of-day reflections, where they will highlight moments when they felt empathy.
Sticky notes for quick reflections.
Emoji stickers to visually express their feelings.
Drawing materials for more accurate visual representations.
A prompt: a coffee date offer to encourage participants to invite someone with whom they don’t interact closely or frequently, or someone outside their usual social circle. This activity would involve three more prompts:
- The Spark: prior to the coffee date, the participants would need to write down on a sticky note, which we will collect, everything they wish to find out about the person that they will soon meet. This process can help set them up to better engage in more empathetic communication during the meeting.
- The Midpoint Boost: among the items in the kit, the participants will be provided with a treat (like a fortune cookie) that comes with a prompt to encourage deep conversation.
- The Epilogue: participants are asked to share a short video of their interaction with their date as they grow to be more comfortable about the coffee date. While the video can be taken at any point in the coffee date, we encourage a more reflective video at the end of the coffee date experience where the two can take as an opportunity to reflect on their interaction. This task is designed to encourage introspection and help our researchers gain a deeper understanding of the participants as we learn about their perspective of the coffee date process.

All tasks (apart from the coffee date) are a form of post-empathy reflections, through which we hope to gain insights and identify. The "coffee date" activity actively pushes participants to create an unusual experience involving empathy, it will allow us to observe how empathy can be developed and fostered in a special social setting that resembles a design room in certain way, which will hopefully suggest novel insights into why, when, and how people empathize.

Findings

Designers’ Self-awareness of Empathic Behaviours

Our cultural probe highlighted the significance of self-awareness in fostering empathetic behaviours during human interactions. Being mindful of one's actions and their impact on others plays a critical role in promoting empathy. For example, when a participant recognized her dominant speaking role in a group, she actively adjusted to create space for others to share their thoughts. Similarly, when she observed herself demonstrating empathic behaviours such as offering verbal reassurance and advice, and receiving positive feedback, she consciously reinforced those behaviours. Immediate strategies were also adopted to push for more user interaction. This was seen in the co-design session when the designer continuously built off the participants’ ideas, asked clarification questions, and intentionally cued the participant who didn’t speak up a lot to engage them. Personal anecdotes were also shared both by designers and participants to foster a common understanding among all and push for deeper conversation. This finding emphasized the role of introspection and being attuned to one's emotions, thoughts, and reactions in developing a deeper understanding and connection with the experiences and perspectives of others.

Yet, maintaining awareness of empathy can be challenging due to its nuanced nature. For example, one participant expressed that she was “not sure if it is being empathetic”, suggesting a potential gap between the sender (designer) and the recipient (user) of empathetic behaviors. This finding underscored the need for ongoing reflection and dialogue to bridge this gap and ensure that empathetic behaviors were effectively communicated and understood.

Designers and Users Power Dynamics

A power imbalance between designers and users hinders empathy building, and this is highlighted in the co-design session we observed, where participants exhibited reluctance in expressing their thoughts. Specifically, when the designers were proactively leading the conversation during the session, participants refrained from voicing their disagreement directly to the designers, and instead used cautious phrases such as "I think it might not make sense." Some participants even admitted to holding back their perspectives. Such power dynamics between the designers and participants created a sense of hesitancy and inhibited open communication. On the contrary, the designers in the museum ethnography study smartly utilized small talk at the beginning and middle of the session, which helped bridge the gap between designers and participants. This approach mitigated the hidden power hierarchy and encouraged participants to open up.

This finding shed light on the importance of creating a safe and inclusive environment that promotes equality between designers and users. As participants feel on equal footing with designers, they will be empowered to express their opinions and engage in constructive dialogue, leading to richer insight exchanges and more effective design outcomes.

Assumptive Communication Barriers

When individuals conform to assumptions and engage in interactions guided by those assumptions, the depth and authenticity of the interactions tend to diminish, making it challenging to foster empathy. This phenomenon was evident in our cultural probe. For instance, when one cultural probe participant was interacting with her fellow colleagues, she expressed a sense of predictability, stating, 'I kind of already know what people would say after my questions.' As expected, she received an anticipated responses from the other party, which hindered the progression of the conversation, hereby impeding the cultivation of empathy. This finding highlighted the potential limitations of adhering to assumptions and expectations in interpersonal interactions. A safe and supportive environment that encourages genuine expression can help overcome the barriers posed by preconceptions and move beyond superficial interactions, thereby enhancing empathy-building experiences.

Designers’ Professionalism

Designers’ unprofessional acts can hinder empathy-building. In the co-design session, the designers used UX design jargon, such as "storyboarding" and "sketching", without explaining them first, showing a lack of perspective-taking. This lack of perspective-taking caused confusion which placed an extra cognitive burden on participants, who had to ask for clarification by saying, "What is that?". In the museum ethnography study, designers did not stay focused on their study: there were excessive casual chats unrelated to their study, and they sometimes checked their phones for non-note-taking purposes, which was viewed as unprofessional by participants. Designers’ unprofessionalism creates discomfort for users, diminishing their ability and interest in expressing themselves.

In our cultural probe, a participant recorded her interactions during a project user test. She demonstrated an absence of negative emotions upon receiving negative feedback and maintained an open mindset. This approach helped users feel at ease and encouraged them to express themselves freely.

Hence, we concluded that upholding designer professionalism, which encompasses perspective-taking, maintaining focus on the task, and being open-minded while avoiding judgments, establishes a solid foundation for fostering empathy and ensuring high-quality interactions between designers and users.

Demonstrated Readiness to Empathize

From our cultural probes, we discovered that self-disclosure, particularly in the form of personal stories and showing vulnerability, can be effective in fostering stronger bonds and building trust between designers and participants. One participant shared that “she shared with me her stories also made me want to share more”. Through personal stories, designers and participants were more likely to discover shared experiences and a common language. Furthermore, acknowledging personal flaws and limitations can help bridge the gap between designers and participants.

Desire for Reciprocity

Our cultural probe revealed that people's desire for reciprocity can be a significant motivator for building empathy. We observed one participant who behaved in a way that she wished others would behave toward her. For instance, she responded to others’ direct messages one by one because she wanted to receive a similar level of attention in return. This behavior stems from the expectation of equal exchange during human interaction. When people offer something of value, they anticipate receiving a similar level of effort or attention in return. Recognizing the importance of reciprocity can help designers cultivate stronger connections with participants in the context of empathy-building.

Shared Visual Stimulation

Verbal and Non-verbal Communication

Signals that demonstrate active listening and engagement, such as nodding, eye contact, and affirmative words like “uh-huh”, “yeah”, are essential to show active listening and engagement and for fostering positive and empathic designer-user relationships. In the co-design session we observed, when one designer selectively made eye contact, some participants felt ignored and reported feeling "discouraged and not being respected." Consequently, these participants held back from actively participating. Further, in the same study, one designer maintained the same posture and no obvious expression change throughout the session while another designer remained in a reserved position by sitting back, holding his arms around his chest, and rubbing his arms when talking. Both expression and gestures were perceived as not to be open for discussion and suggestion, which can discourage interaction with the participants. Similarly, in the museum ethnography study, participants expressed feeling "unheard" and "unwilling to express more" due to insufficient verbal feedback from the designers.

In addition to verbal cues, body language also plays a significant role in empathy-building. During the co-design study, one designer's reserved posture and demeanour, including crossed arms and rubbing of the arms, may have hindered participant interaction. Conversely, our cultural probe revealed that leaning in closer and facing participants, gestures that convey a desire for empathy, could promote empathy-building. Hence, designers should strive to adopt open and inclusive verbal and non-verbal cues to create an empathic atmosphere.

Hence, feedback conveying engagement and active listening, related to both cognitive and affective components of empathy, is crucial for empathic behaviour and fostering positive and empathic designer-user relationships.

Environmental Factors

Environmental factors, including the spatial and social setting of the interaction, can hugely influence designers’ ability to empathize with their users. Through our ethnography study, we observed instances where designers were inattentive to the study setting, resulting in negative user experiences. Users expressed feelings of marginalization and being "frequently disturbed" by the designers' actions. Additionally, our cultural probe revealed that “noisy surroundings [are] distracting”, impeding individuals from fully concentrating on their own interactions.

Conversely, we found that an intimate space characterized by closer physical proximity and a relaxed atmosphere fosters a sense of connection and engagement between participants. This conducive environment promotes a deeper level of empathy and understanding. Furthermore, from the cultural probe, we learned that social facilitation, a group of people working towards the same clear goals, enhances motivation and comprehension among the group members.

Individual Tendency and Pattern to Interact and Engage

According to the Empathy Quotient website, “most non-autistic females score 47 on average.” All non-autistic designers in our study scored lower than average, with one from the co-design session scoring 33 and one from the museum study scoring 31. The autistic designer from the museum study scored 28.

We figured that the affective empathy component, which refers to the designers’ personality and their natural tendency to empathize, may impact their interaction and engagement with users to some degree. While the affective component is less amenable to teaching and learning, it is a critical facilitating or constraining factor to consider in our final design and future research.

Design and Evaluation

We engaged in a thorough process of idea brainstorming, drawing connections to relevant theories and principles from literature review and user research, and evaluating the pros and cons of each idea to ultimately select the final design concept that aligned with our project goal. Our design aims to foster empathy by establishing trust and bonding between users and designers in a comfortable dynamic. Our decisions were informed by the importance of self-awareness, balanced power dynamics, reciprocity, and self-disclosure, which are key findings from our research.

The Empathy Deck includes cards of visual stimulus that serve as tangible artifacts for designers and users to react to and gain inspiration from. Suzanne Peloquin's analysis of art's potential suggests that a person who would derive empathy from art must (a) use the senses to grasp feeling, (b) stretch the imagination to see a new perspective, and (c) invite an occupation that enhances understanding. Hence, through the incorporation of art, we believe it would serve as a powerful tool to facilitate meaningful conversations and place designers and users in the same headspace. The sharing process would also promote reciprocity and self-disclosure, encouraging users to reveal vulnerabilities and disclose themselves more naturally. The deck also conveniently includes a checklist component which is designed to increase designers' self-awareness and prompts reflection on their interactions with users, with the goal of internalizing positive and beneficial behaviours that build empathy. Our user evaluation findings suggest that these two activities together can lead to more empathetic behaviours.

We evaluated the effectiveness of the visual cards through testing during the Information Science poster session with strangers and with friends and colleagues. Most people who interacted with the cards expressed that they had images and words generated in their minds and were willing to share and discuss them with others.

To further evaluate the effectiveness of the checklist, we plan to conduct longitudinal usability testing with student designers who fall within our target user group. This will provide a more detailed evaluation of the design's strengths and weaknesses through hands-on practices for future design projects. Additionally, we will perform autobiographical studies on ourselves with the working prototypes to gather more in-depth insights.

Discussion

During the earlier stage of our user research process, our team was able to confirm through contextual interviews that empathy is a common struggle for young designers as they felt various challenges and factors that hinder them from applying empathetic thinking. However, from the limited scope and the selected research method, we were only able to address several aspects of how we can improve empathy. Empathy is an abstract, broad, and nuanced term that permeates our everyday life, especially the designers. It is not possible to identify and solve all the challenges related to empathy building, but rather the best approach is to educate, increase awareness, and slowly internalize the concept over time. It is not an all-or-nothing process, but a continuous effort to improve.

Reflecting on the entire process, our research provided valuable insights into the multiple factors that influence empathy and allowed us to identify three stages for intervention that can help designers better foster empathy and they are before the interaction, in-the-most/during the interaction, and post interaction. However, our design solution only focused on common challenges related to self-disclosure and vulnerability during the pre-interaction stage. Thus, it is important to acknowledge that our design solution may not be a panacea for all challenges related to empathy-building and the congruence between our research and design lies in the fact that our design solution recognises subjective differences and serves as an overarching inspirational tool that warms up the users and initiates comfortable conversations. As we continue to explore ways to improve and refine our approach, we need to be aware of the congruence or gap between the research completed and the design solution.

Due to our limited study duration, we were unable to gather more comprehensive insights into how external factors may impact the development of empathy among designers. This resulted in our findings and design solution potentially not accounting for all possible variables that can impact the formation of empathetic attitudes. With a longer study period, we would have been able to delve deeper into our current findings and observe our participants to gather more data, enabling us to deepen and consolidate our understanding of factors that influence empathy.

While we recognize that our topic is complex and nuanced, we are pleased with some of the positive outcomes that we observed in our project. In examining the current design, we discovered that the visual cards could act as a catalyst for positive conversations in general. During our testing, we observed how the cards could inspire conversations among people by revealing their vulnerabilities and generating empathy naturally throughout the interaction. Moreover, the cards facilitated people in understanding each other's values, personalities, and creative thoughts in a short period of time. By listening to each other's perspectives on the cards, individuals naturally inquired about the underlying context behind the other's emotions and feelings, facilitating a deeper understanding and empathetic process. This was precisely what we had intended with our design, and we were encouraged to see it in action.

However, we also noted some limitations of the design that need to be addressed in future iterations. We recognized that individuals have differences in sensitivity and reactions to the visual cards, and that some people may be unable to generate more art or may not have anything to say about the cards. This falls short of our intended objective of facilitating designer-user interactions through the warm-up session. Additionally, people have varying levels of openness and willingness to reveal their feelings and genuine thoughts to strangers, which corresponds to the affective component found in our literature review. With our cards, we respect the individual choices that result in the varying degrees of effectiveness of our design in different people and situations. We plan to address these nuances in future iterations to make the design more solid and generalizable.

Conclusion

In conclusion, our project aims to contribute to the HCI research and design community by filling a gap in existing technologies and encouraging a deeper understanding of empathy in design on a daily basis in the long run. Our research has identified the challenges young designers face when it comes to empathetic thinking as well as factors that promote empathy, and we have proposed a design solution that addresses the issue during the pre-interaction phase of designer-user interaction. Our user testing has shown that our design solution is effective in priming designers to consider empathy in their design process and providing tools for reflection and self-awareness. While there is still much to explore in this area, our project serves as a valuable starting point for further research and education in empathy-driven design.