Structures Surrounding the ‘User’ in User Engagement: Gender-based Violence Design Engagements

Abstract

User engagement is a dynamic social process influenced by who is involved and how. Here we argue that designers must account for the structural conditions of users’ lives, as they may have safety, accountability, and political implications. We review current scholarship in the area of user configuration and engagement from a ‘structural’ viewpoint of gender-based violence (GBV), to better understand such considerations. We propose three dimensions that might support designers in deepening their engagement in this area, namely: construction of the user, engagement within the context, and the designers’ position. We combine these dimensions as a framework to review and compare examples of designed outcomes for GBV prevention. This article suggests thoughts and questions to be considered by designers for thinking more structurally about GBV design, and for other contexts involving people experiencing vulnerability.

Technology-facilitated abuse within the context of intimate partner violence: Barriers to and recommendations for safety planning

“…However, available research has indicated that updated/renewed forms of harms perpetrated though technological means have emerged which are largely not known to survivors and advocates (Harris & Woodlock, 2018;Douglas et al, 2019;Lopez-Neira et al, 2019). These harms perpetrated by technological means are referred by different names including technological abuse, tech abuse (Slupska & Tanczer, 2021), technology-facilitated abuse (Harris & Woodlock, 2018;Leitão, 2019;Lopez-Neira et al, 2019;Fiadeiro et al, 2023), technology-facilitated domestic abuse (Brookfield et al, 2024), technology-facilitated domestic and family violence (Douglas et al, 2019), and digital coercive control (Woodlock et al, 2019) amongst others. All these terms though refer to the exploitation and weaponising of digital, hardware and software technologies in pursuance of coercive and abusive tactics typified by stalking, surveillance and harassment.…”

Responsible Design for (Not With) Hard-to-Reach Users

“…This respect applies to the intended end users, but naturally also to anyone involved in the research and testing phases of design and implies careful consideration of privacy and other risks. We might even question our 'right' to expect such participation; "designers must account for the structural conditions of users' lives, as they may have safety, accountability, and political implications" [11]. At a macro perspective, one critique argues that the "technological fix" offered by "do-good design performs the grassroots ideological work of neoliberalism by promoting market values and autoregulation."…”