Design Dilemmas and Development Directions of Inclusive Modularity in Multi-species Wearable Interaction Scenarios
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/0spm0m58Keywords:
Multi-species design; wearable interaction; inclusive modularity; animal-computer interaction; more-than-human design; inclusive design.Abstract
The study explores design difficulties and research directions of inclusive modularity in multi-species wearable interaction scenarios. The research contends that multi-species interaction requires designers to simultaneously consider physiological variation, interspecies ethics, located activity, maintenance, and communicative context, rather than treating wearables as standardised items for a single category of user. Using inclusive design, animal-computer interaction, disability-oriented wearable research, and more-than-human design conversations as a springboard, the essay considers why modularity is appealing in theory but difficult in practice when one system must accommodate heterogeneous bodies, behaviours, and environments. It also investigates how inclusive modularity might enable adaptability, repairability and situation reactivity without turning nonhuman actors into passive extensions of human purpose. The research suggests that the future of multi-species wearable interaction lies in modular systems that are body-aware, context-sensitive, morally based, and open to iterative reconfiguration, rather than inflexible universal solutions.
Downloads
References
[1] Clarkson, J., Keates, S., Coleman, R., & Lebbon, C. (Eds.). (2003). Inclusive design: Design for the whole population. Springer.
[2] Mancini, C. (2011). Animal-computer interaction: A manifesto. Interactions, 18(4), 69–73. https://doi.org/10.1145/1972446.1972461
[3] Ritvo, S. E., & Allison, R. S. (2017). Designing for the exceptional user: Nonhuman animal-computer interaction (ACI). Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 222–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.028
[4] Mancini, C., Lawson, S., & Juhlin, O. (2017). Animal-computer interaction: The emergence of a discipline. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 98, 129–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.10.004
[5] Mancini, C. (2017). Towards an animal-centred ethics for animal-computer interaction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 98, 221–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.11.008
[6] Shull, P. B., & Damian, D. D. (2015). Haptic wearables as sensory replacement, sensory augmentation and trainer—A review. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 12, 59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-015-0055-z
[7] Pacchierotti, C., Sinclair, S., Solazzi, M., Frisoli, A., Hayward, V., & Prattichizzo, D. (2017). Wearable haptic systems for the fingertip and the hand: Taxonomy, review, and perspectives. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 10(4), 580–600. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2017.2668063
[8] Mancini, C., & Nannoni, E. (2023). Editorial: Animal-computer interaction and beyond: The benefits of animal-centered research and design. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 9, 1109994. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.1109994
[9] Coskun, A., Cila, N., Nicenboim, I., Frauenberger, C., Wakkary, R., Hassenzahl, M., Mancini, C., Giaccardi, E., & Forlano, L. (2022). More-than-human concepts, methodologies, and practices in HCI. CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts, Article 150, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491101.3519847
[10] Forlano, L. (2017). Posthumanism and design. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 3(1), 16–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.02.002
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Academic Journal of Art and Design
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
