Transcript Criminal Persona Brainstorming

Criminal Persona Brainstorming
Dr. Kev Hilton
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Introduction
• Collaboration between disciplines encourages
people to look beyond their own boundaries.
• Funding bodies criteria for project support often
requires cross-disciplinary collaboration.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Introduction
Two crime related, funded initiatives:
• The DTI’s Design Against Crime, which looks to critically
review the approach of design to crime prevention,
through UK case studies.
• The EPSRC’s Think Crime, which looks to develop
technologies for crime prevention and detection.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Introduction
The proposed programme of research from
Northumbria is:
Countering Criminal Creativity
• This has initially been a collaboration between
Computer Forensics and Design
• The intention has been to develop criminal
profiles to apply as role-play Personae in the
design process, where the term ‘design’ refers to
the ‘organization of value’.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Criminal Personae
Criminal Behaviour literature was used initially to
develop five basic criminal personae:
• Excitement
• Consequences
• Compliance
• Provocation
• Financial
Adapted from Gudjonsson and Sigurdsson (2004)
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Brainstorms
Brainstorms were run for Computer Forensics
and Product Designers, to identify opportunities
for crime.
Two conditions were used for the pilot test:
• Traditional Brainstorming
• Criminal Personae Brainstorming
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Brainstorms
The themes chosen were led by the level of
impact design is believed to have on types of
crime to counter.
• Theft
• Vandalism
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Computer Forensic Sessions
Theft using:
Vandalism Using:
Spyware
Malware
Phishing
Identity
Piracy
Denial of Service
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Product Design Sessions
Theft using:
Vandalism Using:
Web-Cam
Isocyanate Glue
Bum-Bag
RC Toy
Chewing-Gum
Mobile Phone
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Initial Findings
• Due to the sample size the results should be
viewed as Indicative not Conclusive
• The Computer Forensics and the Product
Designers both showed greater Creative Fluency
and Responsiveness to the Theft opportunities
than the Vandalism opportunities.
• The Product Designers faired better with the
Opportunities they were provided with.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Initial Findings
• The Computer Forensics were more capable of
suggesting solutions to Theft and Vandalism in
Persona mode
• The Product Designers were more capable of
generating Ideas, and partially in suggesting
solutions, in Persona mode
• It is acknowledged that opportunity types, and
profession, may have an influence upon
effectiveness of the Personae approach.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Initial Findings
• The conclusion is that it is worth while furthering
this area of research to the next stage
• The next stage was proposed to involve the
further development of the process as the (Cyclic
Countering of Competitive Creativity.) C4 critical
design process.
• This involved development of more in-depth
personas for specific theft and vandalism
contexts, and running a student design project.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Personas
Since the project began it was further informed by Pruitt
and Adlin’s 2006 text on persona development and
application.
Assumption Personas.
• Preconceptions and Stereotyping.
• Informed by Anecdote and Media.
Developed Personas.
• Secondary Research - Textbooks and reports.
• Indirect Primary Research - Crime prevention agencies.
•
Direct Primary Research – Criminals.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Development
This process involved an assistant developing the initial
context with secondary research.
This context helped in planning the indirect primary research
method.
Supported by Newcastle City Council’s ‘Community
Safety Unit’, the personas were developed for 2 key
themes:
•
•
Vandalism – Specifically graffiti.
Theft – Specifically from student accommodation.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Development
The indirect primary research participants were contacted
and consulted through the following groups:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Community Safety.
Crime Prevention.
Prolific Priority Offenders Team.
Probation.
Mental Health.
Education.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Development
Following leads from the consultations, ethnographic
investigation further supported persona development,
through :
•
•
Potential crime scene observations and recordings.
Internet forums engagement.
Persona details and imagery were drafted up and then
peer reviewed with the participant groups, before
producing persona cards, with 4 persona ‘types’ for
each of the 2 themes.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Development Method
Burglar Types:
•
•
•
•
Professional.
Calculating.
Prolific.
Opportunistic.
Graffiti Types:
•
•
•
•
Fanatic.
Writer.
Vandal.
Prolific Tagger.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Persona Examples
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Cyclic Countering of Competitive Creativity (C4)
The C4 design process uses Competitive Personas in
design against threat, where the aim is to develop
solutions which challenge and positively change the
competition’s behaviour.
The C4 process cycles the design process through :
•
Proposing.
•
Countering.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
C4 Proposing
A C4 brainstorm is facilitated where the 4-6 active participants
each role-play their chosen/assigned persona.
The aim of the brainstorm is to propose ways of gaining
criminal opportunities from a situation of interest.
This approach might be compared to an ‘abusive’ form of
Failure Mode and Effect Analysis.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
C4 Countering
At the countering stage the ‘criminal personas’ are switched
to the ‘designer perspectives’, to propose means of
countering the identified criminal opportunities.
The aim here is to develop and propose a number of
potential resolutions to the suggested criminal
opportunities, possibly even using the criminal intent
against itself.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
C4 Cycling
By cycling the Proposing and Countering, a strong proposal
should develop for the situation of interest, and a more
systemic understanding of it.
This process of critical review and learning from failure
enables the development of a tighter design brief, with a view
towards a product, service or environmental change.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
C4 Outcomes
Refuse Bin.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
C4 Outcomes
Desk Safe.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
C4 Outcomes
Security Blinds.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
C4 Outcomes
Centre for Design Research © 2008
C4 Outcomes
Centre for Design Research © 2008
C4 Outcomes
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Concluding Comments
Persona development actively informs the design
process and aids designer engagement.
Nevertheless, this approach requires a commitment
of time, to both develop and apply the personas.
Persona role-play can be used by a wider projectcommunity to engage with the experience.
However, persona role-play does not suit everyone,
either because of confidence or control issues.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Concluding Comments
The most inspiring element of the persona details
were the ‘Creative Prompts’ in the section on ‘How
they operate’.
The role-play method made it easier for designers to
engage in criticism of project work.
The intended application of a persona will influence
the approach to its development, and resultant depth
of experience it provides its users.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Concluding Comments
It must be appreciated that there are ethical
challenges to consider, for not causing harm
through criminal persona development and use.
Ideally, we should use criminal intent and anti-social
behaviour against itself, where possible, to devalue
such actions, rather than escalate the problems.
The next stage of development would involve a
comparison of Primary, Secondary, and Assumption
Personas, to determine the effective
Investment/Benefit balance.
Centre for Design Research © 2008
Dr. Kev Hilton ([email protected])
Centre for Design Research © 2008