Collaboration as Differentiation: Rethinking interaction intra-actively

Teoma Naccarato, John MacCallum


This paper is a invitation to interaction designers across disciplines to rethink the shaping of interaction “intra-actively”. Whether in human-computer interaction design or interdisciplinary and interactive performance practices, we propose to shift the emphasis from interaction between things, towards the intra-active processes of differentiation by which such things are continually made and unmade. Expanding interaction design by engaging in processes intended to bring awareness to the value systems involved in the local production of “interaction” and “things that interact” offers an opportunity to treat these values, and likewise the designers (be it engineers or choreographers or composers), as objects themselves in the design process. In the traditions of feminist, new materialist, and process philosophy we weave a narrative of appropriated perspectives in order to dismantle hegemonic accounts of correlationism and representationalism in interaction design, while investigating the concepts of boundary objects, diffraction, and critical appropriation as potential approaches to intra-active design.


Diffraction; Intra-Action; Intra-Active (Design); Interaction Design; Boundary Objects; Critical Appropriation; Collaboration; Process Philosophy; Feminist Philosophy; New Materialism

Full Text:



Barad, Karen. 2014. “Diffracting Diffraction: Cutting Together-Apart.” Parallax 20 (3): 168–187.

Barad, Karen. 2012. “Matter Feels, Converses, Suffers, Desires, Yearns and Remembers.” In New Materialism: Interviews & Cartographies. Edited by R. Dolphin and I. van der Tuin, n.p.. Michigan: Open Humanities Press.

Barad, Karen. 2010. “Quantum Entanglements and Hauntological Relations of Inheritance: Dis/continuities, SpaceTime Enfoldings, and Justice-to-Come.” Derrida Today 3 (2): 240–268.

Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Barad, Karen. 2003. “Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter.” Signs 28 (3): 801–831.

Bowker, Geoffrey C., and Susan Leigh Star. 1999. Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Butler, Judith. 1993. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex.” New York: Routledge.

Callon, Michel. 1986. “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay.” In Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? Edited by John Law, 196–233. London: Routledge.

Deleuze, Gilles, and Félix Guattari. (1980) 1987. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Edited and Translated by Brian Massumi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Derrida, Jacques. 2008. The Gift of Death. Edited and Translated by David Wills. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Foucault, Michel. (1976) 1990. The History of Sexuality: Volume 1: An Introduction. New York: Random House.

Foucault, Michel. 1982. “The Subject and Power.” Critical Enquiry 8 (4): 777–795.

Guattari, Félix. 1995. Chaosmosis: An Ethico-Aesthetic Paradigm. Edited and Translated by Paul Bains and Julian Pefanis. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Guattari, Félix. 2015. Psychoanalysis and Transversality. South Pasadena: Semiotext(e).

Haraway, Donna. 1991. “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century.” In Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, 149–181. New York: Routledge.

Haraway, Donna. 1992. “The Promises of Monsters: A Regenerative Politics for Inappropriate/d Others.” In Cultural Studies. Edited by Lawrence Grossberg, Cary Nelson, and Paula A. Treichler, 295–339. New York: Routledge.

Henderson, Kathryn. 1999. On Line and On Paper: Visual Representations, Visual Culture, and Computer Graphics in Design Engineering. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Huvila, Isto. 2011. “The Politics of Boundary Objects Hegemonic Interventions and the Making of a Document.” JASIST 62 (12): 387–406.

Lee, Charlotte P. 2007. “Boundary Negotiating Artifacts: Unbinding the Routine of Boundary Objects and Embracing Chaos in Collaborative Work.” Computer Supported Collaborative Work 16: 307–339.

Maffie, James. 2014. Aztec Philosophy: Understanding a World in Motion. Boulder: University Press of Colorado.

Star, Susan Leigh. 1989. “The Structure of Ill-Structured Solutions: Boundary Objects and Heterogenous Distributed Problem Solving.” Distributed Artificial Intelligence 2: n.p.

Star, Susan Leigh. 2010. “This Is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 35 (3): 601–617.

Star, Susan Leigh, and James R. Griesemer. 1989. “Institutional Ecology, ‘Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39.” Social Studies of Science 19 (3): 387–420.


Copyright (c) 2019 Teoma Naccarato, John MacCallum

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.