Understanding user experience of an open design-clothing product.
Main Article Content
Few studies related open design to the clothing sector, but none explored how users would experience it. The study reported here aimed to investigate how people with some or without prior sewing knowledge - advanced and amateur users – experience an open design-clothing product. Following four fashion design heuristics, a garment was created and distributed as DIY kits among advanced and amateur users. Data were collected in two stages: assembly and personalization. The results indicate that although skills play a significant role during assembly, other factors, like cross-generational differences and personal taste, influence how users experience an open design product. Furthermore, the study shows that given the necessary support, the open design can be used by a heterogeneous public, amplifying the participation of users with little or without prior sewing skills in clothing co-creation.
The clothing sector constantly seeks innovations in styles and materials, but rarely in its processes. Open design can innovate in this aspect. It can use technology for distribution processes while using digital manufacturing to innovate the production processes. However, although open design has been widespread in rapid prototyping over the past few decades (Smith et al., 2017) , open design in clothing design is new. Open design can be defined as a project in which the creators allow free distribution, modification, and derivation (Abel et al., 2011) . Thus, people can develop projects globally through the internet, sharing and improving ideas and digital files, while the production of the artifacts takes place locally.
Although professional designers often create, the open design main actors are the users, with a diversity of skills (Mustonen, 2013) . User participation in the open design can happen by contributing to a collaborative design process or open access to project files and outputs (Open Design Working Group, 2016) . The latter interrelates with the "Do It Yourself" (DIY) culture, in which any person, without the participation of a specialized professional, can manufacture, improve, or correct an artifact. DIY culture has evolved and encompassed innovations such as communication technologies and digital manufacturing, allowing people to produce a clothing product with their abilities through, e.g., kits containing materials and instructions (Martindale & McKinney, 2020) .
While DIY is an old practice in the clothing sector, only recently open design has started to get some attention. Some brands exploited the open design approach, like The Post-Couture Collective, which used to sell its creations as digital files and DIY kits. However, this brand is no longer active. Furthermore, only a few studies related open design to the clothing sector (Hirscher & Fuad-Luke, 2013 ; Mustonen, 2013 ) or mentioned it as a possibility (Hirscher, 2013 ; Rissanen & McQuillan, 2016 ), but none of them explored the users' experience. Hence, this article reports a study that investigated the users' experiences with an open design-clothing product though a DIY kit, looking at two user profiles: people who had little (advanced users) or did not have (amateur users) prior sewing or pattern making knowledge and skills. The aim was to understand to what extent they could benefit from DIY in an open design-clothing concept, exploring their challenges, opinions, and feelings.
2 . Literature Review
The core of the open design proposal is to open the design development and manufacturing processes to different user profiles, with the possibility of participation at various levels, through sharing files and creating opportunities to include individuals with less knowledge and skills in design and production (Instituto Faber-Ludens, 2012) . Furthermore, open design allows users to contribute to artifact production and customization, stimulating the DIY culture (Richardson, 2015) . The DIY culture in post-industrial times takes advantage of the internet and digital manufacturing to distribute, produce and customize products (Fox & Alptekin, 2018) . Through DIY, people can explore the benefits of creative and craft works: joy, pride, personal fulfillment, and high-quality aesthetics (Camburn & Wood, 2018 ; Hahn et al., 2013 ). Nevertheless, suppose the user has a bad experience during the assembly process. If there are failures, or if the process is too complicated, the user could not finish it or not use the product after all (Hirscher, 2013 ).
Since open design can target users with different skills and knowledge, design heuristics can help identify and propose design 'alerts' when using open design in clothing creation. Daly et al. (2012, p. 606)  define heuristics as ideation strategies used by designers and engineers to solve problems; they are "cognitive alerts that point designers to an exploration of design variations." In User Interaction (UI), heuristics are well-known evaluation methods that apply usability principles (based on practice and recurrent problems noticed by experts) to evaluate designed products or services (Perez, 2018). Perez (2018)  proposed heuristics to guide the development of open design clothing: 1) user orientation, 2) system and connections, 3) customization, and 4) modularity. Another approach is to consider the open design process through DIY kits from these users' perspectives. For example, users with different abilities can produce and customize a garment using a DIY kit containing materials and instructions, facilitating the process (Hirscher, 2013 ; Hirscher et al., 2018 ; Martindale & McKinney, 2020 ).
3 . Materials and Methods
The study related here had exploratory and experimental characteristics, with a cross-sectional approach, which evaluates the experiences of two user profiles (advanced and amateur users) with open design facilitated by a DIY clothing kit. These user profiles are based on Mustonen (2013) : advanced users are creative students or professionals in areas related to design, with sewing or digital manufacturing skills, while not working in these areas; and amateur users are unaware of design, sewing, or digital production, but are interested in DIY. The sampling followed the criteria of these two user profiles' skills and diverse age ranges and backgrounds. The recruitment was based on snowball sampling, starting with the researchers' network and expanding as participants indicated friends. Three advanced users and four amateur users from diverse backgrounds and age ranges (24-63 years). The sample of seven participants reflects the qualitative study, and, based on Begley and Dong (2020) , it was adequate for this research's purposive sampling. In terms of ethical compliance, this study complied Resolution no. 510/2016, of April 7, 2016, of the Brazilian National Health Council's. Therefore, the researchers applied the Informed Consent Form to all participants and kept their identities anonymous.
The study used a product developed to explore the user experience, including the four design heuristics mentioned before: a vest in neoprene fabric laser cutting that incorporates a creative identity and guidelines on its surface to assemble without a sewing machine. The researchers prepared a DIY kit whit this product (Fig. 1) consisting of clothing patterns that form the body, sleeves, pouch, pockets, and belt, and trims such as embroidery threads, buttons, and a needle. In addition, an instruction manual with assembly and personalization information was available digitally to the participants, with hyperlinks that led to instructional videos of hand sewing.
Two user experience (UX) methods were chosen to investigate how different users interact with the object of study: contextual inquiry and diary reports. Contextual inquiry combines users' observation and self-reported data holistically as it is conducted in the context of use - the user's natural environment (Hartson & Pyla, 2012 ; Getto, 2020 ). The diary report is also applied in the user's context; however, the result is from daily notes produced by the users without the researcher's input (Martin & Hanington, 2018 ). Data collection took place at the participant’s residences to simulate the experience when assembling the DIY kit in its context of use.
The user experience test was divided into two phases: Assembly - the participants received the DIY kit in their residences and had the instruction manual (digital medium) available. The assembly was experienced freely, without the researchers' intervention.
The researchers documented this phase by video recording, voice recording, photos, and recording the time of the activity. In the end, the researchers interviewed the participants using a structured script to understand the experience of the product assembling. Personalization - the first activity of the second phase was customizing the garment using the laser-cut holes in its surface to create new patterns. The participants had up to three days to customize the vest without the researcher's presence and fulfill the diary report, informing: customization date; time spent; personalized module; carrying out other activities concurrently with the task; feelings during task performance and afterward; the difficulty found across the tasks; and, how involved they were with the product. At the end of the third day, the researchers returned to the participants' residences to collect the diary and apply the second activity of this phase, based on the contextual inquiry method. The users should explore the garment modularity, creating at least three different outfits, using pieces and accessories from their wardrobe, with the condition of presenting the product with and without sleeves, and using the pouch at least in one of the outfits. The researchers documented this activity through photos and voice recordings. In the end, structured interviews aimed to identify the whole experience through emotional perceptions about the three activities processes and results: assembling, customization, and modularity exploration. This analysis followed the recommendation of Gibbs (2008) to create code hierarchies lists and data crossing, applied based on the design heuristics used to develop the product (Table 1).
|ROOT CODES||SUB CODES||HEURISTICS|
|Assembly||Pattern understanding||User orientation; modularity; systems & connections|
|Hand Sewing Process||User orientation; systems and connections|
|Use of the instruction manual||User orientation|
|Emotional aspects of the participant||N/A|
|Personalization||Product customization degree||Customization|
|Aesthetic question||Customization; modularity|
4 . Results
In general, all the advanced users had different perceptions about pattern understanding. Some could easily visualize the parts of the waistcoat, but others could not even assemble it correctly. Amateur users had more difficulty than advanced uses with pattern and features (sleeve, pouch, vest) understanding; and found the hand sewing process difficult. Some were unsure about their results, whose quality was lower than advanced users' results (Fig. 2).
All participants (advancers and amateur users) heeded to consult the instruction manual and reported having confidence in their information. However, only one of the participants accessed the hyperlinks that led to the instructional sewing videos. Regarding the time spent assembling, the average timing of the advanced users was 1 hour and 48 minutes. It was 2 hours and 37 minutes for the amateur users, totaling a considerable difference between their skills. The researchers observed frustration in almost all participants while assembling the vest. Some advanced users reported that the task was slow but challenging. All amateur users stated that they were surprised when they saw the vest completed. The personalization (Fig. 3) is the modification of vest parts surface or combination, like the laser-cut area in which the participants did embroidery (i.e., customization) and wearing the vest with or without the sleeves and the pouch (i.e., modularity). Concerning the results, there was an expressive variability (emphasizing the graphic elements created through the sewing points) among the results of advanced and amateur users. Nevertheless, all participants managed to compose three different outfits with the products regarding modularity. Still, most of them declared that they would not explore all possibilities aesthetics.
The differences among personal tastes were evident in the interest in customization, probably linked to generational differences. The two oldest users of the sample explored more customization possibilities than the other participants, while the two youngest ones declared they would prefer not to customize it. After customization, the user's perceptions of the vest were more favorable among the older adults.
5 . Discussion
The focus of the study reported here was to understand users' participation as they can access the product (e.g., files, blueprints, DIY kits) and create from there. Following the strategy proposed by Martindale and McKinney (2020)  and Hirscher et al. (2018) , the DIY Kit was adopted in this study to facilitate the integration of two users profiles - advanced (with little sewing skills) and amateur (without sewing skills) – investigating their experiences with an open design-clothing product. All amateur users had great difficulty assembling the vest, as they did not have sewing skills and could not understand the clothing pattern to know how the parts of the vest should be joined. Although advanced users also faced difficulties while assembling it, the task was easier for them, who were faster and had a better seam finish. This result indicates some differences in performance and needs between both profiles and the users' age. We observed that, among advanced users, the older ones (57 and 59 years old) had more difficulty in the assembly phase than the younger users. It might indicate that problems can also be related to age since open design-clothing products can present patterns and assembly differently than common ones. Moreover, the personalization phase results suggest that some open design users would not be interested in customization for purely aesthetic purposes, which can be related to the users' age.
Even though the researchers observed frustration in most participants during the assembly phase, most users reported a sense of joy and personal fulfillment after the assembly and customization processes. This result confirms the joy, pride, and personal satisfaction described by Hahn et al. (2013)  because of the creative manufacturing of artifacts. Even so, the difficulties related to the processes (especially the assembly) and the quality of the results, besides the reliance on the instruction manual, indicate that an open design product must be carefully developed when targeting amateurs and advanced users, who must quickly understand how to assemble and personalize it.
Although the heuristics were not the focus principal of the study, they were fundamental to guide the analysis and identify possible improvements in the open design in clothing creation. For instance, the researchers observed that the product could better apply the heuristic user orientation (Rissanen & McQuillan, 2016)  since some users reported difficulty understanding how to assemble the clothing. Other heuristics were satisfactorily used, such as modularity (Instituto Faber-Ludens, 2012)  and customization (Rissanen & McQuillan, 2016) . Due to technical, time, and funding reasons, it was impossible to adopt an iterative approach to modify the artifact by incorporating adjustments and then testing it again. Future research could improve the heuristics applied in the study reported here or even propose and test other ones. Moreover, future studies could incorporate interactive touchscreen interface features to allow amateur and advanced users to participate in thought open contribution during the design process.
6 . Conclusion
The study reported here investigated the users' experiences with an open design-clothing product, looking at f people who have some sewing knowledge - advanced users – and those who do not have prior sewing knowledge - amateur users. Following open design principles of open access to project materials to assembly and personalization, a DIY kit was distributed among the two users' profiles to explore usability, acceptability, and satisfaction with the open design concept in the clothing sector. The results indicate that skills play a significant role during the assembly process. Advanced users benefited more from the open design kit since they were more familiar with sewing. In contrast, amateur users presented more difficulties and needed to use the manual instructions to complete the task. Besides skills, the study suggested that there are cross-generational differences. Both oldest amateur and advanced users faced more difficulties during assembly. Still, they explored more customization possibilities than the younger ones, enjoying more its results than the youngest users. So there is space in open design clothing to explore differences such as taste and preferences among users. Both users' profiles were interested in open design and experienced joy and fulfillment after the assembly and personalization tests. Anyway, open design heuristics and strategies for clothing creation need to be improved, providing the necessary guidance to make open design clothing more accessible to both users' profiles.
An open design-clothing product that can be easily assembled and personalized potentially would attract a heterogeneous public, amplifying their participation in clothing creation independently of their previous sewing skills. In this manner, open design in clothing creation for amateur and advanced users can enable a new area of expertise in the clothing sector, for whom this study may provide important ground in terms of design suggestions and recommendations for future research.
This study was supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) under Grant 304619/2018-3.
Conflicts of interest
The authors state that there was no eventual conflict of interest that might interfere with the result of the research.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Articles submitted to Convergences – Journal of Research and Arts Education are licensed by CC BY. You can consult detailed information at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
You have the right to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
The online access to Convergences articles is open and free, not involving registration, and it is permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or refer partially or fully to the texts, process them for indexing, while input data of programs for software, or use them for any other legal purpose, without financial, legal or technical barriers.
1) The copyright remains with the author (s), which grant the magazine the right of unpublished publication (first), being licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, allowing the sharing of the work, as long as it is recognized authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors of the texts are authorized to enter into other contracts for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in Convergences, namely to publish the article in a revised or enlarged version, or to allow it to be published as part or chapter of any book that in any anthology of which it is an editor, in which it is included, expanded or elaborated, ensuring that the Edições IPCB - Instituto Politécnico de Castelo Branco have the first publication credit, and that this copyright is displayed in the (in the work as a whole and in the article, when applicable), whenever such publication occurs.
3) Authors are authorized to distribute the article for use in their own teaching and research activities, in repositories and social networks dedicated to research; Carry out self-archiving. In all these situations, it must be ensured that the Edições IPCB - Instituto Politécnico de Castelo Branco have the first publication credit, and that this copyright is displayed in the work (in the work as a whole and in the article, when applicable), whenever publication.
The author guarantees that the texts submitted by him are Original / unpublished, that is, that have not been published before, regardless of the form. It is understood that the publication of different articles relating to different components of the same study or research corresponds to different and original articles.
In addition, the author warrants that he has not licensed or transferred to anyone the copyright of the article submitted by him and that is his sole author (or that he and the coauthors listed in the article are his only authors), who generally have the right to make concessions to Convergences or Edições IPCB - Instituto Politécnico de Castelo Branco.
The author submitting the article represents the co-authors listed in the text, taking responsibility for compliance with copyright law.
The author certifies that his texts do not defame anyone, that does not prejudice other copyright, does not compromise the right to information and protection of identity and does not invade the privacy of anyone, nor otherwise violates any common law of any person . The author agrees to indemnify Convergences against any claim or action alleging facts that, if true, constitute a breach of any of the warranties referred to.
Third party copyright
When an article contains copyrighted material (illustrations, figures, diagrams, etc.) held by third parties, they must be used in compliance with the restrictions on rights of use, in particular copyright law. The authors of the manuscripts are obliged to guarantee the right to use the contents of their manuscripts (written, numerical and/or graphic)
1. Smith, P., Baille, J. & McHattie, L. S. (2017). Sustainable design futures: An open design vision for the circular economy in fashion and textiles. Design Journal, 20(sup1), S1938–S1947. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352712
2. Abel, B. van, Evers, L., Klaassen, R. & Troxler, P. (2011). Open design now. BIS Publishers.
3. Mustonen, N. (2013). Fashion Openness: applying an open source philosophy to the paradigm of fashion. [Master’s Thesis, Aalto University, Helsinki, Finland]. Aalto University Learning Center. https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/10357
4. Open Design Working Group. (2016). The open design definition v. 0.5. https://url.gratis/UQ8RPe
5. Martindale, A. & McKinney, E. (2020). Why do they sew? Women’s motivations to sew clothing for themselves. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 38(1), 32–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302X19872552
6. Hirscher, A. L & Fuad-Luke, A. (2013). Open participatory designing for an alternative fashion economy. In K. Niinimäki (Ed.), Sustainable fashion: new approaches (pp. 174–197). Aalto ARTS Books.
7. Hirscher, A. L. (2013). Fashion activism evaluation and application of fashion activism strategies to ease transition towards sustainable consumption behavior. Research Journal of Textile and Apparel, 17(1), 23–38. https://url.gratis/EMq7uz
8. Rissanen, T. & McQuillan, H. (2016). Zero waste fashion design. Bloomsbury.
9. Instituto Faber-Ludens. (2012). Design livre [Free Design]. Clube dos Autores.
10. Richardson, M. (2015). Pre-hacked: Open design and the democratisation of product development. New Media and Society, 18(4), 653–666. https://url.gratis/Me8wH
11. Fox, S. & Alptekin, B. (2018). A taxonomy of manufacturing distributions and their comparative relations to sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 1823–1834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.004
12. Camburn, B. & Wood, K. (2018). Principles of maker and DIY fabrication: Enabling design prototypes at low cost. Design Studies, 58, pp. 63–88. https://url.gratis/1W31S
13. Hahn, K. H. Y., Collier, A. F. & Chyu, R. (2013). Resurgence of textile-making in contemporary Korean culture: Intergenerational differences. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 31(4), 215–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302X13495733
14. Daly, S. R., Yilmaz, S., Christian, J. L., Seifert, C. M. & Gonzalez, R. (2012). Design heuristics in engineering concept generation. Journal of Engineering Education, 1(4), 601–629.
15. Perez, I. U. (2018). Open design na promoção de economias distribuídas: heurísticas para o desenvolvimento de vestuário. [Master’s Thesis, Federal University of Parana, Curitiba, Brazil]. AcervoDigital da UFPR. https://acervodigital.ufpr.br/handle/1884/55033
16. Hirscher, A. L., Niinimäki, K., Armstrong, J. & M., C. (2018). Social manufacturing in the fashion sector: New value creation through alternative design strategies? Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 4544–4554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.020
17. Begley, L. & Dong, H. (2020). Patients’ experience of waiting for surgery. In: Langdon, P., Lazar, J., Heylighen, A., Dong, H. (eds) Designing for Inclusion (pp. 59-67). CWUAAT 2020. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43865-4_6
18. Hartson, R. & Pyla, P. S. (2012). The UX book: Process and guidelines for ensuring a quality user experience. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
19. Getto, G. (2020). The story/test/story method: A combined approach to usability testing and contextual inquiry. Computers and Composition, 55, 102548. https://url.gratis/tgzhW
20. Martin, B. & Hanington, B. (2018). Universal methods of design. Rockport.