Where I started …
Starting my bachelor’s, I knew I grew up in a dutch higher class environment bubble. Therefore, I focused on developing how to incorporate different cultures into design. For example, I practised redesigning a product by looking at the dimensions of culture by Hofstede.
Besides, I performed first user studies. I grew from simply giving people a product and asking their opinion, to doing diary and field studies to gain information on a context.
The Mbrace design (Project 1) which was focused on the dutch market. 
The Mbrace design changed to fit the Guatemalan market. 
The Mbrace design changed to fit the Egyptian market. 
An example of a diary study to gain input for designing a product in a student house. 
Field study at the Eindhoven Marathon focusing on crowd behavior around the track.
… how I continued …
Continuing the master’s, I zoomed in on different emerging technologies people might have hesitations about to find my speciality interest. Starting in M1.1 by designing a social robot for home-working students. From a multiple-day deployment including diary studies and an interview, thematic analysis showed that people were actually comfortable with having a robotic buddy.
I also explored smart home technology. For instance, preventive interaction with systems, a home hierarchy with devices having their own practice, and proposing a wardrobe helping to choose clothes. These studies improved my qualitative data-gathering and analyzing skills. By collecting interview and diary data, I practised doing thematic analysis and thereby gaining an understanding of the overall opinion of people as well as detailed insights. Although I enjoy doing research in this domain, it did not give me the spark of interest I desired.
Then, during the course ‘Ethics of Technology’ I discovered the Metaverse, a concept that could entirely change online interaction. For example, causing a more separated society with epistemic bubbles or echo chambers. Now I was convinced, this Metaverse concept was going to be my speciality as there is much research to be conducted its impacts on everyday life and determining desirable development.
The design of a social robot, Bulb, for students to help them maintain a structure throughout the day. 
The diary for participants during the deployment of Bulb in their student room. 
The prototype for the CDR course that acts in a preventive manner, asking the user first if they want an action to happen, then the user answers by pressing a button. 
The thematic analysis from the deployment of the CDR preventive intervention prototype. 
For the RtFE course, a counterfactual artifact was created that shows the hierarchy in the house, of which the smart appliances are part. 
The M1.2 proposed interaction scenarios of the wardrobe design.
… and where I’m headed.
The Metaverse is still developing into a fully implemented technology. I spent M2.1 and M2.2 informing myself about its possibilities. I focus on how the sense of touch adds value to a virtual experience. By collaborating with CWI my study practices developed by improving which questions to ask and completing the setup with information-gathering forms pre- and post-study. This enables me to evaluate specific concepts like how adding vibration and temperature stimuli impacts how we view a fellow avatar in virtual reality.
I have more to bring in discovering how people act within a virtual space and desirable development. Thus after graduating I will try to continue to work within this domain as a design researcher.
M2.1 prototype to study the effects of vibration and temperature feedback on the experience of watching a video. 
M2.1 prototype including the questions to ask after each video, e.g. a valence rating of the video to see if this differs per feedback modality. 
The M2.2 prototype implemented the vibration and temperature stimuli into a virtual reality space. 
The questions after a trial were in virtual reality. To measure how the stimuli impacted the sense of distance, this question was asked.
Simone Ooms 