Haptiğin Epistemolojik Dönüşümü: Aktör Ağ Teorisi ile Haptiğin Yeniden İnşası

Öz

Teknolojik gelişmelerin tasarım paradigmalarında yarattığı dönüşüm, duyusal deneyimlerin daha kapsamlı biçimde ele alınmasını gerekli kılmıştır. Bu çalışma, dokunma duyusu özelinde haptik deneyimi, birey merkezli yaklaşımların ötesinde, sosyal, kültürel ve teknolojik etkileşimler bağlamında değerlendirmektedir. Kuramsal bir analiz niteliğindeki bu çalışma, haptik etkileşimi Aktör Ağ Teorisi (AAT) perspektifiyle yeniden yorumlamakta ve bu bağlamda kavramsal bir model önermektedir. Haptik deneyim, yalnızca bireyin duyusal algılarıyla sınırlı olmayan; nesneler, teknolojiler ve çevresel faktörlerin katılımıyla oluşan ilişkisel bir yapıdır. Bu yaklaşım, duyusal etkileşimlerin ağ içerisindeki aktör ve aktantlar aracılığıyla nasıl şekillendiğini ortaya koymakta ve haptik tasarımı insan merkezli olmayan bir çerçevede düşünmeye imkân tanımaktadır. Çalışma, haptik deneyimin epistemolojik dönüşümünü tartışmakta; hem tasarım pratiği hem de arayüz geliştirme süreçlerine alternatif bir teorik zemin sunarak, insan-merkezli yaklaşımların ötesine geçen bir perspektif geliştirmeyi amaçlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Haptik Deneyim
• Aktör Ağ Teorisi
• İnsan Merkezli Olmayan Tasarım
• Duyusal Etkileşim
• Kavramsal Model

The Epistemological Transformation of Haptics: Constructing the Haptic Network through Actor-Network Theory

Öz

The transformation brought about by technological developments in design paradigms has necessitated a more comprehensive reconsideration of sensory experiences. This study evaluates the haptic experience (specifically the sense of touch) beyond individual centered approaches, within the context of social, cultural, and technological interactions. As a theoretical analysis, the study reinterprets haptic interaction through the lens of Actor-Network Theory (ANT) and proposes a conceptual model within this framework. Haptic experience is not limited solely to individual sensory perceptions; rather, it is a relational structure shaped by the involvement of objects, technologies, and environmental factors. This approach reveals how sensory interactions are formed through actors and actants within a network and enables the reconsideration of haptic design from a non-human centered perspective. The study discusses the epistemological transformation of haptic experience and aims to develop an alternative theoretical basis that extends beyond human centered approaches—contributing both to design practice and to interface development processes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Actor-Network Theory
• Haptic Experience
• Non-Human Centered Design
• Sensory Interaction
• Conceptual Model

Kaynakça

1. Altıparmakoğulları, Y. (2017). Dokunma deneyiminin tasarım süreci içerisinde planlanması. Doktora Tezi, Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi, Endüstri Ürünleri Tasarımı Anabilim Dalı.
2. Altıparmakoğulları, Y., & Erda, İ. S. (2019). Yaşa Bağlı Olarak Değişen Haptik Davranış Özelliklerinin Otomobil Araç-İçi Kontrolleri Üzerinden Tespit Edilmesi. Tasarım + Kuram, 15(27), 125-141. https://doi.org/10.14744/tasarimkuram.2019.30932
3. Bennett, A. (2005). Culture and everyday life. Sage Publications.
4. Bignetti, B., Alves de Souza, A. C., & Petrini, M. (2022). Actor-network theory: Methodological issues in practice. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 18(2), 145-166. https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-05-2022-2337
5. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Johnson, J. C. (2018). Analyzing social networks. SAGE Publications.
6. Braidotti, R. (2013). The Posthuman. Polity Press. Ferrando, F. (2019). Philosophical Posthumanism. Bloomsbury.
7. Callon, M. (1991). The Sociology of an Actor-Network: The Case of the Electric Vehicle. In A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, John Law (Ed.), Routledge.
8. Checkland, P. (1999). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. Wiley.

9. Costanza-Chock, S. (2020). Design justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need. The MIT Press.
10. Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013). Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming. MIT Press.
11. Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013). Speculative Design: A Critical Primer. University of Dundee, UK.
12. Evers, V., & Day, D. (1997). The role of culture in interface acceptance. In Interact’97 Proceedings of the IFIP TC13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 260–267). London.
13. Frandsen-Thorlacius, O., Hertzum, M., & Clemmensen, T. (2009). Non-universal usability? A survey of how usability is understood by Chinese and Danish users. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
14. Freeman, L. C. (2004). The development of social network analysis: A study in the sociology of science. Empirical Press.
15. Giacomin, J. (2012). What is human-centred design? In 10º Congresso Brasileiro de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento em Design, São Luís, MA.
16. Grunwald, M. (Ed.). (2008). Human haptic perception: Basics and applications. Birkhäuser.
17. Grunwald, M., & John, M. (2008). German pioneers of research into human haptic perception. In M. Grunwald (Ed.), Human haptic perception: Basics and applications (pp. 445–452). Birkhäuser.
18. Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind, intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. McGraw-Hill.
19. Husserl, E. (1931). Ideas: general introduction to pure phenomenology. [Trans. by W. R. B. Gibson]. Macmillan.
20. Hsiao, S., & Yau, J. (2008). Neural basis of haptic perception. In M. Grunwald (Ed.), Human haptic perception: Basics and applications (pp. 445–452). Birkhäuser.
21. Interaction Design Foundation. (2025). Humanity-centered design. Retrieved [February 20, 2025], from https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/humanity-centered-design.
22. Jones, L. A., & Tan, H. Z. (2013). Application of psychophysical techniques to haptic research. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 6(3), 268–284. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2013.6
23. Jütte, R. (2008). Haptic perception: An historical approach. In M. Grunwald (Ed.), Human haptic perception: Basics and applications (pp. 439–444). Birkhäuser.
24. Küçükalp, K. (2010). Husserl. Say Yayınları, Fikir Mimarları Dizisi (9). Ankara.
25. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press.
26. Latour, B. (2008). A cautious Prometheus? A few steps toward a philosophy of design (with special attention to Peter Sloterdijk). Keynote lecture, Networks of Design, Annual Meeting of the Design History Society, Falmouth, Cornwall, 3 September 2008.
27. Latour, B. (2017). On actor-network theory. A few clarifications, plus more than a few complications. Philosophical Literary Journal Logos, 27(1), 173-197.
28. Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems Practice, 5(4), 379–393.
29. Law, J. (2004). After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. Routledge.
30. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
31. Merriam, S. B. (2013). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass. (Çev. Ed. S. Turan). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
32. Miller, D. (1987). Material culture and mass consumption. Blackwell.
33. Mol, A. (2002). The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Duke University Press.
34. Nisbett, R. E., & Norenzayan, A. (2002). Culture and cognition. In D. L. Medin & H. Pashler (Eds.), Handbook of experimental psychology. New York.
35. Norman, D. A. (2023). Design for a better world: Meaningful, sustainable, humanity centered. The MIT Press.
36. Oğrak, Z., & Altıparmakoğulları, Y. (2024). From human-centred to humanity-ecosystem centred design. How can we dialogue with AI? In Proceedings of the International Design Conference – DESIGN 2024. https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2024.219
37. Oğuz, E. S. (2011). Toplum bilimlerinde kültür kavramı. Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(2), 123-138. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/613153
38. Onuncu Kalkınma Planı (2013) Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Kalkınma Bakanlığı, Onuncu Kalkınma Planı (2014-2018).
39. Paterson, M. (2007). The senses of touch: Haptics, affects and technologies. Berg.
40. Petit, J. L. (2003). On the relation between recent neurological data on perception (and action) and the Husserlian theory of constitution. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 2(4), 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PHEN.0000007360.42788.74
41. Prell, C. (2012). Social network analysis: History, theory and methodology. SAGE Publications.
42. Röbig, S., Didier, M., & Bruder, R. (2011). Ergonomics and usability in an international context. In W. Karwowski, M. M. Soares, & N. A. Stanton (Eds.), Human factors and ergonomics in consumer product design: Uses and applications, Taylor & Francis Group, CRC Press, Boca Raton.
43. Salman, M., Zhang, L., & Yu, W. (2021). Haptic feedback in autonomous driving: A review of state-of-the-art technology. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 14(2), 236-250.
44. Samur, E. (2012). Performance metrics for haptic interfaces. Springer-Verlag London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4225-6
45. Serres, M. (2007). The Parasite. University of Minnesota Press.
46. Scott, J. (2017). Social network analysis. SAGE Publications.
47. Sloterdijk, P. (2005). Im Weltinnenraum des Kapitals: Für eine philosophische Theorie der Globalisierung. Suhrkamp.
48. Tırıl, A. (2020). Kültür. Türkiye Turizm Ansiklopedisi. https://turkiyeturizmansiklopedisi.com/kultur
49. Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (1997). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity in business (2nd ed.). Nicholas Brealey, London.
50. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge University Press.
51. Zhang, T., & Dong, H. (2009). Human-centred design: An emergent conceptual model. In Include 2009, Royal College of Art, April 8–10, 2009, London.