Human-computer interaction as science
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/aahcc.v1i1.21296Keywords:
Science, disciplinarity, cognitive scienceAbstract
The human-computer interaction (HCI) has had a long and troublesome relationship to the role of ‘science’. HCI’s status as an academic object in terms of coherence and adequacy is often in question—leading to desires for establishing a true scientific discipline. In this paper I explore formative cognitive science influences on HCI, through the impact of early work on the design of input devices. The paper discusses a core idea that I argue has animated much HCI research since: the notion of scientific design spaces. In evaluating this concept, I disassemble the broader ‘picture of science’ in HCI and its role in constructing a disciplinary order for the increasingly diverse and overlapping research communities that contribute in some way to what we call ‘HCI’. In concluding I explore notions of rigour and debates around how we might reassess HCI’s disciplinarity.
References
Bartneck, C. 2008. What Is Good? – A Comparison Between The Quality Criteria Used In Design And Science. In Proc. CHI ‘08 Extended Abstracts. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2485-2492.
Bedersen, B., Shneiderman, B. 2003. The Craft of Information Visualization, chapter 8, p. 350, Elsevier, 2003.
Bittner, E. 1973. Objectivity and realism in sociology. In Psathas, G. (ed.), Phenomenological Sociology. Chichister: Wiley, 109-25.
Blackwell, A. F. 2015. HCI as an Inter-Discipline. In Proc. CHI ‘15 Extended Abstracts. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 503-516.
Bødker, S. 2006. When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges. In Proc. of NordiCHI ‘06. ACM Press, 2006.
Card, S. K., Mackinlay, J. D., Robertson, G. G. 1990. The design space of input devices. In Proc. CHI ‘90. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 117-124.
Card, S. K., Mackinlay, J. D., Robertson, G. G. 1991. A morphological analysis of the design space of input devices. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 9, 2 (April 1991), 99- 122.
Card, S. K., Newell, A., Moran, T. P. 1983.The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. L. Erlbaum Assoc. Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, USA.
Carroll, J. M. 1997. Human–computer interaction: Psychology as a science of design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Volume 46, Issue 4, April 1997, Pages 501-522.
Carroll, J. M. (ed.) 2003. HCI Models, Theories, and Frameworks: Towards a Multidisciplinary Science, Elsevier, 2003.
Carroll, J. M. 2010. Conceptualizing a possible discipline of human-computer interaction. Interact. Comput. 22, 1 (January 2010), 3-12.
Carroll, J. M., Campbell, R. L. 1986. Softening up Hard Science: reply to Newell and Card. Human–Computer Interaction, 2(3):227-249, Taylor and Francis, 1986.
Collins, H. M. 1975. The seven sexes: A study in the sociology of a phenomenon, or the replication of experiments in physics. Sociology, 9(2):205-224, 1975.
Cross, N. 2007. Designerly ways of knowing. Birkhäuser GmbH, Oct. 2007.
Dix, A. 2010. Human-computer interaction: A stable discipline, a nascent science, and the growth of the long tail. Interact. Comput. 22, 1 (January 2010), 13-27.
Ehn, P. 1990. Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts. L. Erlbaum Assoc. Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, USA.
Fallman, D. 2003. Design-oriented human-computer interaction. In Proc. CHI ‘03. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 225-232.
Fallman, D., Stolterman, E. 2010. Establishing criteria of rigour and relevance in interaction design research. Digital Creativity 21, 4, Routledge, 2010, 265–272.
Feyerabend, P . K. 2010. Against Method. 4th ed., New York, NY: Verso Books.
Fodor, J. A. 1974. Special sciences (or: The disunity of science as a working hypothesis). Synthese28, 2, Springer, 1974, 97-115.
Garfinkel, H., Lynch, M., Livingston, E. 1981. The Work of a Discovering Science Construed with Materials from the Optically Discovered Pulsar. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 11 (June 1981), Sage, 131-158.
Gaver, W. 2012. What should we expect from research through design?. In Proc. CHI ‘12. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 937-946.
Golbeck, J. 2013. Analyzing the Social Web. Elsevier, 2013.
Goodman, E. 2013. Delivering Design: Performance and Materiality in Professional Interaction Design. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 2013.
Gray, W. D., Salzman, M. C. 1998. Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 13, 3 (September 1998), 203-261.
Greenberg, S., Buxton, B. 2008. Usability evaluation considered harmful (some of the time). In Proc. CHI ‘08. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2008.
Greenberg, S., Thimbleby, H. 1992. The weak science of human-computer interaction. In Proc. CHI ‘92 Research Symposium on HCI, Monterey, California, May.
Greiffenhagen, C., Reeves, S. 2013. Is replication important for HCI? In Workshop on replication in HCI (RepliCHI), CHI ‘13.
Grudin, J. 2015. Theory weary. interactions, blogpost (posted 14/03/14), retrieved 15th June, 2015, from: http://interactions.acm.org/blog/view/theory-weary
Harrison, S.Tatar, D., Sengers, P. 2007. The Three Paradigms of HCI. In Proc. alt.chi, CHI ‘07, San Jose, CA, May 2007.
Hornbæk, K., Sander, S. S., Bargas-Avila, J. A., Simonsen, J. G. 2014. Is once enough?: on the extent and content of replications in human-computer interaction. In Proc. CHI ‘14. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3523-3532.
Howes, A., Cowan, B. R., Janssen, C. P ., Cox, A. L., Cairns, P., Hornof, A. J., Payne, S. J., Pirolli, P. 2014.
Interaction Science Spotlight, CHI ‘14. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2014.
Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., Çetinkaya, M. 2013. Design Thinking: Past, Present and Possible Futures. Creativity and Innovation Management. 22, 2 (June 2013), 121–146.
John, B. E., Newell, A. 1989. Cumulating the science of HCI: From S-R compatibility to transcription typing. In Proc. CHI ‘89. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 109-114.
Kostakos, V . The big hole in HCI research. Interactions 22, 2 (February 2015), 48–51.
Liu, Y ., Goncalves, J., Ferreira, D., Xiao, B., Hosio, S., Kostakos, V. 2014. CHI 1994-2013: mapping two decades of intellectual progress through co-word analysis. In Proc. CHI ‘14. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2014.
Livingston, E. 2008. Ethnographies of Reason. Ashgate, 2008.
Long, J., Dowell, J. 1989. Conceptions of the discipline of HCI: craft, applied science, and engineering. In Proc. 5th conference of the BCS-HCI Group on People and computers V, Sutcliffe, A., Macaulay, L. (eds.). Cambridge University Press, 9-32.
Martin, A., Lynch, M. 2009. Counting Things and People: The Practices and Politics of Counting. Social Problems 56, 2 (May 2009), 243-266.
Medawar, P. B. 1963. Is the scientific paper a fraud? The Listener 70 (12 September), 377–378.
Moggridge, B. 2006. Designing Interactions. MIT Press, Oct. 2006.
Myers, B. A. 1998. A brief history of human-computer interaction technology. interactions 5, 2 (March 1998), 44-54.
Newell, A., Card, S. K. 1985. The prospects for psychological science interaction. Hum.-Comput. 1985), 209-242. in human-computer Interact. 1, 3 (September
Newell, A., Card, S. 1986. Straightening Out Softening Up: Response to Carroll and Campbell. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2, 3 (1986), 251-267.
Newman, W. M. 1997. Better or just different? On the benefits of designing interactive systems in terms of critical parameters. In Proc. DIS ‘97. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 239-245.
Norman, D. A. 1986. Cognitive engineering. In D. A. Norman & S. W. Draper (Eds.), User centered system design: New perspectives on human-computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Olson, G. M., Moran, T. P. 1998. Commentary on “Damaged merchandise?”.Hum.-Comput. Interact.13, 3 (September 1998), 263-323.
Pirolli, P . 2007. Information foraging theory: Adaptive interaction with information, vol. 2. Oxford University Press, USA, 2007.
Reeves, S. 2015. Locating the “Big Hole” in HCI Research. Interactions 22, 4 (July 2015).
Rogers, Y. 2012. HCI Theory: Classical, Modern and Contemporary, Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 5, 2, Morgan & Claypool, 2012, 1-129.
Rogers, Y., Sharp, H., Preece, J. 2011. Interaction Design: Beyond Human—Computer Interaction, 3rd Edition. Wiley, 2011.
Rooksby, J. 2014. Can plans and situated actions be replicated? In Proc. CSCW ‘14. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 603-614.
Shneiderman, B. 2011. Claiming success, charting the future: micro-HCI and macro-HCI. Interactions 18, 5 (September 2011), 10-11.
Shneiderman, B. 2012. The Expanding Impact of Human-Computer Interaction. Foreword to The Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, Jacko, J. A. (ed), CRC Press, May 2012.
Shneiderman, B., Card, S., Norman, D. A., Tremaine, M., and Waldrop, M. M. 2002. CHI@20: fighting our way from marginality to power. In Proc. CHI ‘02 Extended Abstracts. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 688- 691.
Simon, H. A. 1996. Sciences of the Artificial. 3rd ed., MIT Press, Sept. 1996.
Whittaker, S., Terveen, L., Nardi, B. A. 2000. Let’s stop pushing the envelope and start addressing it: a reference task agenda for HCI. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 15, 2 (September 2000), 75-106.
Wilson, M. L., Mackay, W. 2011.RepliCHI—We do not value replication of HCI research: discuss (Panel). In Proc. CHI ‘11 Extended Abstracts. ACM, New York, NY, USA.
Wilson, M. L., Resnick, P., Coyle, D., Chi, E. H. 2013. RepliCHI: The workshop. In CHI ‘13 Extended Abstracts. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3159-3162.
Wolf, T. V., Rode, J. A., Sussman, J., Kellogg, W. A. 2006. Dispelling “design” as the black art of CHI. In Proc. CHI ‘06. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 521- 530.
Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., Evenson, S. 2007. Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In Proc. CHI ‘07. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 493-502.
Zimmerman, J., Stolterman, E., Forlizzi, J. 2010. An analysis and critique of Research through Design: towards a formalization of a research approach. In Proc. DIS ‘10. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 310-319.
