KTH,
room number E35, Lindstedtvägen 3, floor 3,
Stockholm, Sweden.
Organised by
Olav W. Bertelsen, Centre for Human-Machine Interaction, University of Aarhus, Denmark.
olavb@daimi.au.dk
Liam J. Bannon, Dept. of Computer Science & Information Systems, University
of Limerick, Ireland.
The field of human-computer interaction is highly inter-disciplinary involving and borrowing from a multitude of incompatible disciplines to ensure that no means are left out in aiming for the best computer solutions. In the early years of HCI an overemphasis on criteria for scientific validity in the involved "basic" disciplines dominated over the question of practical relevance of research. Today, however, this disciplining has been substituted by an equally unsound looseness with respect to method, rigor and theoretical foundation.
Due to the inter-disciplinarity it becomes difficult to ask questions about the quality of research. The question is to easily brushed aside with arguments about relevance, or the (political) need for this specific kind of research.
The workshop invites contributions on the question of validity in various well-defined parts of HCI, in order to open a discussion on standards for research in this field. We would like to hear about the criteria and standards for research in your field and see good and bad examples as illustrations of the principles.
The aim of the workshop is to nurture the diversity of the field by making explicit the "rules" in each corner, thus making it possible for others to appreciate other researchers' work. The aim is not to decide which kind of HCI research is most appropriate or valid, but to make explicit the criteria in order to improve research in all sub-disciplines.
In accordance with the submitted position statements and workshop papers, the workshop will be organised into themes taking off from the accepted workshop papers. We will not try to find the one and only criterion for good research, but uncover the richness of criteria within the field.
We will conclude the workshop by producing a collection of posters presenting a classification of the approaches to validity and quality discussed during the day.
| 0900-0915: | introduction. |
| 0915-1030: | 5 min opening remarks. (everybody should state what they see as the biggest problem for HCI reserach today, and what they want to get out of the day). |
| 1000-1030 | coffee |
| 1045-1200: | session 1: thematic discussions (in smaller groups) |
| lunch | |
| 1400-1500: | session 2: general discussion of the issue of validity; between relevance and rigour (all together) |
| 1500-1530: | session 3: a quick construction of the ten commandments of HCI (in smaller groups) |
| 1600-1730: | session 4: conclusions, where are hci heading? where should it go? |
Liam Bannon, CS, University of Limerick.
Olav Bertelsen, Centre for Human-Machine interaction, University of Aarhus [ ......statement ]
Patric Dahlqvist, KTH [ statement | paper ]
Sara Eriksén, University of Karlskrona/Ronneby [ statement ]
Jan Gulliksen, Uppsala University
Christina Nielsen, University of Aarhus [ statement ]
Marko Nieminen, Helsinki University of Technology [ statement ]
Jarmo Parkkinen, CS, Helsinki University of Technology [ statement | paper ]
Matthias Rautherberg, IPO, Eindhoven University of Technology [ paper ]
Dag Svanaes, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim [ statement ]
Sakari Tamminen, TAI-Research Centre, Helsinki University of Technology [ statement ]
How they understand the role of HCI at User Centred Design at Danfoss. [from CACM].
Liam J. Bannon, professor at Dept. of Computer Science & Information Systems, University of Limerick, Ireland. Bannon has been an influential actor in criticising established assumptions in human-computer interaction since the mid-eighties, and is one of the pioneers in computer supported cooperative work.
Olav W. Bertelsen, research associate professor at Centre for Human-Machine Interaction, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Aarhus, Denmark. Bertelsen has worked with the the possibilities for theory in human-computer interaction, mainly based on an analysis of Card, Moran & Newell's engineering psychology. Recently he has developed a concept of design artefacts in order to understand mediation in design, e.g. the mediating role of theories in design. This later concept is based on activity theory.
Last update: 31. Oct, 2000