should be automated?
• Who gets to decide what will
be automated?
In contrast to the fundamental question underlying all of
machine-centered computing,
“What can be efficiently automated?” the fundamental question underlying all of human-centered computing might
be, “How can one efficiently
automate processes that can
and should be automated?” This
question includes the practitioner’s question, “How can process
p be automated?” the theoretician’s question, “What can be
efficiently automated?” and the
question of human-centered
computing, “What should be
automated?” All three aspects
are necessary, but they lie in
different domains of knowledge.
The first one belongs to the
domains of engineering-oriented
and empirical computing disciplines, the second one belongs
also to the domain of theoretically oriented computer science,
and the third one belongs perhaps to the domains of social
sciences and applied philosophy.
The theoretician’s questions,
the practitioner’s question, and
the human-centered question
are portrayed in Figure 1. All
of those questions are important themselves, and research
in nonintersecting areas is
important. However, whereas in
machine-centered computing
the production of efficient and
reliable technology takes place
in the area delineated by the
question “How do we automate
things reliably and efficiently?”
in human-centered computing
the responsible production of
useful and fair technology takes
place in the intersection marked
with light gray.
In order for human-centered
computing to really respond to
human needs, it is not enough
to consider only technical and
ethical questions, but also the
needs, wants, hopes, expectations, wishes, fears, concerns,
and anxieties that people have
regarding technology. Although
human-centered computing
does not eliminate the need
for technological experts, the
methodological, conceptual, and
theoretical toolbox of technology experts is insufficient for
dealing with the unique issues
of human-centered computing.
That is, the toolbox of computing
disciplines is in most of its parts
insufficient for selecting, recording, understanding, explaining,
analyzing, or predicting phenomena in the field of human affairs.
We need to borrow tools from
other disciplines.
Computing researchers in general need not become experts in
sociocultural, ethical, economic,
or other issues outside of the discipline of computing. Mastering
computing topics is hard enough
as it is. It is equally unreasonable
to expect people from other disciplines to become experts in the
discipline of computing. Expert s,
specialists, and professionals
have their areas of expertise and
they should do what they know
best. Instead of scores of broadly
trained bricoleurs, human-centered computing requires a
working multidisciplinary combination of experts from different fields. Human-centered computing does not necessarily need
to spawn new interdisciplinary
fields, but it might best work as
an eclectic, multidisciplinary
umbrella term for different kinds
of computing research that share
the focus on the human.
The increasing interest in
human-centered issues in the
field of computing is especially
lucid in practically oriented
branches of computing. Focusing
on the human in computing
research inevitably brings forth
a number of ethical and social
questions that have not been
important in machine-centered
computing. In human-centered
computing, concerns about
social and cultural responsibility,
responsiveness to people’s needs,
the consideration of individual
and social consequences, and
sensitivity to human expectations and anxieties limit the production of computing machinery
as much as the machine-centered questions of efficiency and
reliability. The ethical questions
of human-centered computing
are certainly not any easier than
the technical and theoretical
questions of machine-centered
computing. But no matter how
one approaches the new problems that a human focus brings
forth, a shift from machine-centered computing to human-centered computing inevitably shifts
the question from “What can be
automated?” to “What should be
automated?”
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Dr. Matti Tedre works as an
associate professor and
head of B.Sc. program in IT
at Tumaini University,
Tanzania. His research
interests include information technology
education, social studies of computer science, the history of computer science, and
the philosophy of computer science.
Previously, he has worked and studied at
the University of Joensuu in Finland, studied at universities of Ajou and Yonsei in
South Korea, visited the University of
Pretoria in South Africa, and worked in the
software industry.
Permission to make digital
or hard copies of all or part
of this work for personal or
classroom use is granted
without the fee, provided
that copies are not made
or distributed for profit or
commercial advantage,
and that copies bear this
notice and the full citation
on the first page. To copy
other wise, to republish,
to post on services or to
redistribute to lists, requires
prior specific permission
and/or a fee. © ACM
1072-5220/08/0900 $5.00
September + October 2008
DOI
10.1145/1390085.1390096
