activities are as much sociological as architectural and as much about politics as cognitive reasoning. Given the scope and complexity of these issues, HCI professionals need to engage in discourses that may at one time have seemed distant, if not entirely alien to them.

Redefining the H, C, and I. It is with these concerns in mind that the report suggests redefining the three elements of HCI—human, computer, and interaction.

The “H,” representing the “user,” clearly needs revision, especially given that people nowadays are as much consumers, creators, and producers as they are users of computers, and they often employ computers just for the fun of it. Conceptualizing the emotional aspects of experiencing technologies is already starting to happen. Words like magic, enchantment, pleasure, wonder, excitement, and surprise have begun to creep into the vocabulary when researchers and designers discuss the value of technology to people. But HCI specialists also need to ask what these terms really mean and how technologies may engender such experiences. The aesthetics of computational products has also gained importance in helping to define users’ relationships to technology. Therefore new models would provide a better understanding of how the emotional aspects of computing relate to human values.

A new conception of the “C” in HCI is also needed so that we may better understand how the embedding of digital technologies in everyday objects, in the built structures around us, and in the natural landscape is transforming our surrounding environment into a physical-digital ecosystem. Thus we need to address not just the design of artifacts per se but also the spaces within which they reside. And the design has to deal with deeper and more systemic issues. As the computer becomes increasingly reliant on a larger world, and in particular as the connection to a network becomes an essential part of the computer’s operation, the opportunity for improving the user experience simply through a better interface is rapidly disappearing. HCI needs concepts, frameworks, and methods that will enable it to consider people and computers as part of

a messy world full of social, physical, technological, and physiological limitations and opportunities.

It follows that the “I” in HCI will also need to be understood at many different levels. As Greenfield has

7

so elegantly described, we will have to consider different sites of interaction—for example, interactions on and in the body, interactions between bodies, interactions between bodies and objects (properties such as graspable, pushable, and other human-centered descriptors may be important here), and interactions at the scale of kiosks, rooms, buildings, streets, and other public spaces. All these levels of interaction offer different physical and social “affordances”—readily perceivable action possibilities—that technologies can potentially change.

In redefining H, C, and I, and in extending what the field of HCI may achieve, we will need to develop a lingua franca that expresses not only new metaphors but also new principles. Such a common language will enable the diverse parties to better understand each other, to talk in detail about the emergent transformations, and to productively explore how to steer them in human directions.

In a world where people’s movements and transactions can be tracked—where individuals trigger non-deliberate events just by being in a certain place, physical or virtual, at a certain time—the notion of interaction itself is being fundamentally altered. As the conception of technology use as a conscious act becomes difficult to sustain, other models of interaction and communication will have to be developed. At the other extreme, digital technologies will continue to be used in more deliberate and engaged ways as media for self-expression, commu-nity-building, identity-construction, self-presentation, and interpersonal relations. HCI professionals must understand the complexity of the new forms of social relations and interactions if they are to help develop technology that enables people’s effective engagement.

The fact that we now live with technology and not just use it means that HCI must also take into account the truly human element, conceptualizing “ users” as embodied individuals who have

desires and concerns and who function within a social, economic, and political ecology. HCI must also be flexible, given that people’s forms of engagement with technology and the nature of their interactions with it will continually be changing, often becoming more sophisticated, as they grow older. Understanding the new forms of interaction between humans and computers will involve asking questions about the qualitative—process, potential, and change—rather than quantifiable attributes and capabilities alone.

 

References

1. harper, r., rodden, t., rogers, y., and sellen, a. Being Human: Human-Computer Interaction in the Year 2020. microsoft research, cambridge, u.k., 2008. copies available on request at bhuman@microsoft. com.

2. card, s., moran, t., and newell, a. The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. lawrence erlbaum associates, hillsdale, nJ, 1983.

3. cockton, g. a development framework for value-centered design. in Proceedings of CHI ’05, Extended Abstracts. acm Press, ny, 2005.

4. dourish, P. Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. mit Press, cambridge, ma, 2001.

5. friedman, B. and kahn, P. h., Jr. human values, ethics, and design. Handbook on Human-Computer Interaction, Jacko, J. and sears, a., eds. lawrence erlbaum associates, mahwah, nJ, 2003, 1177–1201. (revised second edition, 2008, 1241–1266.)

6. friedman, B., kahn, P. h., Jr., and Borning, a. Value-sensitive design and information systems. Human-Computer Interaction in Management Information Systems: Foundations. Zhang, P., and galletta, d., eds. m.e. sharpe, armonk, ny, 2006, 348–372.

7. greenfield, a. Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing. Preachpit Press, ny, 2006.

8. grudin, J. a moving target: the evolution of human-computer interaction. Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies, and Emerging Applications, sears, a., and Jacko, J. eds. lawrence erlbaum associates, mahwah, nJ, 2007, 1–24.

9. harrison, s., tatar, d., and sengers, P. the three paradigms of hci. in Alt.chi. Proceedings of CHI ’07. acm Press, ny, 2006.

10. mccarthy, J. and Wright, P. Technology as Experience. mit Press, cambridge, ma, 2004.

11. norman, d.a. Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things. Basic Books, ny, 2004.

12. Peters, J.d. Speaking into the Air: A History of the Idea of Communication. university of chicago Press, chicago/london, 1999.

13. sproull, l. and kiesler, s. Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization. mit Press, cambridge, ma, 1991.

14. Wendell, J., Wood, s., and holtzblatt, k. Rapid Contextual Design: A How-To Guide to Key Techniques for User-Centered Design. elsevier, 2004.

 

Abigail Sellen ( [e-mail]) is Principal researcher, microsoft research cambridge, cambridge, u.k.

Yvonne Rogers ( [e-mail]) is a professor in the department of computing, the open university, milton keynes, u.k.

Richard Harper ( [e-mail]) is Principal researcher, microsoft research cambridge, cambridge, u.k.

Tom Rodden ( [e-mail]) is a professor in the school of computer science, university of nottingham, nottingham, u.k.

© 2009 acm 0001-0782/09/0300 $5.00