1. Foundations¶

1.1. Introduction¶

Human–Computer Interaction (HCI) studies the design, evaluation, and implementation of interactive computing systems for human use and the major phenomena surrounding them [M1:1]. It is an interdisciplinary field that incorporates expertise from computer science, psychology, sociology, anthropology, cognitive science, and linguistics [M1:2]. The goal of this module is to provide you with a general introduction to some of foundational material in HCI, including its historical context and some common terms.

1.1.1. Towards Human-Computer Interaction¶

When you read the first chapter of Human-Computer Interaction: An Empirical Research Perspective by I. Scott MacKenzie, you will learn about many notable events that lead to the emergence of HCI as a field. MacKenzie provides historical context by starting his timeline of events in the 1940s, the decade that introduced the ABC and ENIAC computers to the world. Since the human-computer interactions back then differ from what is available today in both quantity and related affordances, it’s important to understand how they evolved and what inspired them.

1.1.2. Norman Doors¶

picture of a "pull" door with a sign that says "push" — Fig. 1.1 This picture was associated with a “plaque set for doors” product on an online store for home builders. Retrieved circa August 2020.¶

Please take a moment to look at the image in Fig. 1.1 that Dr. Cotterell found associated with a “plaque set for doors” product on the website of an online store for home builders. As an exercise, pretend that you have encountered that door out in the real world and write down everything that you see. After that, reflect on the following question:

What issues, if any, can you identify with scenarios involving the door depicted in that picture?

The door in the picture is a classic example of a system with diametrically opposed signifiers. Although the door plaque clearly signifies that the door affords pushing, the almost unnoticed door handle signifies that the door affords pulling. What are affordances and signifiers, and why are they important? Can it get any worse than what we see in Fig. 1.1? You will read about all of that and more in The Design of Everyday Things (DOET) by Donald A. Norman. Doors like the one in Fig. 1.1 are called “Norman” doors.

1.2. Required Reading¶

Please read the items in the list of required readings below. If you are in CSCI 6800, then there may be some additional required readings. Whenever possible, direct links to articles are provided using UGA Library Links so that you can access them online using your MyID.

Required Reading for Everyone

I. Scott MacKenzie. Chapter 1: Historical Context. In Human-Computer Interaction: An Empirical Research Perspective, pages 1–26. Morgan Kaufmann, Amsterdam, 2013.
Donald A. Norman. Chapter 1: The Psychopathology of Everyday Things. In The Design of Everyday Things, pages 1–36. Basic Books, New York, New York, Revised and Expanded Edition edition, 2013.
Ben Shneiderman, Catherine Plaisant, Maxine Cohen, Steven Jacobs, Niklas Elmqvist, and Nicholas Diakopoulos. Chapter 1: Usability and Interactive Systems. In Designing the User Interface. Pearson, Boston, 6 edition, 2017.

1.3. Key Terms¶

accessibility¶

The extent to which a system, product or service is usable by all users, regardless of disability type or severity of impairment. Addressing accessibility means addressing discriminatory aspects related to equivalent user experiences for such users.

Web accessibility means that people with disabilities can equally perceive, understand, navigate, and interact with web content (e.g., sites, apps, etc.) and related tools. It also means that users can contribute equally without barriers.

—W3C: Accessibility, Usability, and Inclusion

affordance¶

An action possibility; more specifically, an affordance is a relationship between the properties of an object or system and the capabilities of the agent that determine just how the object or system could possibly be used [M1:3, M1:4]. When a user percieves the properties of a system, they discover the system’s affordances based on their interpretation of those properties and the context in which they were percieved.

conceptual model¶

A high-level, usually simplified, description of how a system is organized and works [M1:3, M1:5].

effectiveness¶

The accuracy and completeness with which users achieve specified goals [M1:6].

efficiency¶

The resources expended in relation to the accuracy and completeness with which users achieve goals [M1:6].

equality¶

The quality of being the same in quantity, size, degree, or value, especially in status, rights, and opportunities.

equity¶

The quality of being fair and impartial by meeting needs as a condition of equality [M1:7]. When considering a situation involving multiple individuals, equality implies that the individuals are equal (e.g., in their status, rights, and opportunities), while equity, instead, implies that interactions involving those individuals may vary so long as they are guided by truth, reason, fairness, and justice [M1:8].

Note

Equity is often understood as a way to address social imbalances. For example, equity-centered educational initiatives create opportunities for marginalized people that enable them to access and participate in educational programs that are capable of closing student achievement gaps [M1:9]. Likewise, equity-centered research models like participatory design and community-based practice research adopt methods that recognize and mitigate the social imbalances that often exist between researchers and the human research subjects in their studies [M1:10].

feedback¶

Information that is communicated about the results of an action [M1:3].

HCI¶

human-computer interaction¶

The design, evaluation, and implementation of interactive computing systems for human use and the major phenomena surrounding them [M1:1].

inclusion¶

universal design¶

design for all¶

Ensuring involvement of everyone to the greatest extent possible. It addresses a broad range of issues, including, but not limited to:

accessibility for people with disabilities;
access to and quality of hardware, software, and Internet connectivity;
computer literacy and skills;
economic situation;
education;
geographic location;
culture;
age, including older and younger people;
and language.

IRB¶

Institutional Review Board¶

An administrative body within an institution tasked with protecting the rights and welfare of human research subjects recruited to participate in research activities conducted under the auspices of the institution. Most IRBs are charged with the responsibility of reviewing, prior to its initiation, all research (whether funded or not) involving human participants.

Note

Many researchers also use “IRB” to informally refer to the paperwork that must be submitted to and approved by their IRB before an applicable study can begin.

system¶

interactive system¶

A combination of hardware and/or software and/or services and/or people that users interact with in order to achieve specific goals. This includes, where appropriate, packaging, user documentation, online and human help, support and training [M1:11].

mapping¶

A relationship between the elements of two sets [M1:3].

object¶

A thing to which a specified action or feeling is directed.

phenomenography¶

The empirical study of the different ways in which people experience or think about phenomena of the world [M1:12].

phenomenology¶

The philosophical study of “phenomena”: appearances of things, or things as they appear in our experience, or the ways we experience things [M1:13].

property¶

An attribute, quality, or characteristic of something.

satisfaction¶

Freedom from discomfort and positive attitudes towards the use of the product [M1:6].

signifier¶

Any perceivable indicator that communicates appropriate behavior to a user [M1:3]. With respect to a system, a signifier is one or more properties of the system or its context that, when perceived by a user, directly communicate an affordance (action possibility) of the system to the user.

system image¶

What can be perceived from a physical structure that has been built [M1:3].

usability¶

The extent to which a system, product or service can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use [M1:11].

1.4. References¶

M1:1(1,2): Thomas T. Hewett, Ronald Baecker, Stuart Card, Tom Carey, Jean Gasen, Marilyn Mantei, Gary Perlman, Gary Strong, and William Verplank. ACM SIGCHI Curricula for Human-Computer Interaction. Technical Report, ACM SIGCHI, New York, NY, USA, 1992. doi:10.1145/2594128.
M1:2: I. Scott MacKenzie. Chapter 1: Historical Context. In Human-Computer Interaction: An Empirical Research Perspective, pages 1–26. Morgan Kaufmann, Amsterdam, 2013.
M1:3(1,2,3,4,5,6): Donald A. Norman. 2013. Chapter 1: The Design of Everyday Things. Basic Books, New York, New York, Revised and Expanded Edition edition. ISBN 978-0-465-05065-9.
M1:4: James J. Gibson and Leonard Carmichael. 1983. The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems., volume 2. Greenwood Press, Westport, CT, USA. ISBN 978-0313239618.
M1:5: Jeff Johnson and Austin Henderson. Conceptual Models: Begin by Designing What to Design. Interactions, 9(1):25–32, January 2002. doi:10.1145/503355.503366.
M1:6(1,2,3): ISO/TC 159/SC 4. Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction – Part 210: Human-Centred Design for Interactive Systems. Standard ISO 9241-210:2019, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, CH, 2019. URL: https://www.iso.org/standard/77520.html.
M1:7: Louis Tietje. Introduction: Social Justice. In Sherwood Thompson, editor, Encyclopedia of Diversity and Social Justice, pages 27–36. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham, Maryland, USA, 2014. URL: https://t.uga.edu/7gr.
M1:8: Benterah C. Morton and Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner. Equity. In Sherwood Thompson, editor, Encyclopedia of Diversity and Social Justice, pages 435–437. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham, Maryland, USA, 2014. URL: https://t.uga.edu/7gr.
M1:9: AAC&U. Making Excellence Inclusive. Website, Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U), Washington, DC, USA, n.d. URL: https://www.aacu.org/making-excellence-inclusive.
M1:10: Calvin A. Liang, Sean A. Munson, and Julie A. Kientz. Embracing Four Tensions in Human-Computer Interaction Research with Marginalized People. ACM Transactions on Computuer-Human Interaction, April 2021. doi:10.1145/3443686, URL: https://doi-org.proxy-remote.galib.uga.edu/10.1145/3443686.
M1:11(1,2): ISO/TC 159/SC 4. Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction – Part 110: Interaction Principles. Standard ISO 9241-110:2020, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, CH, 2020. URL: https://www.iso.org/standard/77520.html.
M1:12: Ference Marton. Phenomenography—A Research Approach to Investigating Different Understandings of Reality. Journal of Thought, 21(3):28–49, 1986. URL: https://www-jstor-org.proxy-remote.galib.uga.edu/stable/42589189.
M1:13: David Woodruff Smith. Phenomenology. In Edward N. Zaltam, editor, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The Metaphysics Research Lab, Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI), Stanford University, Summer 2018 edition, 2018.