Jennifer Mankoff
Jennifer A. Rode
ABSTRACT
Doing research is, in part, an act of foresight. Even though it is not explicit in many projects, we especially value research that is still relevant five, ten or more years after it is completed. However, published research in the field of interactive computing (and technology research in general) often lacks evidence of systematic thinking about the long-term impacts of current trends. For example, trends on an exponential curve change much more rapidly than intuition predicts. As a result, research may accidentally emphasize near-term thinking. When thinking about the future is approached systematically, we can critically examine multiple potential futures, expand the set of externalities under consideration, and address both negative and positive forecasts of the future. The field of Futures Studies provides methods that can support analysis of long-term trends, support the identification of new research areas and guide design and evaluation. We survey methods for futuristic thinking and discuss their relationship to Human Computer Interaction. Using the sustainability domain an example, we present a case study of a Futures Studies approach - the Delphi Method. We show how Futures Studies can be incorporated into Human Computer Interaction and highlight future work such as rethinking the role of externalities in the validation process.
- Agre, P. E. Toward a critical technical practice: Lessons learned in trying to reform AI. In Bridging the Great Divide: Social Science, Technical Systems, and Cooperative Work, G. Bowker, et al., Ed. Erlbaum, 1997.Google Scholar
- Agre, P. E. Real-time politics: The Internet and the political process. The Information Society 18, 5 (2002), 311--331.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andersson, J. The future landscape. Technical Report 2008:5, Institute for Futures Studies, 2008.Google Scholar
- Bardzell, J. Interaction criticism and aesthetics. In CHI (2009), 2357--2366. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bell, G., and Dourish, P. Yesterday's tomorrows: notes on ubiquitous computing's dominant vision. PUC 11, 2 (2006), 133--143. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bell, W. What do we mean by Futures Studies? In New Thinking for a New Millennium, R. Slaughter, Ed. Psychology Press, 1996, 3--25.Google Scholar
- Bell, W. Foundations of Futures Studies: Human science for a new era: History, purposes and knowledge, vol. 1. Transaction Publishers, 2003.Google Scholar
- Blevis, E. Sustainable interaction design: Invention & disposal, renewal & reuse. In CHI (2007), 503--512. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Blythe, M., and Wright, P. Pastiche scenarios: Fiction as a resource for user centred design. Interacting with Computers 18, 5 (2006), 1139--1164. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Carter, S., Mankoff, J., Klemmer, S. R., and Matthews, T. Exiting the cleanroom: On ecological validity and ubiquitous computing. HCI Journal 23, 1 (2008), 47--99.Google Scholar
- Dator, J. From future workshops to envisioning alternative futures. Futures Research Quarterly 42 (1993), 298--319.Google Scholar
- Dator, J. The future lies behind! Thirty years of teaching futures studies. American Behavioral Scientist 42 (1998), 298--319.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Davidoff, S., Lee, M. K., Dey, A. K., and Zimmerman, J. Rapidly exploring application design through speed dating. In Ubicomp (2007), 429--446. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dourish, P., and Bell, G. "Resistance is Futile": Reading science fiction alongside ubiquitous computing. PUC (2008).Google Scholar
- Dourish, P., and Bell, G. Divining a Digital Future: Mess and Mythology in Ubiquitous Computing. MIT Press, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Edwards, K., and Grinter, R. At home with ubiquitous computing: Seven challenges. In Ubicomp (2001), 256--272. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Feiner, S., Macintyre, B., and Seligman, D. Knowledge-based augmented reality. CACM 36, 7 (1993), 53--62. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Garreau, J. Radical Evolution: The Promise and Peril of Enhancing Our Minds, Our Bodies - and what it Means to be Human. Broadway, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gianchandani, E. Calling for proposals: Envisioning frontiers of computing research. The Computing Community Consortium Blog, September 2011. Archived by WebCite (http://www.webcitation.org/6DdA6MheT).Google Scholar
- Gibson, W. The science in science fiction, August 2012. Archived by WebCite (www.webcitation.org/69qsg0Nqh).Google Scholar
- Gray, W. D., and Salzman, M. C. Damaged merchandise? a review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods. HCI Journal 13, 3 (1998), 203--261. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Greenbaum, J., and King, M., Eds. Design at work: Cooperative design of computer systems. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 1992. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Greenberg, S., and Buxton, B. Usability evaluation considered harmful (some of the time). In CHI (2008), 111--120. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Harber, R., Rodden, T., Rogers, Y., and Sellen, A. Being human: HCI in the year 2020. Tech. rep., Microsoft, 2008.Google Scholar
- Hayles, N. K. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics. University of Chicago Press, 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hendrickson, C. T., Lave, L., and Matthews, S. H. Environmental life cycle assessment of goods and services: An input-output approach. Tech. rep., Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, 2006.Google Scholar
- Kirby, D. The future is now: Diegetic prototypes and the role of popular films in generating real-world technological development. Social Studies of Science 40, 1 (2010), 41--70.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kreis, M. Pictures of the future in a digital world: An international comparison of user perspectives. Results of the third phase of the international study "Prospects and Opportunities of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and Media", 2011.Google Scholar
- Kurzweil, R. The Singularity is near: When humans transcend biology. Viking Adult, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Laurel, B. Computers as Theatre. Addison-Wesley, 1991. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Linston, H. A., and Turoff, M., Eds. The Delphi Method: Techniques and applications. H. A. Turoff and M. Linston, 2002.Google Scholar
- Meadows, D. H. The limits to growth: A report for the Club of Rome's project on the predicament of mankind. Universe Books, 1972.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Miller, D. Stuff. Polity, 2009.Google Scholar
- Moore, G. E. Cramming more components onto integrated circuits. Electronics Magazine 4 (1965).Google Scholar
- Nathan, L. P., Friedman, B., Klasnja, P., Kane, S. K., and Miller, J. K. Envisioning systemic effects on persons and society throughout interactive system design. In DIS (2008), 1--10. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nelson, H. G., and Stolterman, E. The design way: Intentional change in an unpredictable world. Educational Technology Publications, 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Olsen, D. R. Evaluating user interface systems research. In UIST (2007), 251--258. Google ScholarDigital Library
- O'Neill, E., Lewis, D., and Conlan, O. A simulation-based approach to highly iterative prototyping of ubiquitous computing systems. In Simutools '09 (2009), Article No. 56. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pearson, I. D. The next 20 years in technology: Timeline and commentary. The Futurist (January 2000).Google Scholar
- Peirce, C. S. Pragmatism as the logic of abduction. In The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings, 1893--1913, Pierce Edition Project, Ed. Indiana University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
- Quist, J., and Vergragt, P. J. Backcasting for industrial transformations and system innovations towards sustainability: Relevance for governance? In the Berlin Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change, Governance for Industrial Transformation (2003), 409--437.Google Scholar
- Rheingold, H. Smart mobs: The next social revolution. Basic Books, 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rittel, H. W. J., and Webber, M. M. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4 (1973), 155--169.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rode, J. A. Reflexivity in digital anthropology. In CHI (2011), 123--132. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rogers, Y. The changing face of Human-Computer Interaction in the age of ubiquitous computing. In USAB, vol. LNCS 5889 (2009), 1--19. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rowe, G., and Wright, G. The delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis. International Journal of Forecasting 15 (1999), 353--375.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schneider, S. H. Patient from hell: How I worked with my doctors to get the best of modern medicine and how you can to. Da Capo Lifelong Books, 2007.Google Scholar
- Sellen, A. J., and Harper, R. R. The Myth of the Paperless Office. MIT Press, 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sengers, P., Boehner, K., David, S., and Kaye, J. Reflective design. In Critical Computing (2005), 49--58. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sengers, P., and Gaver, B. Staying open to interpretation: Engaging multiple meanings in design and evaluation. In DIS (2006), 99--108. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Spigel, L. Yesterday's future, tomorrow's home. Emergence 11, 1 (2001), 29--49.Google Scholar
- Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D. Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In Judgement and Decision Making: An Interdisciplinary Reader, T. Connolly, H. R. Arkes, and K. R. Hammond, Eds. Cambridge University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
- Wagener, W. A., and Sagaria, S. Misperception of exponential growth. Perception and Psychophysics 18, 6 (1975), 416--422.Google Scholar
- Willard, W. Apocalypse When. Praxis, 2009.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Looking past yesterday's tomorrow: using futures studies methods to extend the research horizon
Recommendations
The (Un)sustainability of Imagined Future Information Societies
CHI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsThe pathway to a sustainable society is not clear, and we need to consider different developmental possibilities. This paper describes the results of a research project in the intersection of HCI and Futures Studies as well as in the intersection ...
IC failure mechanisms yesterday, today, tomorrow: implications from test to DFM
ISPD '06: Proceedings of the 2006 international symposium on Physical designThe failure mechanisms that occur on manufactured ICs affect yield or, worse, shipped product quality level. The difference between the two is in whether or not detection occurs at test. In this talk, we look at the types of failure mechanisms that ...
Yesterday and Tomorrow: A View on Progress in Computer Design
ICCD '05: Proceedings of the 2005 International Conference on Computer DesignSome 50 years ago saw a series of rapid advances in design automation technology setting the stage for generations of reliable computers. Over the intervening years progress in the field continued to deal with the advancing complexity of the technology. ...
Comments