skip to main content
10.1145/3328020.3353923acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Beyond cultural dimensions: digital inclusion in global UX

Published:04 October 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Today's global digital climate is characterized by a variety of UX communities that are emerging online for the first time. While many technology companies have developed design systems and practices to address the needs of global users, there is a noticeable gap in understanding of global UX in technical communication and even in UX education. The purpose of such experience report is to outline a framework for establishing a shared understanding of global UX. The framework relies on inclusive design as a guiding philosophy and is based on my experience developing and teaching a global UX course in an undergraduate UX program. This paper briefly outlines the purpose and key topics of a global UX course at [school name omitted intentionally]. The paper concludes with a call for UX educators to engage with the topic of global UX through curriculum development and research.

References

  1. Lee Okan. 2018. UX education: The rise of educational programs. User Experience Magazine 18(5), http://uxpamagazine.org/ux-education-2/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Yubo Kou and Colin M. Gray. 2019. A practice-led account of the conceptual evolution of UX knowledge. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. May 4--9, Glasgow, Scotland, UK. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Linn Vizard. 2016. The evolution of UX education. Adobe Blog, December 19, 2016, https://theblog.adobe.com/the-evolution-of-ux-education/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Alberto Ferreira. 2017. Universal UX Design: Building Multicultural User Experience. Elsevier: Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Robert Schumacher. 2010. Handbook of Global User Research. Morgan Kaufmann Press: Oakbrook Terrace, IL.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Whitney Quesenbery and Daniel Szuc, 2012. Global UX: Design and Research in a Connected World. Morgan Kaufmann.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Jan Brejcha, 2015. Cross-Cultural Human-Computer Interaction and User Experience Design: A Semiotic Perspective. CRC Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Kirk St. Amant. 2017. The cultural context of care in international communication design: A heuristic for addressing usability in international health and medical communication. Communication Design Quarterly. 5 (2), 62--70.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Tatiana Batova. 2018. Global technical communication in 7.5 weeks online: Combining industry and academic perspectives. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 61 (3), 311--329.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Josephine Walwema. 2018. Transliteracies in Intercultural Professional Communication. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 6 (3), 330--345.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Microsof. n.d. Inclusive Design Toolkit, https://www.microsoft.com/design/inclusive/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Google. 2018. Designing for global accessibility, Part I-III. UX for the Next Billion of Users, https://design.google/library/ux-next-billion-users/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Luciano Floridi (Ed.). 2015. The Online Manifesto: Being Human in an Interconnected Era. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Center for Human Technology. 2019. https://humanetech.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Professional Association of Design. nd. Diversity and inclusion initiative. https://www.aiga.org/diversity-and-inclusion-initiative.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Design for Social Good. 2019. Can good design change the world? https://designforsocialgood.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Harvard Project Zero. 2018. Digital Civics Toolkit. http://www.pz.harvard.edu/resources/digital-civics-toolkit.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Open Lab at Newcastle University. 2019. Digital Civics. https://digitalcivics.io/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Emma J. Rose. 2016. Design as advocacy: Using a human- centered approach to investigate the needs of vulnerable populations. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 46(4), 427--445.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Cynthia Putnam, Maria Dahman, Emma J. Rose, Jinghui Cheng, Glee Bradford. 2016. Best practices for teaching accessibility in university classrooms: Cultivating awareness, understanding, and appreciation for diverse users. In ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing 8 (4), 13:1-13:26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Rose, Emma & Edenfield, Avery & Walton, Rebecca & Gonzales, Laura & Shivers McNair, Ann & Zhvotovska, Tetyana & Jones, Natasha & I. Garcia de Mueller, Genevieve & Moore, Kristen. 2018. Social Justice in UX: Centering Marginalized Users. 1--2. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Josephine Miller. 2018. How to design for social change. Medium, https://medium.com/nyc-design/how-to-design-for-social-change-571a18e70bf5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Web Accessibility Initiative. 2016. Making the Web Accessible, https://www.w3.org/WAI/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. IBM. n.d. IBM Accessibility Handbook, http://accessibility-handbook.mybluemix.net/design/a11y-handbook/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Microsoft. n.d. Inclusive Design Toolkit, https://www.microsoft.com/design/inclusive/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Google. 2018. Designing for global accessibility, Part I-III. UX for the Next Billion of Users, https://design.google/library/ux-next-billion-users/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Samsung Design. 2019. Right to Access, http://design.samsung.com/global/contents/accessibility/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Institute for Human-Centered Design. n.d. Inclusive Design: History, https://www.w3.org/WAI/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Roger Coleman, John Clarkson, Hua Dong, and Julia Cassim (eds). 2007. Design for Inclusivity: A Practical Guide to Accessible, Innovative and User-Centered Design. Lancaster University, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Laura Calbag. 2017. Accessibility of everyone. A Book Apart. New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Nithya Sambasivan and Jess Holbrook. 2019. Towards Responsible AI for the Next Billion Users. Interactions, 68--71.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Google. 2018. Designing for global accessibility, Part I-III. UX for the Next Billion of Users, https://design.google/library/ux-next-billion-users/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Google Developer. 2017. Designing Great Apps for New Internet Users. Global UX Speaker Series, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo-1qrHeQXQGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Google. n.d. The Making of YouTube Go. https://design.google/library/making-youtube-go/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Microsoft. n.d. Inclusive Design Toolkit, https://www.microsoft.com/design/inclusive/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Facebook Design. 2019. Diverse Device Hands. https://facebook.design/handskit.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Apple. 2018. Apple brings more than 70 new emoji to iPhone with iOS 12.1. Newsroom, https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Google. n.d. Material Design, https://material.io/design/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Adobe XD. n.d. Adobe Design systems from the inside out, https://www.adobe.com/products/xd/design-systems/design-systems-what-how-why.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Anna Cavender, Shari Trewin, and Vicki Hanson. 2015. Accessible writing guide. ACM Interactions 22 (6), 62--65.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Google. n.d. Material Design WritingGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. https://material.io/design/communication/writing.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Hans Persson, Henrik Åhman, Alexander Arvei Yngling, Jan Gulliksen. 2015. Universal design, inclusive design, accessible design, design for all: Different concepts-one goal? On the concept of accessibility-historical, methodological and philosophical aspects. Journal of Universal Access in the Information Society. 14 (4), 505--526.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Microsof. n.d. Inclusive Design Toolkit, https://www.microsoft.com/design/inclusive/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. World Economic Forum (2018). The Future of Jobs. http://reports.weforum.org/future-of-jobs-2018/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Nithya Sambasivan. 2019. The remarkable illusions of technology for social good. ACM Interactions 26 (3), 64--67.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Max Krüger, Ana Bustamante Duarte, Anne Weibert, Konstantin Aal, Reem Talhouk, and Oussama Metatla. 2019. What is participation? Emerging challenges for participatory design in globalized conditions. ACM Interactions. 26 (3), 50--54.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Chris Kiess. 2019. Building an ethics framework for UX design. User Experience Magazine 18 (5), from http://uxpamagazine.org/building-an-ethics-framework-for-ux-design/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Tatiana Batova. 2018. Global technical communication in 7.5 weeks online: Combining industry and academic perspectives. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 61 (3), 311--329.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Beyond cultural dimensions: digital inclusion in global UX

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        SIGDOC '19: Proceedings of the 37th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication
        October 2019
        308 pages
        ISBN:9781450367905
        DOI:10.1145/3328020

        Copyright © 2019 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without 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. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 4 October 2019

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • short-paper

        Acceptance Rates

        SIGDOC '19 Paper Acceptance Rate85of105submissions,81%Overall Acceptance Rate355of582submissions,61%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader