With some regularity I read papers from HCI, trying to identify or define paradigms within the discipline. Invariably the introduction of the term paradigm is enfolded in cautionary remarks about the use of the term, typically with references to Thomas Kuhn or Imre Lakatos. However, it never gets clear to me which debate these authors are trying to soothe Are these authors differentiating against light uses of the word paradigm (as in experimental paradigm) or to particularly heavy ones?
Can you give some examples of "papers form HCI" as a reference please? I hope to understand the question better then. From my point of view the theory of paradigms has always been a controversial issue (sse "The Perils of Paradigm Mentalities: Revisiting Kuhn, Lakatos, and Popper"), but to make things easier to learn for my students, I emphasized the "scientific achievement" as a core of a paradigm. These achievements have practical relevance and helped to "resolve debate over foundations, assumptions, and methods", e.g. the WIMP paradigm (HCI). Neither a light or a heavy use of the paradigm concept seems to be helpful here.
https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/54A33349-DDB5-9122-52D039391EF8BB6C/paradigm_mentalities_perspectives_10.pdf
Hi Roland,
Thanks for this answer. You seem to use the term on a lower level of abstraction than the authors I am refering to.
Some references in this literature are...
Harrison, S., Tatar, D., & Sengers, P. (2007). The three paradigms of HCI. alt. chi.
Kuutti, Kari, and Liam J. Bannon. "The turn to practice in HCI: Towards a research agenda." Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 2014.
The problem is not with the idea ofparadigms it is rather the interaction between paradigms.The key issue is when two different debators approach the issue from two different paradigms.There will be no mediator between them. More so when in HCI, the "H" tends to be linked to the social sciences and the "C" tends towards the technical. Hence as a compromise you always end up with a list of prescriptive principles.And depending on which paradigm you subscribe to ,you will have a certain preference for certain sets of principles.Which ultimately leaves a big question mark as to how to implement these principles.An analogous situation happens in the realm of management studies. Because it deals with the ubiquitous issue of management. The possibilities for paradigms are limitless.And it would seem that the ubiquity of the computer will mean that paradigms will be multiplied as long as there are computers and people.Until the day that the singularity arrives where humans converge with machines/computer. As the link would indicate this is not Sci-Fi. The vision is quite opposite of traditional AI/computer science where the benchmark are humans (e.g. the Turing test). The singularity paradigm implies that computers /machines are superior and that we are to transcend our biology.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Singularity-Is-Near-Transcend/dp/0143037889
@Roland. I have now read the "Paradigm Mentalities: Revisiting Kuhn, Lakatos, and Popper paper" and it fitted my question perfectly. As wel as putting some recent other literature in HCI in perspective thx!
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers