Rethinking theoretical frameworks for HCI: report on an INTERCHI '93 workshop, Amsterdam, 24–25th April, 1993

• Authors: Yvonne Rogers;Liam Bannon;Graham Button
• Venue: ACM SIGCHI Bulletin
• Year: 1994

This one-and-a-half day workshop was intended to bring together researchers concerned about the state of theory in HCI, to discuss the adequacy of current theoretical frameworks and to examine more closely a number of alternative or extended frameworks that have been proposed for HCI. A further aim was to examine the recent 'turn to the social' and its implications for design practice in HCI. A wide variety of position papers (to put it mildly) were received, from which 15 were selected for presentation and discussion at the workshop. These ranged from critiques of the role of theory in HCI, expositions of various theoretical frameworks and the importance of considering methodology in relation to theory. Several authors also described how their alternative frameworks had enabled them to 'open their eyes' to alternative design solutions when analysing particular problems in a work context. The workshop was organized around three inter-related themes with the intention of engaging in both reflective and projected thinking. These were: i) What is the problem in HCI? (ii) What does my theoretical approach have to offer HCI, and (iii) How does my theory relate to practice? The participants were asked to address these questions in relation to their position papers. A general concern that became central to all themes was what theory was being used for in HCI. Several attempts at identifying and demystifying its role were suggested and it became clear that in fact it was being used in a multitude of ways. These included a background from which to: frame the problem, pose questions, to analyse, to describe and to explain. There was a general consensus, however, that the most 'scientific' use of a theory to propose and evaluate predictions about human performance was not appropriate for the current wave of alternative theory building. The lessons learnt from attempts to apply information-processing models to user performance were taken as sufficient evidence that the field of HCI is far too rich and complex to force into a set of hypotheses that can be quantitatively tested. Furthermore, the field is too diverse and changing to be formulated as a coherent theory of HCI. Alternatively, the role of theory in HCI should be to inform and guide system analysis and design.