Poststructuralist Perspectives on HCI Research

Poststructuralist Perspectives on HCI
Research
Henrik Åhman
Mediateknik och
Interaktionsdesign
KTH
Abstract
My PhD work consists of two main components, one
focusing on identifying philosophical suppositions in HCI
research literature and the other focusing on exploring
poststructuralist theory as a possible frame of
interpretation applicable to HCI research.
Author Keywords
HCI; theory; poststructuralism; Mark C. Taylor;
philosophy
Introduction
During the past two years I have been struggling to
find ways of combining my own research interests with
that of the projects and stakeholders I have been
financed by. I have tried different empirical and
theoretical approaches but without ever really hitting
the nail. However, coming back from parental leave in a
couple of months I do not have any project affiliations
and am now able to choose path more freely and
independently. Therefore, I have reorganized the work
I have done so far and gone back to where I started
when I applied for my PhD position, i.e. exploring HCI
from a poststructuralist perspective, and doing it
theoretically as I have wanted to do from the
beginning.
Thus, my research consists of two main components,
one focusing on HCI research and one focusing on
poststructuralist theory (especially as formulated by
Mark C. Taylor). Going forward, my purpose is to
conduct a dialog between these two entities in order to
test Taylor as theorist in HCI areas in an attempt to
reach an increased understanding of the relation
between technology and human beings.
Focal point 1: HCI Research
In this part of my research I investigate a number of
areas that can be argued to be of key interest for
contemporary HCI research. The investigation consists
of a number of literature studies focusing on HCI
research (articles, conference papers, etc.) and aims at
clarifying aspects of the theoretical underpinnings of
HCI through identifying philosophical themes in
research literature.
The method used in selecting which areas to study can
be compared to snowball sampling[1]; the study of one
area affects the identification of the next area. Thus
there is a continuous reassessment of the research
focus and research demarcation. As might be expected
from this kind of study, I draw on qualitative strands in
traditions such as philosophy, hermeneutics and
ideology analysis which means that questions of
representativeness and generalizability is not my
primary interest.
So far I have been studying social sustainability and
accessibility which has resulted in two articles: “Social
sustainability – Society at the intersection of
development and maintenance”[5] and “Universal,
Inclusive, Accessible, Design for all; Different concepts
– one goal? On the Concept of Accessibility – Historical,
Methodological and Philosophical Aspects”[2]. These
articles should be seen as initial explorations which will
be further developed and investigated during the
coming years of research.
Other areas that interest me and that will possibly be
included in the study are materiality and agency.
Focal point 2: Mark C. Taylor
The other part of my research focuses on the
poststructuralist theorist Mark C. Taylor and how he
approaches the themes identified in the HCI research.
Taylor is a multifaceted scholar who combines
philosophical analysis with history of religion, art,
cultural theory, media technology and natural science
in order to explore the conditions of mankind.
Taylor views his own philosophy as a conversation
between Hegel and Kierkegaard [3]. However, at this
point I have chosen to instead focus on his Nietzschean
influences underlying many of his discussions on
themes like transgression, carnality and rationality
which I hope can contribute to my analysis of both
materiality and agency in HCI[4].
My aim is to not only describe a poststructuralist frame
of interpretation possible to apply within the HCI field
but also to contribute to a deeper understanding of
Taylor’s theories by engaging in a critical,
problematizing reading of his material.
Feedback requests
Coming from another scientific tradition than what
might have been mainstream in HCI over the years, I
have been struggling with how to position my research
in order to meet the criteria of a PhD thesis in HCI. I
have been trying to stay true to my own academic
background but still some adjustments are needed in
order for me not to get slaughtered when presenting
my thesis. Input and feedback on this challenge would
be helpful.
Another area where I would appreciate input is in the
identification and demarcation of HCI research areas.
What would be a good way of identifying some key HCI
References
[1] Bryman, A. Samhällsvetenskapliga metoder. Liber,
Malmö, 2002.
[2] Persson, H., Åhman, H., Yngling, A., and Gulliksen, J.
Universal, Inclusive, Accessible, Design for all; Different
concepts – one goal? On the Concept of Accessibility –
Historical, Methodological and Philosophical Aspects. The
Springer Journal Universal Access in the Information
Society (Unpublished; submitted April 23) (2013), 1-39.
[3] Taylor, M.C. Journeys to selfhood: Hegel &
Kierkegaard. Fordham University Press, New York, 2000.
[4]
Taylor, M.C. Nots. University of Chicago Press, 1993.
[5] Åhman, H. Social sustainability–society at the
intersection of development and maintenance. Local
Environment (2013), 1-14.
areas (which sources should I use – CHI themes,
conference proceedings, research articles, etc.)? How
do I go about to identify core themes in such a diverse
academic discipline as HCI? How far back in HCI
research history should I go in order not to be a mayfly
but at the same time avoid accusations of being just an
HCI historian without relevance to contemporary
research?

Download Report