Critique: when second wave HCI meets third wave challenges.

[1] explores the boundaries between 2nd and 3rd generation HCI, and how the 2nd generation theory and research “can, will, and must be addressed in the transition” [1] to manage 3rd wave problems. [2] discusses the challenges of [1], and how these have been explored over the past ten years, lessons learned, and the challenges ahead. Both papers discuss the context and participation of each wave and how technological solutions can be used to address each.

In the 2nd wave, context focused on the “design of work-place technology” [1], while the 3rd on “multiple experience oriented technologies across life and work” [2]. Bødker notes that this non-work focus prevents designers to “understand the resources that exist on the boundaries” [1]. If designers focus on a single aspect of context – work or leisure – then areas of research and their boundaries for work and play could be discovered and the solutions developed.

In [1] Bødker feared that technological experiments (cultural probes) must be undertaken to understand the types of questions researchers should ask, and not to “dump” technology on people, which was the case in [2], ten years later. 3rd generation design uses artistic statements and ambiguity to provoke us despite having uncertain objectives overall. Although this provides an interesting way to establish context of user and participation, there appears to be no direct purpose of goals achieved in this process.

These papers provide insight into the historical development of HCI, and raise thought on the current and future direction of HCI. In [2] Bødker proposes for others to identify the forth wave; I feel that this is exactly what digital civic aims to address – broadening the scope of HCI further by making communities central to participation of system design, and the context dependent on their needs and problems.

[1] S. Bødker. When Second Wave HCI meets Third Wave Challenges. 2006.

[2] S. Bødker. Third-wave HCI, 10 years later — participation and sharing. 2015.

Traditional HCI has always interested me and how the usability of a system can improve interaction and participation. A paper that exemplifies this is: “Designing for Usability: Key Principles and What Designers Think”, by John Goul and Clayton Lewis.