Sissy - Elise van den Hoven

offering a new way to see or think about something;
you are developing the very concepts that you and
others later on (including social scientists) will use
to understand and evaluate a phenomenon in a new
light. [0]
Reconciling the Two Approaches
It is evident that these are two very different
approaches. As a result mutual criticism between the
two disciplines has emerged.
Ethnomethodologists lament “the wholesale
importation of cultural theory (via media studies and so
on) into the field of HCI. Indeed, the signature of these
new ‘reflexive’ ethnographies increasingly gaining
exposure within CHI. This brings in other cultural
‘standpoints’ that provide existential conditions for
reflexive critiques of dominant discourses” [0].
Crabtree argues that the problem with critically
informed approaches is that their inherent need to
deconstruct all that they it encounter results in findings
that meet the agenda of the researcher. The needs of the
user become peripheral in the quest to fulfill this
agenda. It is for this reason that new approaches, while
alluring, fail to provide sufficiently detailed social
analyses to ground design in what people do [0]
Most significantly, the rejection of theory by
ethnomethodology continues to act as a metaphorical
red flag for those wishing to adopt more culturally
situated HCI approaches. These debates are becoming
increasing evident during conference presentations, and
are played out regularly in HCI blogs.
Having discussed the divergent characteristics of the
two approaches, we will now explore the possibility for
the two methodologies to combine together in a
complimentary manner. The next sections will illustrate
how the two approaches can coexist, by examining the
application of these two approaches.
The cultural theory perspective
Recent interpretations of critically informed HCI has
seen agendas such as Feminism shape analytical lenses
[0]. When applied to the data from the user study this
meant a feminist critique was used to better understand
the way in which gender is constructed and the role that
technology plays in shaping notions of ‘the body’.
Focusing on this issue drew attention to the way in
which three of the mothers in the families participating
in the study were reluctant to reveal their age. Rather
than attempting to gather information about their age in
order to keep with preconceived ideas of what our data
should look like, this indicated the potential to
recognize and reshape our research questions so they
are more in keeping with cultural mores and taboos.
Thus, rather than seeing the lack of data about specific
age as being problematic, this indicated an opportunity
to identify and address an important methodological
challenge.
36
In addition to indicating the need to rethink the way in
which we approach the question of age, the reoccurring
reluctance to reveal age also tells us something about
the female’s relationship with her own body. For
example, one of the women who did not wish to
disclose her age also reported than when it was her turn
to engage with the Kinect in front of other people she
felt embarrassed and conspicuous, and a pregnant
participant felt that it heightened awareness of her
condition.
From a cultural theory point of view the data tells us
about the complex and unique relationships that women
have with their changing bodies and the need for design
approaches that are sensitive enough to allow for this.
The Interaction Analysis perspective
When comparing the two approaches, what is
immediately evident is that the ethno methodological
approach told us virtually nothing about gender. This is
not because ethnomethodology set out to ignore power
structures relating to gender completely, but rather that
it would only flag them if it were found to emerge from
the users’ interactions. The lack of gender related
insights could mainly be attributed to the way in which
ethnomethodology resists drawing on performed; thus
distancing notions of the domestic space as being one
that is zoned according to gender.
An exception to this is that when the interview data was
included in the analysis the issues regarding the
women’s reluctance to reveal age did arise. But this
type of data is secondary in the Interaction Analysis
approach and there was nothing in the actual video data
itself to suggest gender related concerns were at work.
We must then ask ourselves, was the issue of gender in
the interview transcripts merely an extension of the
researcher’s own background in cultural theory – what
Crabtree would call an example of the researcher
implanting their own theoretical concerns in place of
those of the user’s concerns? Or does it indicate the
importance of extending ethnomethodological notions
of what constitutes data so that previously secondary
sources such as interview data become included as
primary sources?
CONCLUSION
One of the characteristics of HCI is that it has remained
a relatively un-politicized space. The third wave of
critically informed design methodologies we are now
heading into will bring about change, one of which is
the emergence of new politicized HCI design space.
For example, the introduction of Feminist HCI will
mean we forever lose the previous HCI construction of
the ‘user’ as genderless beings. So although these
theories will bring many benefits to the design of new
technologies, the culturally loaded nature of these
discourses will change the landscape of HCI as for
example, as increasing awareness of gender pushes out
an ambiguity towards it. The importance of this
ambiguity should not be underestimated.