No abstract

EditorialGlobal human -computer systems: cultural determinants of usability IntroductionNot so long ago, the practical relevance of cultural issues was widely ignored -if not questioned -in Human -Computer Interaction (HCI) related literature. Initially, the awareness of the importance of human aspects of computer systems shifted the attention of researchers from how computer systems work to how people use these systems in their work. However, the increasing use of such systems in different cultural contexts, and observations that different people think in different ways, put forth the issue of the degree to which the use of such systems is really a matter of culture.Meanwhile, the importance of cultural issues has been evident in many other applied disciplines. Studies have applied concepts of culture from sociology, social psychology, and anthropology. Nevertheless, there are controversies concerning the definition and the use of the concept of culture. When defining culture, researchers often refer to patterns of values, attitudes, and behaviours, which are shared by two or more people. They further point out that culture is socially acquired, and that relationships with other people, relationships with the environment, and assumptions in term of space and language (for example) affect and shape culture, and are themselves affected by the culture.Even so, culture remains difficult to study, alone and certainly in relation to HCI practices. It is in particularly difficult to identify meanings, attitudes and expectations, not to mention the deeply embedded values and beliefs behind people's thoughts, behaviours and actions. People's behaviours might be influenced by other factors (e.g. environmental conditions) rather than by their cultural traits, and the reasons for, and meaning of, an action can seldom be observed wholly and directly.Despite all these complexities related to the concept of culture, there are a number of theories that focus on some aspects or dimensions of culture (e.g. such as those of Geert Hofstede). These cultural dimensions include values, cognitive structures, and behaviours at the individual level, structures and rituals at the organizational level, and artefacts and attributes at the societal or national level.In 1998, Donald Day edited 'Shared values and shared interfaces: the role of culture in the globalisation of human -computer systems', the first special edition in this field for 0953-5438/$ -see front matter q

Ping Zhang was the accepting Senior Editor. This article was submitted on 5/27/2010 and accepted on 3/19/2011. It was with the authors 129 days for 1 revision. Value Sensitive Design (VSD) is a comprehensive framework for advancing a value-centered research and design agenda. It provides methods for producing and evaluating a design outcome by taking human values into account. Drawing on discourse ethics, this paper first critically analyzes the status quo in VSD and identifies some gaps. These mainly concern the lack of explicit methods for supporting a deliberative and legitimate process of decision making with respect to many concerns, including the identification of stakeholders, the legitimation of common design communication, the justification of trade-offs and/or a common regulation in case of competing or incommensurable values, as well as the deliberativeness of other design decisions such as the selection of design goals and means. In addition, this paper suggests ways to move VSD toward the standards of discourse ethics by drawing on the knowledge base of critical research in the Information Systems field. In particular, the suggestions concern the inclusion of a practical method for boundary critique and different types of discourses and principles as well as discourse support methods and tools for structuring participation in a way that allows participants to deal with the plurality of values, norms, goals and means deliberatively. Finally, this paper revisits a VSD case and explores the applicability of the ideas suggested.

No abstract

Critical researchers in HCI have recently faulted Persuasive Technology (PT) for taking a modernist approach and suggested ways for redirecting research. This paper reflects on this critical perspective and compares it with Habermas's critical perspective. I claim that the recent critiques of PT are grounded on a narrow and pessimistic concept of modernism, and that Habermas's works, rarely taken into account in the HCI community, can serve as an alternative lens for reflective analysis and design and can provide a foundation for justifying design decisions while realizing the unfulfilled potentials of PT. Beyond offering critical analysis and reflections, this paper contributes to the HCI field by calling attention to alternative reflective concepts and emerging relevant works.