2012
DOI: 10.1201/b12679
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cross-Cultural Design for IT Products and Services

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
4

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
8
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…The possible reasons for this may be as follows: (1) path diagram involves specific directional relationship between various elements of an information structure, while card sorting mainly represents a user's understanding of the directionless relationship; (2) culture difference might influence the way users are navigating in websites. Chinese users will benefit from a thematically organized information structure of a GUI system, whereas American users will benefit from a functionally organized structure [63]. Specifically in the card sorting tasks, Chinese subjects were more likely to stress the category by identifying the relationship between different entities, while the Danish subjects preferred to stress the category name by its physical attributes [64].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The possible reasons for this may be as follows: (1) path diagram involves specific directional relationship between various elements of an information structure, while card sorting mainly represents a user's understanding of the directionless relationship; (2) culture difference might influence the way users are navigating in websites. Chinese users will benefit from a thematically organized information structure of a GUI system, whereas American users will benefit from a functionally organized structure [63]. Specifically in the card sorting tasks, Chinese subjects were more likely to stress the category by identifying the relationship between different entities, while the Danish subjects preferred to stress the category name by its physical attributes [64].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Leaving aside rapid technological advancement, today's HCI landscape is dramatically different, influenced by heightening user participation in an increasingly globalized world. Issues such as identity, agency, power, structure, politics, and social justice compete for designer's attention alongside traditional metrics (e.g., effectiveness and efficiency) in our design process, as shown in research areas such as postcolonial computing [31,32,39,47], feminist HCI [6,7], and critical design [5,8], along with new development in areas such as cross-cultural design [48,56], ICT4D and HCI 4D [27,57], and value sensitive design [11,21,41]. All these changes ask us to look beyond the view of affordances as intrinsic properties of technology and to adopt a more robust view of affordances that would connect the material with the discursive for technology design.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prior studies also highlighted the importance of contextual factors in sharing motives and privacy concerns [16]- [19]. As national differences necessitate diversity in design principles to support effective interactions [20], understanding and analyzing national differences in dashcam video sharing are vital to properly design online services that promote dashcam video sharing. The importance of culture analysis is further substantiated by the growing literature of exploring various cultural perspectives in the humancomputer interaction (HCI) field, such as information sharing patterns [21]- [23] and privacy concern differences [24], [25].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%