Four factors informing design judgement at a hackathon

Abstract

It is our pleasure to welcome you to the 30 th Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction-OzCHI 2018. We are delighted to be holding this conference at the State Library of Victoria, Australia's oldest public library. This venue is home to historic Australian artefacts and is an important cultural and educational icon in Melbourne. In keeping with the focus on local history, we are hosting the Welcome Reception at another local cultural icon: The Old Melbourne Gaol. The site of a grim part of Melbourne's history, the Gaol is now a fascinating museum that offers a glimpse into 19 th century Melbourne. These venues give us pause to reflect on our history, which is fitting for a milestone conference event such as this. OzCHI 2018 marks the 30 th year this conference has run. OzCHI is the annual non-profit conference for the Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group (CHISIG) of the Human Factors and Ergonomic Society of Australia. The first CHISIG Seminar was held in Melbourne in November 1988. Titled "New ways with WIMPs" it was a one-day event featuring four invited speakers in the morning and two afternoon workshops. 1 How far we have come! The theme for OzCHI 2018 is 'digital, physical, interactive, human'. This theme represents the broad church that the OzCHI community has become and will hopefully continue to be. We are pleased to offer a full program of presentations on a wide range of topics. This conference is only possible through the hard work of many people. The administrative staff at the University of Melbourne, including Julie Ireland, Emma Russo, Imbi Neeme and Rhonda Smithies, have been fantastically helpful in the face of many unexpected requests. Jai Secker, the Secretariat at the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society of Australia, has been extremely helpful throughout the arrangement of this year's conference. To the program, short papers, workshop, and poster and demonstration chairs, we give many thanks for their great assistance throughout this year's reviewing process, and to the many members of our program committee who carefully reviewed the papers. Melissa Rogerson capably arranged the final proceedings for publication, and Romina Carrasco is due many thanks for her sterling work on the conference website.

Design at hackathons: new opportunities for design research

“…Hackathons have only recently come into research focus (Trainer et al 2016). Studies have investigated the individual experiences of participants (Olesen, Hansen & Halskov 2018), the effect of expertise diversity in hackathon teams (Legardeur et al 2020) and the use of hackathons to solve problems (Artiles & LeVine 2015; Lewis et al 2015; Uffreduzzi 2017; Kos 2019), teach design (Fowler 2016; Nandi & Mandernach 2016; Page et al 2016; Gama et al 2019) and facilitate a design process (Artiles & Wallace 2013).…”

“…The unique characteristics of hackathons bring about heightened and condensed design activity in which the typical design processes are challenged and adapted. A better understanding of design at hackathons can help clarify how these events engage participants in the design process (Olesen et al 2018) and shed light on the consequences of a hackathon’s format on participants’ ideation, design judgement and knowledge of design. Studying how hackathon participants design can also more broadly enrich our understanding of how designers think during an applied design task when in a condensed time frame.…”

How do participants collaborate during an online hackathon? An empirical, quantitative study of communication traces

“…. others, can affect the way individuals engage with each other and with their project (Olesen et al, 2018;. Once teams have been formed, organizers often also deploy means of facilitation to keep them on track (Taylor and Clarke, 2018).…”

“…However, such approaches have inherent limitations. First, the findings are based on the perception of team members-in the case of post-interviews (for example, Nolte et al, 2020b-or on the perception of researchers-in the case of observational studies for example, Olesen et al, 2018-or both for example, Pe-Than et al, 2022. Moreover, insights are limited by the ability of researchers to observe team processes and document them-which can be difficult because teams might split into subteams-or by the ability of participants to remember how their collaboration unfolded after an event accurately.…”

“…The wide spread of hackathons has consequently resulted in an increased interest in studying these events (Falk Olesen and Halskov, 2020). Existing studies focus on a variety of aspects including how to encourage participation (Taylor and Clarke, 2018), support newcomers (Nolte et al, 2020b), foster the participation of diverse audiences (Paganini and Gama, 2020;Prado et al, 2020), organize an event (Briscoe and Mulligan, 2014; and foster continuation activity after an event has ended (Nolte et al, 2020a;Imam et al, 2021), as well as how participants approach a project (Olesen et al, 2018;Gama et al, 2022).…”