Human–Computer Interaction and International Public Policymaking: A Framework for Understanding and Taking Future Actions

Lazar, Jonathan; Abascal, Julio; Barbosa, Simone Diniz Junqueira; Barksdale, Jeremy; Friedman, Batya; Großklags, Jens; Gulliksen, Jan; Johnson, Jeff; McEwan, Tom; Martínez-Normand, Loïc; Michalk, Wibke; Tsai, Janice; Veer, Gerrit van der; Axelson, Hans; Walldius, Åke; Whitney, Gill; Winckler, Marco; Wulf, Volker; Churchill, Elizabeth F.; Cranor, Lorrie Faith; Davis, Janet L.; Hedge, Alan; Hochheiser, Harry; Hourcade, Juan Pablo; Lewis, Clayton; Nathan, Lisa P.; Paternò, Fabio; Reid, Blake E.; Quesenbery, Whitney; Selker, Ted; Wentz, Brian

doi:10.1561/9781680831115

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…End-users of care robots need to understand why they should use care robots, they need to know what kind of care robot to use and in which situation, and they need to know how to use it: know-why, know-what and know-how [109]. A user-centred design framework may be beneficially adopted when introducing new technology into work organisations [110,111]. Similarly, the implementation and deployment of care robots may be user-centred, which is characterised by iterative processes involving the user and knowledge of the context of use in all stages of the design process.…”

Section: Course Of Action: How Do We Go From Here Towards Increasing mentioning

confidence: 99%

Technological Frames and Care Robots in Eldercare

Frennert

Aminoff

Östlund

2020

Int J of Soc Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Care robots are often portrayed as an exciting new technology for improving care practices. Whether these robots will be accepted and integrated into care work or not, is likely to be affected by the assumptions, expectations and understandings held by potential end users, such as frontline staff and the people that are cared for. This paper describes how the conceptual framework of technological frames was used to identify the nature of care robots, care robots in use and care robot strategy as shared group level assumptions, expectations and understandings of care robots among care staff and potential care receivers. Focus groups were conducted with 94 participants. These groups consisted of line managers, frontline care staff, older people and students training to become carers. The technological frame of the nature of care robots revealed two complementary components: care robots as a threat to the quality of care, and care robots as substitute for humans and human care, held together by imaginaries of care robots. The technological frame of care robots in use revealed aspects of prospective end-users' uncertainty of their ability to handle care robots, and their own perceived lack of competence and knowledge about care robots. In addition, the following potential criteria for successful use of care robots were identified: adequate training, incentives for usage (needs and motives), usability, accessibility and finances. The technological frame of care robot strategy was revealed as believed cost savings and staff reduction. The novelty of the results, and their relevance for science and practice, is derived from the theoretical framework which indicates that adoption of care robots will be dependent on how well societies succeed in collectively shaping congruent technological frames among different stakeholders and aligning technological development accordingly.

show abstract

Section: Course Of Action: How Do We Go From Here Towards Increasing mentioning

confidence: 99%

Technological Frames and Care Robots in Eldercare

Frennert

Aminoff

Östlund

2020

Int J of Soc Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several recent publications have included open calls for the HCI community to engage with and inform public policy related to environmental sustainability, security, and justice [21,31,34,48]. This note offers a direct response to those calls; in it, we discuss the primary author's recent engagement with a policy unit of the Government of Canada's (GoC) Global Affairs Canada (GAC) ministry.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Members of the HCI community have been engaging with public policy for decades, both directly and indirectly. In the 1980s and 90s, some HCI researchers and practitioners worked to influence "accessibility" policies in the USA [34]. They designed interfaces that would be more usable for people of all physical and mental abilities, and worked to influence technical standards related to those interfaces [34].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the 1980s and 90s, some HCI researchers and practitioners worked to influence "accessibility" policies in the USA [34]. They designed interfaces that would be more usable for people of all physical and mental abilities, and worked to influence technical standards related to those interfaces [34]. Similar work on accessibility has continued to this day, with members of the HCI community examining and engaging with accessible designs, policies and laws around the world (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The allure of public policy is likely due to its role as "a core component of social systems", which are tightly intertwined with the digital technologies, systems and practices that we study, design, and build in HCI [34]. Research has demonstrated that our digital and social systems directly influence the planet's ecological systems [21,26,31,45,48], which might be why some HCI researchers have called for increased engagement with environmental public policy [21,31,48].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

HCI and Environmental Public Policy

Thomas

Remy

Hazas

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This note discusses opportunities for the HCI community to engage with environmental public policy. It draws on insights and observations made during the primary author's recent work for a policy unit at Global Affairs Canada, which is a federal ministry of the Government of Canada. During that work, the primary author identified several domains of environmental public policy that are of direct relevance to the HCI community. This note contributes a preliminary discussion of how, why, with whom, and in what capacity HCI researchers and practitioners might engage with three types of environmental public policy: climate change, waste electrical and electronic equipment, and green ICT procurement policies. This builds on existing public policy and environmental knowledge within the HCI community and responds directly to calls from some members to engage with environmental public policy.

show abstract