Research-practice interaction

Abstract

Previous work in the CHI community has identified and explored gaps between theory and practice in HCI research [2]. The recently formed SIGCHI Community on Research-Practice Interaction aims to help bridge the gap between research and practice, by for example supporting practitioner-friendly dissemination of results, and serving as a conduit for feedback from practitioners to researchers. This SIG is an opportunity for interested CHI attendees to meet members of the SIGCHI RPI community, and engage in discussions on RPI issues including the CHI format, dissemination of results, and supporting practice-based research.

Translational Resources

“…Findings in the HCI research community provide insights to designers to understand why people behave the way they do, design more effective products, and predict how designs will affect people. Using theories to guide technology design has long been advocated by researchers in HCI [10,19,39], for example, human factors to guide the design of interaction techniques [35], human cognition to design usable interfaces [35], and social psychology to encourage participation [28].…”

“…Despite the purported availability and benefits of using academic research, practitioners often do not use recommendations described in theory. Known as the research-practice gap, this topic has been acknowledged as an important challenge for HCI [10]. The "gap" reduces the impact of scientific research and contributes to suboptimal designs that fail to take advantage of scientific knowledge about people, behaviors, and technology [1,4,10,19,21,36].…”

“…Known as the research-practice gap, this topic has been acknowledged as an important challenge for HCI [10]. The "gap" reduces the impact of scientific research and contributes to suboptimal designs that fail to take advantage of scientific knowledge about people, behaviors, and technology [1,4,10,19,21,36]. The gap also impedes scientific advancement; as academic researchers miss the opportunity to examine limitations of their work through observing its application [10].…”

“…The "gap" reduces the impact of scientific research and contributes to suboptimal designs that fail to take advantage of scientific knowledge about people, behaviors, and technology [1,4,10,19,21,36]. The gap also impedes scientific advancement; as academic researchers miss the opportunity to examine limitations of their work through observing its application [10]. Academics complain that even when their ideas are used in industry, practitioners often leave out or misinterpret critical aspects [21,36].…”

“…We examined how academic and nonacademic information resources support, or fail to support, practitioners' work, and what makes informational resources useful to practitioners. We offer three high-level contributions: a) a detailed catalog of barriers that inhibit use of academic resources in industry, b) a list of resources that practitioners use to support design activities where translational resources can be beneficial, and c) recommendations for the design of translational resources that are useful for practitioners, listed below: research-practice gap [8,10,11,19,21,24,30,35,36,39,43,45]. Below, we describe common barriers associated with content of academic resources, barriers related to access, and previous attempts to address those barriers.…”