Reviewing a Decade of Human-Computer Interaction for Development (HCI4D) Research, as One of Best's "Grand Challenges"

Abstract

The human–computer interaction for development (HCI4D) field emerged at the intersection of the fields of information and communication technology for development (ICT4D) and human–computer interaction (HCI). In 2010, Michael Best nominated HCI4D as one of ICT4D’s “grand challenges”. This HCI4D field is now entering its second decade, and it is important to reflect on the research that has been conducted, and to consider how HCI4D researchers have addressed the challenge that constitutes the raison d’être of HCI4D’s existence. Best provided four guidelines to inform researchers embracing this challenge. This study commences by identifying the primary HCI4D-specific themes, and then carries out a systematic literature review of the HCI4D literature to build a corpus to support the analysis. The corpus is analysed to reflect on how well the field’s practices align with Best’s guidelines. The overall finding is that HCI4D researchers have largely been following Best’s guidelines and that the HCI4D field is demonstrating encouraging signs of emerging maturity.

Defining Functional Illiteracy to Empower Inclusive Technology Design

“…This highlights the need to consider language proficiency and technological skills, leading to definitions embracing cultural and linguistic diversity [5], classified under 'functional literacy' [43]. Thus, we adopt 'functional illiterates' to include the 'function' aspect, resonating with HCI4D's contextual nature [1]. Moreover, our findings identify a gap in recognizing the significance of motivation for technology use, despite its crucial role in influencing user performance [44].…”

“…Literacy is a significant topic in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) research, focusing on barriers faced by users with limitations in literacy and strategies to overcome them [1]. However, knowledge in this field is scattered across academic sources, and inconsistent terms like 'functional illiterates' (FXI), 'low literates' (LL), and 'semi-literates' (SL) for identifying users with literacy challenges contribute to this fragmentation [2].…”

No More “Solutionism” or “Saviourism” in Futuring African HCI: A Manyfesto

“…This raises the fundamental question of whether African HCI, either a sub-theme of HCI or a discursive invention of Eurocentric classification in computing, does exist. The simple answer would be that such an invention does exist, as much as such questions have been raised concerning ICT4D [75] and HCI4D [56,186]. However, the issue that arises would be about how dominant HCI represents African narratives of innovation, and how in turn, African HCI researchers and practitioners domesticate and reproduce the connotation attached to its practice in HCI s discourses.…”

“…Therefore, the politics of thinking in the exteriority of Western logic of progression might be considered as disobeying the foundational epistemes of design. When such revelations are considered in contextualizing the centrality of HCI4D to 'development, design/intervention, and context' [185,186] and not to the human, technical artefact and context focus of HCI [78], one can begin to wonder whether the futuring practices of Euro-American centric HCI would be underpinning the same objectives as that of Western discourses that defutured non-Western institutions and structures.…”

“…Questions posed ranged from what would work in rectifying the unfortunate stories of the past to what could allow for reinventing African identities of innovation in HCI? Would it be recognising the alternative development discourse in HCI4D [56,185,186] or embracing alternatives to the postcolonial narratives of the global south [5,20,29,104,195] or rather adopting community-led initiatives that champion for and extend situated ways of doing in HCI? [99,145,179].…”