SIGCHI社会影响力奖:提出更好的问题

A. Dearden
{"title":"SIGCHI社会影响力奖:提出更好的问题","authors":"A. Dearden","doi":"10.1145/3411763.3457779","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I remember when I started my DPhil studies joking with friends that my research was improving the sum total of human happiness – by one. I was enjoying the work. It was as a post-doc, however, that I began to see how knowledge, or at the very least the pursuit of knowledge, is not neutral. The things that we choose to study, the problems that we choose to focus on, and the way we frame our questions, lead towards different benefits for different interests. If we want to make a better world, then perhaps we should focus on asking better questions. One question that was a turning point for me was posed by Steve Walker in 2002. In a world where e-commerce and e-government already had thriving, well-financed research communities, he convened a workshop asking “Can there be a Social Movement Informatics?” The topics ranged from designing with voluntary organizations and trade-unions, to investigating hate speech in Internet bulletin boards and chat rooms. Together with colleagues, we ran projects around “Design for Civil Society”, and “Technology and Social Action”, exploring how we as technologists, designers and researchers can connect and collaborate more effectively with groups promoting social change. Following on from that work, I won an opportunity to explore how participatory approaches in international social and economic development relate to understandings of participatory design in HCI. Working with the Sironj Crop Producers Company Ltd (a co-operative of small and marginal farmers in Madhya Pradesh, India) and Safal Solutions (a small software house focused on rural development, based in Telengana, India), this was my first attempt to apply participatory design methods in a context with very limited infrastructure and resources. How can we facilitate meaningful communications about priorities and possibilities across wide social, cultural, geographical, linguistic, experiential and economic divides? How does the way we arrange, organize and conduct projects aiming to advance ‘development’ affect the outputs, the outcomes and the impacts that are achieved? How can agency, creativity and control be shared in ways that move systems towards a more just world? I don't know all the answers to those questions, but I have learned that the inequalities of this world are far greater than I had originally imagined. I started with high hopes that expertise in participatory design, together with a commitment to participatory development would deliver radical results. I discovered that true participation and reciprocity is tougher than I thought. We cannot communicate effectively across such huge social divides without questioning, acknowledging and responding to our own positionality in the wider context. For example, we should ask how our own actions are contributing to harming others, such as the millions who will become, or are already, climate refugees? A few short-term “bungee research” visits will not lead us to real understanding. When key decision making remains in the usual centers of power, that simply reinforces the neo-colonial arrangements that underpin the marginalization that we say we want to change. To create a future for humanity as part of life on this planet, we must see changes in behavior close to centers of power – and that includes ourselves. We are already enmeshed in a system of unjust socio-economic relationships. “The problem” is not something that is “out there”, it is also “in here” and all around us. Are we asking the questions that really matter?","PeriodicalId":265192,"journal":{"name":"Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"SIGCHI Social Impact Award: Asking Better Questions\",\"authors\":\"A. Dearden\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3411763.3457779\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I remember when I started my DPhil studies joking with friends that my research was improving the sum total of human happiness – by one. I was enjoying the work. It was as a post-doc, however, that I began to see how knowledge, or at the very least the pursuit of knowledge, is not neutral. The things that we choose to study, the problems that we choose to focus on, and the way we frame our questions, lead towards different benefits for different interests. If we want to make a better world, then perhaps we should focus on asking better questions. One question that was a turning point for me was posed by Steve Walker in 2002. In a world where e-commerce and e-government already had thriving, well-financed research communities, he convened a workshop asking “Can there be a Social Movement Informatics?” The topics ranged from designing with voluntary organizations and trade-unions, to investigating hate speech in Internet bulletin boards and chat rooms. Together with colleagues, we ran projects around “Design for Civil Society”, and “Technology and Social Action”, exploring how we as technologists, designers and researchers can connect and collaborate more effectively with groups promoting social change. Following on from that work, I won an opportunity to explore how participatory approaches in international social and economic development relate to understandings of participatory design in HCI. Working with the Sironj Crop Producers Company Ltd (a co-operative of small and marginal farmers in Madhya Pradesh, India) and Safal Solutions (a small software house focused on rural development, based in Telengana, India), this was my first attempt to apply participatory design methods in a context with very limited infrastructure and resources. How can we facilitate meaningful communications about priorities and possibilities across wide social, cultural, geographical, linguistic, experiential and economic divides? How does the way we arrange, organize and conduct projects aiming to advance ‘development’ affect the outputs, the outcomes and the impacts that are achieved? How can agency, creativity and control be shared in ways that move systems towards a more just world? I don't know all the answers to those questions, but I have learned that the inequalities of this world are far greater than I had originally imagined. I started with high hopes that expertise in participatory design, together with a commitment to participatory development would deliver radical results. I discovered that true participation and reciprocity is tougher than I thought. We cannot communicate effectively across such huge social divides without questioning, acknowledging and responding to our own positionality in the wider context. For example, we should ask how our own actions are contributing to harming others, such as the millions who will become, or are already, climate refugees? A few short-term “bungee research” visits will not lead us to real understanding. When key decision making remains in the usual centers of power, that simply reinforces the neo-colonial arrangements that underpin the marginalization that we say we want to change. To create a future for humanity as part of life on this planet, we must see changes in behavior close to centers of power – and that includes ourselves. We are already enmeshed in a system of unjust socio-economic relationships. “The problem” is not something that is “out there”, it is also “in here” and all around us. Are we asking the questions that really matter?\",\"PeriodicalId\":265192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3411763.3457779\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3411763.3457779","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我记得当我开始攻读博士学位时,我和朋友们开玩笑说,我的研究将人类幸福的总和提高了一个。我很享受这份工作。然而,在做博士后的时候,我开始看到知识,或者至少是对知识的追求,是如何不中立的。我们选择研究的东西,我们选择关注的问题,以及我们构建问题的方式,会为不同的兴趣带来不同的好处。如果我们想创造一个更美好的世界,那么也许我们应该专注于提出更好的问题。2002年史蒂夫·沃克提出的一个问题对我来说是一个转折点。在一个电子商务和电子政务已经有了蓬勃发展、资金充足的研究社区的世界里,他召集了一个研讨会,问“能有社会运动信息学吗?”主题包括与志愿组织和工会合作设计,以及调查互联网公告栏和聊天室中的仇恨言论。我们与同事一起,围绕“为公民社会设计”和“科技与社会行动”展开项目,探讨我们作为科技专家、设计师和研究人员如何更有效地与推动社会变革的团体联系和合作。在这项工作之后,我获得了一个探索国际社会和经济发展中的参与式方法如何与HCI中的参与式设计的理解相关联的机会。与Sironj Crop Producers Company Ltd(印度中央邦的小型和边缘农民合作社)和Safal Solutions(一家专注于农村发展的小型软件公司,总部位于印度特伦加纳)合作,这是我第一次尝试在基础设施和资源非常有限的情况下应用参与式设计方法。我们如何才能促进跨越广泛的社会、文化、地理、语言、经验和经济鸿沟,就优先事项和可能性进行有意义的沟通?我们安排、组织和开展旨在促进“发展”的项目的方式如何影响产出、结果和所取得的影响?如何才能共享代理、创造力和控制权,使系统朝着更公正的世界发展?我不知道所有这些问题的答案,但我知道这个世界的不平等比我最初想象的要大得多。一开始,我对参与式设计的专业知识以及对参与式发展的承诺寄予厚望,希望它们能带来根本性的成果。我发现真正的参与和互惠比我想象的要难得多。如果不质疑、承认和回应我们在更大背景下的地位,我们就无法有效地跨越如此巨大的社会鸿沟进行沟通。例如,我们应该问自己,我们自己的行为是如何对他人造成伤害的,比如数百万将成为或已经成为气候难民的人?几次短期的“蹦极研究”不会让我们真正了解。当关键的决策权仍然在通常的权力中心时,这只会加强新殖民主义的安排,巩固我们说我们想要改变的边缘化。为了创造一个作为地球生命一部分的人类的未来,我们必须看到在接近权力中心的行为上的改变——这也包括我们自己。我们已经陷入了一个不公正的社会经济关系体系。“问题”不是“在外面”的东西,它也“在这里”,在我们周围。我们问的是真正重要的问题吗?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
SIGCHI Social Impact Award: Asking Better Questions
I remember when I started my DPhil studies joking with friends that my research was improving the sum total of human happiness – by one. I was enjoying the work. It was as a post-doc, however, that I began to see how knowledge, or at the very least the pursuit of knowledge, is not neutral. The things that we choose to study, the problems that we choose to focus on, and the way we frame our questions, lead towards different benefits for different interests. If we want to make a better world, then perhaps we should focus on asking better questions. One question that was a turning point for me was posed by Steve Walker in 2002. In a world where e-commerce and e-government already had thriving, well-financed research communities, he convened a workshop asking “Can there be a Social Movement Informatics?” The topics ranged from designing with voluntary organizations and trade-unions, to investigating hate speech in Internet bulletin boards and chat rooms. Together with colleagues, we ran projects around “Design for Civil Society”, and “Technology and Social Action”, exploring how we as technologists, designers and researchers can connect and collaborate more effectively with groups promoting social change. Following on from that work, I won an opportunity to explore how participatory approaches in international social and economic development relate to understandings of participatory design in HCI. Working with the Sironj Crop Producers Company Ltd (a co-operative of small and marginal farmers in Madhya Pradesh, India) and Safal Solutions (a small software house focused on rural development, based in Telengana, India), this was my first attempt to apply participatory design methods in a context with very limited infrastructure and resources. How can we facilitate meaningful communications about priorities and possibilities across wide social, cultural, geographical, linguistic, experiential and economic divides? How does the way we arrange, organize and conduct projects aiming to advance ‘development’ affect the outputs, the outcomes and the impacts that are achieved? How can agency, creativity and control be shared in ways that move systems towards a more just world? I don't know all the answers to those questions, but I have learned that the inequalities of this world are far greater than I had originally imagined. I started with high hopes that expertise in participatory design, together with a commitment to participatory development would deliver radical results. I discovered that true participation and reciprocity is tougher than I thought. We cannot communicate effectively across such huge social divides without questioning, acknowledging and responding to our own positionality in the wider context. For example, we should ask how our own actions are contributing to harming others, such as the millions who will become, or are already, climate refugees? A few short-term “bungee research” visits will not lead us to real understanding. When key decision making remains in the usual centers of power, that simply reinforces the neo-colonial arrangements that underpin the marginalization that we say we want to change. To create a future for humanity as part of life on this planet, we must see changes in behavior close to centers of power – and that includes ourselves. We are already enmeshed in a system of unjust socio-economic relationships. “The problem” is not something that is “out there”, it is also “in here” and all around us. Are we asking the questions that really matter?
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Office Agents: Personal Office Vitality Sensors with Intent What Can CHI Do About Dark Patterns? Towards the Next Generation of Extended Reality Wearables TactiHelm: Tactile Feedback in a Cycling Helmet for Collision Avoidance Remote Friction Control on 3-dimensional Object Made of Polystyrene Foam Using Airborne Ultrasound Focus
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1