Français Anglais
Accueil Annuaire Plan du site
Home > Research results > Dissertations & habilitations
Research results
Faculty habilitation de

Faculty habilitation
Group : Human-Centered Computing

'Designeering Interaction': A Missing Link in the Evolution of Human-Computer Interaction

Starts on 00/00/0000
Advisor :

Funding :
Affiliation : Université Paris-Sud
Laboratory : LRI-InSitu

Defended on 07/05/2013, committee :
Saul Greenberg
Robert J.K. Jacob
Laurence Nigay

Alain Denise (Président)
Michel Beaudouin-Lafon
Jan Borchers
Robert J.K. Jacob
Wendy E. Mackay
Laurence Nigay
Ted Selker

Research activities :
   - Multi-Surfaces Interaction
   - Human-Computer Interaction

Abstract :
Human Computer Interaction (HCI) is a fascinating research field because of its multidisciplinary nature, combining such diverse research domains as design, human factors and computer science as well as a variety of methods including empirical and theoretical research. HCI is also fascinating because it is still young and so much is left to discover, invent and understand. The evolution of computers, and more generally of interactive systems, is not frozen, and so are the ways in which we interact with them. From desktop computers, to mobile devices, to large displays or multi-surface environments, technology extends the possibles, needs initiate technologies, and HCI is thus a constantly moving field. The variety of challenges to address, as well as their underlying combinations of sub-domains (design, computer science, experimental psychology, sociology, etc.), imply that we should also adapt, question and sometimes reinvent our research methods and processes, pushing the limits of HCI research further. Since I entered the field 12 years ago, my research activities have essentially revolved around two main themes: the design, implementation and evaluation of novel interaction techniques (on desktop computers, mobile devices and multi-surface environments) and the engineering of interactive systems (models and toolkits for advanced input and interaction). Over time, I realized that I had entered a loop between these two concerns, going back and forth between designing and evaluating new interaction techniques, and defining and implementing new software architectures or toolkits. I observed that they strongly influence each other: The design of interaction techniques informs on the capabilities and limitations of the platform and the software being used, and new architectures and software tools open the way to new designs and possibilities. Through the discussion of several of my research contributions in these fields, this document investigates how interaction design challenges technology, and how technology - or engineering of interactive systems - could support and unleash interaction design. These observations will lead to a first definition of the "Designeering Interaction" conceptual framework that encompasses the specificities of these two fields and builds a bridge between them, paving the way to new research perspectives. In particular, I will discuss which types of tools, from the system level to the end user, should be designed, implemented and studied in order to better support interaction design along the evolution of interactive systems. At a more general level, Designeering Interaction is also a contribution that, I hope, will help better "understand how HCI works with technology".

More information:
Ph.D. dissertations & Faculty habilitations
The original manuscript conceptualizes the recent rise of digital platforms along three main dimensions: their nature of coordination devices fueled by data, the ensuing transformations of labor, and the accompanying promises of societal innovation. The overall ambition is to unpack the coordination role of the platform and where it stands in the horizon of the classical firm – market duality. It is also to precisely understand how it uses data to do so, where it drives labor, and how it accommodates socially innovative projects. I extend this analysis to show continuity between today’s society dominated by platforms and the “organizational society”, claiming that platforms are organized structures that distribute resources, produce asymmetries of wealth and power, and push social innovation to the periphery of the system. I discuss the policy implications of these tendencies and propose avenues for follow-up research.