Search for: All records

Policies significantly shape computation’s societal impact, a crucial HCI concern. However, challenges persist when HCI professionals attempt to integrate policy into their work or affect policy outcomes. Prior research considered these challenges at the “border” of HCI and policy. This paper asks: What if HCI considers policy integral to its intellectual concerns, placing system-people-policy interaction not at the border but nearer the center of HCI research, practice, and education? What if HCI fosters a mosaic of methods and knowledge contributions that blend system, human, and policy expertise in various ways, just like HCI has done with blending system and human expertise? We present this re-imagined HCI-policy relationship as a provocation and highlight its usefulness: It spotlights previously overlooked system-people-policy interaction work in HCI. It unveils new opportunities for HCI’s futuring, empirical, and design projects. It allows HCI to coordinate its diverse policy engagements, enhancing its collective impact on policy outcomes. 

Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have enabled unprecedented capabilities, yet innovation teams struggle when envisioning AI concepts. Data science teams think of innovations users do not want, while domain experts think of innovations that cannot be built. A lack of effective ideation seems to be a breakdown point. How might multidisciplinary teams identify buildable and desirable use cases? This paper presents a first hand account of ideating AI concepts to improve critical care medicine. As a team of data scientists, clinicians, and HCI researchers, we conducted a series of design workshops to explore more effective approaches to AI concept ideation and problem formulation. We detail our process, the challenges we encountered, and practices and artifacts that proved effective. We discuss the research implications for improved collaboration and stakeholder engagement, and discuss the role HCI might play in reducing the high failure rate experienced in AI innovation. 

Clinical practice guidelines, care pathways, and protocols are designed to support evidence-based practices for clinicians; however, their adoption remains a challenge. We set out to investigate why clinicians deviate from the “Wake Up and Breathe” protocol, an evidence-based guideline for liberating patients from mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU). We conducted over 40 hours of direct observations of live clinical workflows, 17 interviews with frontline care providers, and 4 co-design workshops at three different medical intensive care units. Our findings indicate that unlike prior literature suggests, disagreement with the protocol is not a substantial barrier to adoption. Instead, the uncertainty surrounding the application of the protocol for individual patients leads clinicians to deprioritize adoption in favor of tasks where they have high certainty. Reflecting on these insights, we identify opportunities for technical systems to help clinicians in effectively executing the protocol and discuss future directions for HCI research to support the integration of protocols into clinical practice in complex, team-based healthcare settings. 

Advances in artificial intelligence have enabled unprecedented technical capabilities, yet making these advances useful in the real world remains challenging. We engaged in a Research through Design process to improve the ideation of AI products and services. We developed a design resource capturing AI capabilities based on 40 AI features commonly used across various domains. To probe its usefulness, we created a set of slides illustrating AI capabilities and asked designers to ideate AI-enabled user experiences. We also incorporated capabilities into our own design process to brainstorm concepts with domain experts and data scientists. Our research revealed that designers should focus on innovations where moderate AI performance creates value. We reflect on our process and discuss research implications for creating and assessing resources to systematically explore AI’s problem-solution space. 

Accounting for technologies’ unintended consequences—whether they are misinformation on social media or issues of sustainability and social justice—increasingly requires HCI to consider technology design at a societal-level scale. At this scale, public and corporate policies play a critical role in shaping technologies and user behaviors. However, the research and practices around tech and policy design have largely been held separate. How can technology design and policies better inform and coordinate with each other in generating safe new technologies? What new solutions might emerge when HCI practitioners design technology and its policies simultaneously to account for its societal impacts? This workshop addresses these questions. It will 1) identify disciplines and areas of expertise needed for a tighter, more proactive technology-and-policy-design integration, 2) launch a community of researchers, educators, and designers interested in this integration, 3) identify and publish an HCI research and education agenda towards designing technologies and technology policies simultaneously. 

HCI research has explored AI as a design material, suggesting that designers can envision AI’s design opportunities to improve UX. Recent research claimed that enterprise applications offer an opportunity for AI innovation at the user experience level. We conducted design workshops to explore the practices of experienced designers who work on cross-functional AI teams in the enterprise. We discussed how designers successfully work with and struggle with AI. Our findings revealed that designers can innovate at the system and service levels. We also discovered that making a case for an AI feature’s return on investment is a barrier for designers when they propose AI concepts and ideas. Our discussions produced novel insights on designers’ role on AI teams, and the boundary objects they used for collaborating with data scientists. We discuss the implications of these findings as opportunities for future research aiming to empower designers in working with data and AI.