Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Micro-politics, Semiotic Power and Infrastructural Inversion: Theoretical Lenses for Geopolitical HCI

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Sense, Feel, Design (INTERACT 2021)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13198))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

An argument is presented for the use of the concepts of Micro-Politics and Semiotic Power by Bijker, and Infrastructural Inversion by Bowker to understand the geopolitical dynamics of career-building, knowledge and value creation in the field of human computer interaction (HCI). This is illustrated with brief references to examples of HCI academic and professional practice and dissemination in local and global contexts. It is shown how local and global micro-politically dominant groups in the HCI field can construct scripts that define quality, impact and relevance. These scripts in turn have a direct effect in career-building and what is considered valid and useful knowledge and practice. The political leverage of these scripts is therefore embedded in artefacts used for different types of transactions in the HCI field. Infrastructural inversion is finally presented as a possible framework to deconstruct and make visible these scripts and the different types of historical and political tensions inscribed in them at disciplinary, local, national, regional and global level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Irani, L., Vertesi, J., Dourish, P., Philip, K., Grinter, R.E.: Postcolonial computing: a lens on design and development. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1311–1320. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2010). https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753522

  2. Abdelnour-Nocera, J., Clemmensen, T., Kurosu, M.: Reframing HCI through local and indigenous perspectives. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 29, 201–204 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2013.765759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Suchman, L.: Located accountabilities in technology production. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 14, 91–105 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kurosu, M., Kobayashi, T., Yoshitake, R., Takahashi, H., Urokohara, H., Sato, D.: Trends in usability research and activities in Japan. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 17, 103–124 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Sturm, C., Oh, A., Linxen, S., Abdelnour Nocera, J., Dray, S., Reinecke, K.: How WEIRD is HCI? Extending HCI principles to other countries and cultures. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2425–2428. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2702613.2702656

  6. Guidini Gonçalves, T., Marçal de Oliveira, K., Kolski, C.: HCI in practice: an empirical study with software process capability maturity model consultants in Brazil. J. Softw.: Evol. Proc. 30, e2109 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lacerda, T.C., von Wangenheim, C.G.: Systematic literature review of usability capability/maturity models. Comput. Stand. Interf. 55, 95–105 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2017.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Smith, A., Joshi, A., Liu, Z., Bannon, L., Gulliksen, J., Li, C.: Institutionalizing HCI in Asia. In: Baranauskas, C., Palanque, P., Abascal, J., Barbosa, S.D.J. (eds.) INTERACT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4663, pp. 85–99. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74800-7_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Bijker, W.E.: Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bowker, G.C., Geoffrey, C., Carlson, W.B., et al.: Science on the Run: Information management and Industrial Geophysics at Schlumberger, pp. 1920–1940. MIT press (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Milne, A., Maiden, N.: Power and politics in requirements engineering: embracing the dark side? Require. Eng. 17, 83–98 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-012-0151-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sabherwal, R., Grover, V.: A taxonomy of political processes in systems development. Inf. Syst. J. 20, 419–447 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sillince, J.A., Mouakket, S.: Varieties of political process during systems development. Inf. Syst. Res. 8, 368–397 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bachrach, P., Baratz, M.S.: Two faces of power. Power: Crit. Concepts. 2, 85 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sarkkinen, J.: Examining a planning discourse: how a manager represents issues within a planning frame and how the other could do the same. In: Participatory Design Conference. ACM, Toronto, Canada (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bano, M., Zowghi, D., da Rimini, F.: User involvement in software development: the good, the bad, and the ugly. IEEE Softw. 35, 8–11 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Grover, V., Lederer, A.L., Sabherwal, R.: Recognizing the politics of MIS. Inform. Manage. 14, 145–156 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bjerknes, G., Bratteteig, T.: User participation and democracy: a discussion of Scandinavian research on system development. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 7, 1 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Johann, T., Maalej, W.: Democratic mass participation of users in requirements engineering? In: 2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 256–261. IEEE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Valença, G., Alves, C., Heimann, V., Jansen, S., Brinkkemper, S.: Competition and collaboration in requirements engineering: a case study of an emerging software ecosystem. In: 2014 IEEE 22nd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 384–393. IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Poo-Caamano, G.: Release management in free and open source software ecosystems (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rowlands, B., Kautz, K.: Power relations inscribed in the enactment of systems development methods. Inform. Syst. J. 32(2), 278–309 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hardy, C.: The nature of unobtrusive power. J. Manage. Stud. 22, 384–399 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lin, A., Silva, L.: The social and political construction of technological frames. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 14, 49–59 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pellegrino, G.: Thickening the frame: cross-theoretical accounts of contexts inside and around technology. Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 25, 63–72 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kaplan, S., Tripsas, M.: Thinking about technology: applying a cognitive lens to technical change. Res. Policy 37, 790–805 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.02.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Wolf, C.T.: Narrative Assembly: Technological Framing, Storytelling, and the Situating of “Data Analytics” in Organizational Life (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hsieh, M.F.: Learning by manufacturing parts: Explaining technological change in Taiwan’s decentralized industrialization. East Asian Sci. Technol. Soc.: Int. J. 9, 331–358 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Alnesafi, A.: Blended learning and accounting education in Kuwait: an analysis of social construction of technology. Acad. Account. Finan. Stud. J. 22, 1–19 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Mackay, H., Carne, C., Beynon-Davies, P., Tudhope, D.: Reconfiguring the user: using rapid application development. Soc. Stud. Sci. 30, 737–757 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Woolgar, S.: Configuring the user: the case of usability trials. In: A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power. Technology and Domination, pp. 58–100. Routledge, London (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Akrich, M.: The description of technical objects. In: Shaping Technology, Building Society Studies in Sociotechnical Change. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Azad, B., Faraj, S.: Using signature matrix to analyze conflicting frames during the IS implementation process. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 14, 120–126 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2011.06.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Orlikowski, W., Gash, D.C.: Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organisations. ACM Trans. Inform. Syst. 12, 174–207 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Austin, A.: The differing profiles of the human-computer interaction professional: perceptions of practice, cognitive preferences and the impact on HCI education (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Davidson, E.: A technological frames perspective on information technology and organizational change. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 42, 23–39 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886305285126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Star, S.L., Ruhleder, K.: Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: design and access for large information spaces. Inf. Syst. Res. 7, 111–134 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Bateson, G.: Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology. University of Chicago Press (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Simonsen, J., Karasti, H., Hertzum, M.: Infrastructuring and participatory design: exploring infrastructural inversion as analytic, empirical and generative. Comput. Supp. Cooper. Work 29(1–2), 115–151 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-019-09365-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ribes, D., Lee, C.P.: Sociotechnical studies of cyberinfrastructure and e-research: current themes and future trajectories. Comput. Supp. Cooper. Work 19, 231–244 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Dreyfus, H.L.: Being-in-the-World: A commentary on Heidegger’s Being and Time. MIT press, Cambridge, MA (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mkude, C., Wimmer, M.: Using PESTELMO to frame HCI contextual development in developing countries. In: International Conference on Social Implica-tions of Computers in Developing Countries, pp. 326–333. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19115-3_27

  43. Ward, V.: Why, whose, what and how? A framework for knowledge mobilisers. Evid. Policy: J. Res. Debate Pract. 13, 477–497 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of West London, London, UK

    José Abdelnour Nocera & Ali Gheitasy

  2. ITI/LARSyS, Funchal, Portugal

    José Abdelnour Nocera

Authors
  1. José Abdelnour Nocera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ali Gheitasy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to José Abdelnour Nocera .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Polytechnic University of Bari, Bari, Italy

    Carmelo Ardito

  2. University of Bari Aldo Moro, Bari, Italy

    Rosa Lanzilotti

  3. Computer Science Department, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy

    Alessio Malizia

  4. Reykjavik University, Reykjavik, Iceland

    Marta Larusdottir

  5. University of Cagliari, Caglieri, Italy

    Lucio Davide Spano

  6. Department of Information, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal

    José Campos

  7. Department of Communication, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Morten Hertzum

  8. Fachbereich Informatik, Trier University of Applied Sciences, Trier, Germany

    Tilo Mentler

  9. ITI/Larsys, University of West London, London, UK

    José Abdelnour Nocera

  10. Knowledge Media Institute, Open University, Milton Keynes, UK

    Lara Piccolo

  11. University of Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany

    Stefan Sauer

  12. Faculty of Sciences, Department of Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Gerrit van der Veer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Nocera, J.A., Gheitasy, A. (2022). Micro-politics, Semiotic Power and Infrastructural Inversion: Theoretical Lenses for Geopolitical HCI. In: Ardito, C., et al. Sense, Feel, Design. INTERACT 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13198. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98388-8_43

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98388-8_43

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-98387-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-98388-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation