CHI 2011 Workshop

May 712, 2011 Vancouver, BC, Canada

Feminism and Interaction Design

Shaowen Bardzell Indiana University School of Informatics Bloomington IN 47408 selu@indiana.edu Elizabeth Churchill Internet Experiences Group. Yahoo! Research, 4301 Great America Parkway, Santa Clara, CA 95054 churchill@acm.org Deborah Tatar Jeffrey Bardzell Indiana University School of Informatics Bloomington IN 47408 jbardzel@indiana.edu Dept of Computer Science Virginia Tech 2202 Kraft Dr. Rm 123 Blacksburg, VA 24060 dtatar@cs.vt.edu Jodi Forlizzi HCII and Design Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA forlizzi@cs.cmu.edu Beki Grinter School of Interactive Computing Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA, 30332 beki@cc.gatech.edu

Abstract
This workshop is aimed at exploring the issues at the intersection of feminist thinking and human computer interaction. Both feminism and HCI have made important contributions to social science in the past several decades, but though their potential for overlap seem high, they have not engaged each other directly until recently. In this workshop we will explore diverseand contentiousways that feminist perspectives can support user research, design ideation and problem framing, sketching and prototyping, and design criticism and evaluation. The workshop will include fast-moving mini-panels and hands-on group exercises emphasizing feminist interaction criticism and design ideation.

Keywords
Feminism, HCI, gender, theory, interaction design

ACM Classification Keywords

H.5 Information interfaces and presentation (e.g. HCI): H.5.2 User Interfaces

General Terms
Design, theory
Copyright is held by the author/owner(s). CHI 2011, May 712, 2011, Vancouver, BC, Canada. ACM 978-1-4503-0268-5/11/05.

Introduction
Feminist HCI has recently been proposed as a cross disciplinary area of research that combines feminist

CHI 2011 Workshop

May 712, 2011 Vancouver, BC, Canada

thinking with the concerns of human computer interaction as a field [2]. At this stage, however, feminist HCI remains a promising, yet underdeveloped term. We argue that feminism and HCI are on converging trajectories. In this workshop, we will invite participants to reflect on this point. We wish to explore the fact that, while feminism and HCI have made important contributions to social science in the past several decades, it is only recently that feminism and HCI have been more directly connected. HCIs so-called cultural turn has opened the field to issues that have been central to feminismissues such as agency, identity, subjectivity, sociability, experience, cultural difference, and social change and even activism [1,9]. To address such issues, HCI has borrowed and innovated on research and design epistemologies and methodologies from a wide range of sources, including the humanities (e.g., [14]). Simultaneously, feminist thinking, whose origins were originally within the humanities, has moved in recent decades steadily into the social sciences, contributing to social sciences philosophy, methodologies, and methods (e.g., [15,16]). In the past two decades feminism has also become part of the discourse within the fields of computer supported cooperative work and sociotechnical design [12, 18,19,20]. This workshop is aimed at exploring the potential overlap of feminist thinking and HCI. Exploring, clarifying, and consolidating efforts that combine HCI and feminism will take a community effort. Additionally, understanding how to use feminist concepts, theories, and social scientific methodologies in support of the design of new technology products and services will require the creation and documentation of successful exemplars. We propose this workshop as one mechanism

through which to bring this emerging community together and to help clarify our research trajectories, to encourage the cross-pollination of ideas, and to encourage new collaborations in this promising space.

Motivation and Goals

The goals of the workshop are as follows: Create actionable opportunities for design using feminist concepts, values, and theories Reflect on the methodological implications of practicing feminist interaction design, both philosophical and practical Identify obstacles that inhibit research and design in this area

Previous Connections
Plenty of work already available points to the need and benefits of a feminist HCI, without simultaneously embracing feminism and HCI explicitly. For example, researchers and practitioners in analogous fields such as industrial design, architecture, and game design have applied feminism in their work and their professional practices [5,13,17]. Femme Den [11], part of Smart Design, aims at establishing appropriate toolkits for design products that will bring out a positive impact on womens lives. Funded by the Danish Enterprise and Construction Authority, Female Interaction [10], offers user-driven development methods and tools to create products that meet the demands and desires of female users. In HCI, Bdker and Greenbaum [4] apply gender perspectives to explore informal work relationship of systems developers. Taylor and Swan pay special attention to womens work in the design and use of home organ-

CHI 2011 Workshop

May 712, 2011 Vancouver, BC, Canada

izing systems, such as calendars and to-do lists [21]. De Angeli & Bianchi-Berthouze focus on the examination of attitudinal and behavioral differences between men and women in the perception, acceptance, and usage of interactive technologies [8]. Czerwinski and her colleagues examine the roles gender plays in virtual world navigation [7]. Informed by the notion of defamiliarization, Bell et al. examine the cultural associations of household appliances in light of gendered division of domestic labor [3]. In a recent essay, Churchill reflects on gender and design, cautioning designing for existing cultural assumptions about gender [6].

Workshop Activities
The workshop is designed to be highly participatory through a range of activities, collectively intended to help participants conceptualize, brainstorm, and plan both the critique-based and action-based agenda for feminist HCI. The preliminary plan for a one-day workshop is as follows: Introduction. Workshop organizers will introduce the goals and objectives of the workshop. Following the introduction, the organizers will stage an icebreaker exercise, intended to help workshop participants become comfortable interacting with one another. Thematic Presentations. Based on the position paper submissions, organizers will arrange participants into different panels based on workshoprelevant themes that emerge from the submissions. The presentations will be conducted in the format of 20x20 pecha kucha style, which will keep the workshop flow at a rapid but concise pace. The morning session will conclude with a full discussion of the themes and challenges that emerged during the thematic presentations. Feminist Design Critique and Ideation. Following lunch, we will divide the afternoon portion of the workshop into two sessions of 90 minutes each, and participants will be sorted into small breakout groups. During the first session, the organizers will present a collection of pre-selected artifacts for the group to conduct feminist design critique. In the 2nd 90-min session, the organizers will select a content area and process (based on the outcomes of the morning thematic presentations) for designing with feminist values. The group will brainstorm and ideate new products and systems from feminist

Workshop Themes
The workshop will focus integrating feminism and design processes: How do we use feminist theory and constructs to discover design opportunities? What do the six qualities proposed in [2] mean for interaction designers? Are there cases, applications, or problems that enable us as a community to better understand and design for these qualities? How can designers integrate abstract concepts, such as feminist design qualities, with reasonably well defined stakeholder needs; empirical user and/or market data; human, technological, and financial resources; and so forth? What is (or what should be) that relationship? How do we evaluate whether a design process or product is successful in its feminist aspirations? Is evaluation just a judgment, or are there measures? Who gets to perform this judgment, anyway?

CHI 2011 Workshop

May 712, 2011 Vancouver, BC, Canada

perspectives. Workshop organizers will move around and participate in the breakout groups to guide conversation and log key points for discussion in the ensuing session. Regroup and Report. Participants will present outcomes from the small group breakout activities. Organizers will review key points from the discussion and conceptualize how these ideas contribute to the action-based feminist HCI design agenda. Conclusion. The workshop will conclude collaboratively, as participants and organizers identify major themes, problem areas, and opportunities. The organizers will also encourage participants to develop a concrete and specific agenda for moving forward, which might include an edited book and a proposal for a new CHI community for 2012.

[8] De Angeli, A., and Bianchi-Berthouze, N. Gender and interaction: Real and virtual women in a male world. AVI 2006 workshop (2006). [9] Dourish, P. Where the Action is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. MIT Press, 2006. [10] Female Interaction: http://www.femaleinteraction.com/ (retrieved Sept 29, 2010) [11] Femme Den: http://www.femmeden.com/ (retrieved Sept 29, 12010) [12] Haraway, D. A Manifesto for Cyborgs. In Simians, cyborgs, and women: the reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge. Originally published in Socialist Review (1985) 80: 65-108. [13] Laurel, B. Utopian Entrepreneur. MIT Press, 2001. [14] McCarthy, J. and Wright, P. Technology as Experience. The MIT Press, 2004. [15] Reinharz, S. Feminist Methods in Social Research. Oxford UP, 1992. [16] Sprague, J. Feminist Methodologies for Critical Researchers: Bridging Differences. AltaMira Press, 2005. [17] Rothschild, J. Design and Feminism: Re-Visioning Spaces, Places, and Everyday Things. Rutgers UP, New Brunswick, New Jersey, and London, 1999. [18] Star, S. L. (1991) Invisible Work and Silenced Dialogues in Knowledge Representation. In Women, Work and Computerization, eds. I. Eriksson,B. Kitchenham, and K. Tijdens, K., 8 1-92. Amsterdam: North Holland. [19] Suchman. L. Agencies in Technology Design: Feminist Reconfigurations. (2009). [20] Suchman, L., and Jordan, B. (1989) Computerization and Women's Knowledge. In Women, Work and Computerization, eds. K. Tijdens, M. Jennings, I. Wagner and M. Weggelaar, 153-160. Amsterdam: North Holland. [21] Taylor , A., and Swan, L. Artful systems in the home. Proc. of CHI05, (2005), 641-650

References
[1] Bardzell, J. Interaction criticism and aesthetics. Proc. of CHI09, ACM Press (2009), 2357-2366. [2] Bardzell, S. Feminist HCI: Taking stock and outlining an agenda for design. Proc. of CHI10. ACM Press: New York (2010), 1301-1310. [3] Bell, G., Blythe, M., & Sengers, P. Making by making strange: Defamilarization and the design of domestic technology. TOCHI 12, 2(2005), 149-173. [4] Bdker, S. and Greenbaum, J. A feeling for systems development work. In K. Tijdens, et al (eds.). Women, Work and Computerization. North Holland, 1988. [5] Buckley, C. Made in patriarchy: Toward a feminist analysis of women and design. In Margolin, V. (ed). Design Discourse: History, Theory, Criticism, 1989. [6] Churchill, E. Sugared puppy dog tails: Gender and design. In Interactions XVII.2 ACM Press (2010). [7] Czerwinski, M., Tan, D, and Robertson, G. Women take a wider view. In Proc. of CHI02.