Classifying users: A hard look at some controversial issues
Kathleen M. Potosnak, Philip J. Hayes, et al.
CHI 1986
A source of intellectual overhead periodically encountered by scientists is the call to be “hard,” to ensure good science by imposing severe methodological strictures. Newell and Card (1985) undertook to impose such strictures on the psychology of human-computer interaction. Although their discussion contributes to theoretical debate in human-computer interaction by setting a reference point, their specific argument fails. Their program is unmotivated, is severely limited, and suffers from these limitations in principle. A top priority for the psychology of human-computer interaction should be the articulation of an alternative explanatory program, one that takes as its starting point the need to understand the real problems involved in providing better computer tools for people to use. © 1986, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
Kathleen M. Potosnak, Philip J. Hayes, et al.
CHI 1986
Thomas Erickson, Susan Herring, et al.
CHI EA 2002
Clare-Marie Karat, John Karat, et al.
CHI 2006
Gilly Leshed, Eben M. Haber, et al.
CHI 2008