Recent issues of Interactions have laid the groundwork for a debate about the disciplinary status of HCI. This was initially perceived as a "big hole" in HCI research—the concern that HCI does not seem to have a solid intellectual or methodological core . That article by Vassilis Kostakos drew on his work with Liu and others, whose bibliometric analysis of keywords in CHI publications over the past 20 years showed that the field seemed to follow technical fashions rather than long-term research themes. Quite reasonably, Kostakos and his colleagues observed that it is hard to maintain an academic discipline…
You must be a member of SIGCHI, a subscriber to ACM's Digital Library, or an interactions subscriber to read the full text of this article.
GET ACCESSJoin ACM SIGCHI
In addition to all of the professional benefits of being a SIGCHI member, members get full access to interactions online content and receive the print version of the magazine bimonthly.
Subscribe to the ACM Digital Library
Get access to all interactions content online and the entire archive of ACM publications dating back to 1954. (Please check with your institution to see if it already has a subscription.)
Subscribe to interactions
Get full access to interactions online content and receive the print version of the magazine bimonthly.