Historical analysis and conflicting perspectives — Contextualizing HCI

  • Susanne Bødker
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 753)


This paper develops two ways of analyzing the human-computer interaction of a computer application in use in an organization. The techniques, historical analyses and conflicting perspectives analysis, and the interplay between them, are used in providing the basis for a more detailed analysis.

Historical analyses focus on the historical development of artifacts and their use. Conflicting perspectives analysis reflects on the roles of the artifact in use, as system, tool, or medium. Combined, the two types of analysis allow for a focus in particular on conflicts between the roles of a specific artifact in use.

The techniques are based on human activity theory. They are illustrated by means of a case study of a computer application from a project with the Danish National Labour Inspection Service.


Historical Analysis Object Orient Program Media Perspective Branch Office Cognitive Artifact 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    L. Bannon, S. Bødker: Beyond the Interface: Encountering Artifacts in [7].Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    O. Bisgaard, P. Mogensen, M. Nørby, M. Thomsen: Systemudvikling som lærevirksomhed, konflikter som basis for organisationel udvikling (DAIMI IR-88). Århus, Aarhus University, 1989.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Bødker: A Human Activity Approach to User Interfaces. In Human Computer Interaction, T. Moran, (Ed.), Vol. 4, No. 3, 171–196 (1989).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Bødker: Through the Interface — a Human Activity Approach to User Interface Design, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1991.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Bødker: Understanding computer applications in use — a human activity analysis. In P. Bøgh Andersen, B. Holmquist H. Klein, R. Posner: The semiotics of the workplace, in preparation.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Bødker, E. Christiansen, P. Ehn, R. Markussen, P. Mogensen, R. Trigg: Computers in Context. Report from the AT-project in Progress. Report of the 1991 NES-SAM conference, Ebeltoft, Denmark, 1991.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. M. Carroll (Ed.): Designing Interaction: Psychology at the Human-Computer Interface, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Y. Engeström: Learning by expanding. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit, 1987.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Kammersgaard: Four different perspectives on human-computer interaction. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 28: 343–362 (1988).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. Maass, H. Oberquelle: Perspectives and metaphors for human-computer interaction. In C. Floyd et al. (Eds.): Software development and reality construction., Berlin: Springer Verlag 1992, pp. 233–251.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Markussen: A historical perspective on work practices and technology. In P. Bøgh Andersen, B.Holmqvist, J. F. Jensen (Eds.): The Computer as a Medium, Cambridge University Press, in press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. Norman: Cognitive artifacts. In [7]. pp. 17–38.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Robinson: Introduction to “common artefact”. COMIC-SF-4-1, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    P. Sørgaard: Object Oriented Programming and Computerised Shared Material. In Second European Conference on Object Oriented Programming (ECOOP '88), ed. S. Gjessing, K. Nygaard, 319–334. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, 1988.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susanne Bødker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceAarhus UniversityAarhus CDenmark

Personalised recommendations