How can researchers unite?


CEIW - have you been in contact with anyone at the Human Computer Interaction (HCI) centre here at Birmingham ?I’ve done some lit review on new material geographies and conceptualisations of the ‘individual’ in light of a blurring of boundaries between humans and infrastructure, as well as things like Rob Kitchin’s ‘Codespace’ and extended and distributed cognition. Happy to chat if any use.



Hi Rebecca!
Thanks for sharing, sorry for the late reply here.

Yes, asking what makes for meaningful and inclusive tech experiences is sorely needed too! I recently did an experience sampling study where we looked at what kinds of smartphone use people found meaningful or meaningless.

I’m likewise interested in methodologies for designing for meaningful tech. The closest I’ve seen are approaches like value-sensitive design. I know Colin Gray at Perdue University is also exploring new ethics education for UX designers. A closely related question of interest to me is how to evaluate whether a technology experience is meaningful or not? Developers often build what they can measure and right now we have metrics for in-the-moment engagement (e.g., likes, clicks, views), but not much for meaningfulness.



Fascinating questions.

I know Dimitri Christakis has done research on the developmental effects of technology use on children, although it doesn’t specifically address the questions you ask:


Hi Todd!
Thanks for the response, sorry for my late reply here.

What would be a minimum viable product to get started? I’m thinking even just a bimonthly Mailchimp email newsletter. With time and interest we could then add features like a searchable database.

I like the idea of having curators from a few different fields (e.g., computer science, design, psychology, health) to get different perspectives and spread the word in different communities. To start it might help to find 4 or so people who can commit 4 hours every other month to this? Ideally most of the effort would just be keeping track of the papers that curators are already reading as part of their work.



I hope you don’t mind my joining the conversation here. I’d suggested to @aschrijver and @metasj that we have a free publication for members using Substack. I cited The Bad Astronomer as an example of what Substack can do.

A section of the Substack newsletter could be for researchers, though most of it would be written in layperson’s language. Perhaps people could pay for the research section (a nominal fee, such as $5 a month), and revenues could be used to fund CHT activities.


Hey @patm -
The Substack model is great. I think it’d made sense to start free and then move towards a paid version when we’re confident that we have contributors who can offer value to readers on a consistent schedule. I know the American mindfulness review has done something similar in moving towards a paid membership model over time.


I’m more of a UX practitioner at the moment, but I have close ties to research and I’m partly involved in advocacy

I’d like to suggest the creation of a public cite-able reference library for research and advocacy, as I think that such a community effort would be beneficial.

I already created a group on the reference management tool Zotero that you can join here

I decided to open a separate thread for the details and the discussion here

I did this also in order to attract attention from non-researchers, as I think that they may be capable to help out there just as well.