Design Awards Criteria

The interactions Design Awards’ Quality of Experience Criteria (see interactions, iii.3, May+June, 1996) provide a strong foundation for evaluating human—computer interactions. Especially praiseworthy are the multidisciplinary range of the criteria, the attention to understanding how computer-based media work in their larger context, and the credence given to the relationship of the process of interaction design to the resulting product. I listened closely to the Design Awards committee’s desire to “stimulate discussion, ... [and] spawn new ideas.” [1, p. 13] Buried in the criteria are challenges that I would like to address. While these guidelines are on the right track, I want to reorient them by focussing on the role of culture. I’ll start by defining “culture.” Then, with culture in mind, I’ll examine the question the Design Awards committee answered in forming the criteria, as well as the resulting guidelines. I’ll propose two forms of amendments: modifications to the formative question and the guidelines themselves, and the establishment of a new cultural representation guideline. This initiative applies human—computer interface ecology—a theoretical framework to support the analysis and development of interfaces as part of our cultural relationships. Using our diverse cultural heritage will support our efforts to make computers more responsive to human beings. Cultural Representation Interface Ecosystems: in Amendments to the ACM/interactions Design Awards Criteria Andruid Kerne Understanding of users