Paper Reading #2: Interaction Design in the University: Designing Disciplinary Interactions

Comments:
http://jaiachi.blogspot.com/
http://shennessy11.blogspot.com/

Reference:
Interaction Design in the University: Designing Disciplinary Interactions
Gale Moore, Danielle Lottridge
CHI EA '10

Summary:
This paper covers a fairly new field called Interaction Design (ID) and how it may be applied to the third paradigm of HCI.  The three paradigms of HCI are defined in the paper of the same name as follows:  engineering and human factors, cognitive science, and the phenomenological matrix.  The Three Paradigms of HCI claims that the first two have been thoroughly explored by the HCI field.  This paper explores how research into the third paradigm, the phenomenological matrix, may be aided through ID.  To this end, the paper explores the three classes of disciplinary interactions.
The three types of disciplinary interactions are multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary.  In a multidisciplinary environment, two disciplines work on a common problem, then go their seperate ways when finished.  Interdisciplinarity results when two disciplines combine to form a new discipline or field of research, like how biology and chemistry formed biochemistry.  Transdisciplinarity results when different disciplines join together to define a problem in the context of the application.  For example, if the technology were available, should a car be able to track the occupant's emotions in order to take actions preventing road rage?  If so, what's the best way to implement it?  With enough different disciplines looking at the problem from several directions, it becomes evident that there is no 'correct' solution, but the best solution for the context of the problem can be found.
The paper then delves into university policies that hamper study in this area.  For example, tenure for a professor partially depends on how many of the professor's papers have been published in important journals for their field.  If the professor attempts to publish papers on a new discipline, it is quite possible that it will only be accepted by a journal in another field, hurting the professor's chance at tenure.  In a traditional university, the authors argue, it is unclear as to how forms of interdisciplinary engagement and research can be accommodated.

Discussion:
To be perfectly honest, this was a boring paper.  In the spirit of fairness, I admit that it would be difficult for anyone to make a paper on "Designing Disciplinary Interactions" riviting.  In all seriousness, though, it seems to me that the point this paper pushes is an example of trying to force something that happens naturally.  To follow the biochemistry example, I would imagine that at some point a biologist said to a chemist "Hey, I study the things that make up life, you study the things that make up things, let's see what we have in common!"  From the sound of this paper, however, the authors would have various disciplines come together under the consent and watchful eye of some professor.  Typically this would not be a problem, but I can forsee situations where electrical engineers and poultry scientists are required to create some new field.  An unlikely scenario to be sure, but stranger things have happened in this world.  If, however, the authors believe that this ID field should merely make suggestions to other fields, that would certainly be acceptable.  Still, in general I think things should simply be allowed to run their course naturally.

Biology + Physics = Biophysics