Postcolonial HCI

Made in

5 episodes

Description

Exploring literature on postcolonial Human Computer Interaction (HCI). Each episode summarises and briefly analyses a specific publication in 5-7 minutes. The podcast uses synthetic voices to overcome my own limited vocal qualities. The podcast gives you a very brief overview of the main issues at stake, hopefully inspiring you to read it in depth, or at least to get an overall sense of what is at stake. I hope this inspires you and helps you access important research in the field while doing your chores, commuting or just relaxing.

Episodes

Episode #4: Stories from the Field: Reflections on HCI4D Experiences (2009) published in Information Technologies and International Development by Yaw Anokwa, Thomas Smyth, Divya Ramachandran, Jahanzeb Sherwani, Yael Schwartzman, Rowena Luk, Melissa Ho, Neema Moraveji, and Brian DeRenzi

Postcolonial HCI

Welcome to the Postcolonial HCI podcast, where we delve into the realm of human-computer interaction from a postcolonial perspective. In each episode, we present a concise summary and analysis of thought-provoking publications, allowing you to gain valuable insights in just 5-7 minutes. . Today we’ll be discussing the 2009 paper “Stories from the Field: Reflections on HCI4D Experiences” published in Information Technologies and International Development by Yaw Anokwa, Thomas Smyth, Divya Ramachandran, Jahanzeb Sherwani, Yael Schwartzman, Rowena Luk, Melissa Ho, Neema Moraveji, and Brian DeRenzi. This rich paper analyzes practical challenges faced by HCI4D researchers through concrete stories and critical reflection. HCI4D, or human-computer interaction for development, is an emergent subfield of HCI focused on technology design and use in global South contexts. The authors synthesize 55 “stories from the field” based on their own diverse experiences across 13 countries into key lessons learned for conducting HCI4D research. For example, one author worked with local female facilitators in conservative Pakistan to make women users more comfortable. Another author leveraged student assistants to manage disruptive onlookers during a field study on mobile phones in rural Liberia. The paper goes beyond practical guidance to critically examine wider issues endemic to technology research partnerships across global inequities. This is where postcolonial perspectives become particularly relevant. Several reflections touch on uneven power dynamics between Western academic researchers and local non-academic participants. Schwartzman discusses the tendency for participants to tell researchers what they think they want to hear rather than honest opinions due to perceived differences in status and wealth. Relatedly, multiple researchers raise difficulties in eliciting candid feedback from users, with some even defending covert eavesdropping on conversations as a workaround. Such challenges can lead to what postcolonial theorist Gayatri Spivak calls “epistemic violence” in knowledge production - when marginalized voices are ventriloquized to serve academic ends. As Arjun Appadurai argues, the poor are often treated as objects rather than thinking subjects in their own right by development research. These stories reveal such uneven power relations in researching vulnerable populations. The authors also critically examine issues of participation and control in HCI4D partnerships. They classify participation as “weak” using Vikram Michener’s framework, since local stakeholders lack control over setting research agendas. This resonates with Arturo Escobar’s critique of mainstream development’s failure to facilitate grassroots agency on their own terms. Finally, the paper discusses conflicting incentives between academic research goals focused on publishability versus humanitarian aims to meet user needs sustainably. This tension parallels debates on decolonizing methodology in indigenous studies, regarding how external researchers can conduct investigations ethically and responsibly in marginalized communities. As Linda Tuhiwai Smith writes, “Whose research is it? Who owns it? Whose interests does it serve?”. Furthermore, the paper highlights the importance of managing expectations when engaging communities. Failing to do so, as well as overpromising, results in feelings of disappointment that are both problematic in the short term, as well as in the long term as communities might feel less inclined to collaborate over time. While the paper has limitations in focusing narrowly on practical guidance without a deeper examination of these theoretical issues, its articulation of concrete experiences provides an opening to discuss such questions of epistemic justice. Attending carefully to these postcolonial perspectives can strengthen technology research and design partnerships across unequal terrains of power, toward more ethically and politically conscious engagements.

Dec 24, 2023 · 4:55

Episode #3: Towards a Decolonial Computing (2014) Ali, Mustafa

Postcolonial HCI

Welcome to the Postcolonial HCI podcast, where we delve into the realm of human-computer interaction from a postcolonial perspective. In each episode, we present a concise summary and analysis of thought-provoking publications, allowing you to gain valuable insights in just 5-7 minutes. In this exciting episode, we’ll be diving into a rich paper titled “Towards a Decolonial Computing” published in the book Ambiguous Technologies: Philosophical Issues, Practical Solutions, Human Nature back in 2014. The author is Syed Mustafa Ali, a critical theorist and researcher at The Open University in the UK whose work synthesizes postcolonial theory with critical race scholarship. . In "Towards a Decolonial Computing", Ali argues powerfully that there is a pressing need to develop what he terms a “decolonial computing” perspective - one that features a fundamental re-examination of computing through lenses of global racial politics and systemic oppressions that persist within technological systems today. Ali’s paper begins by surveying prior critical research on race in computing - from early digital divide studies to critical race approaches focusing on identity and representation online. He applauds these efforts but also perceives key limitations in their assumptions and scope. For instance, when discussing Jessie Daniels’ book on cyber racism, Ali suggests Daniels adopts too "U.S.-centric" of an approach that ignores more global formations of race and white supremacy. The paper then turns a critical eye towards the emerging domain of postcolonial computing - as represented in cutting-edge work by scholars like Lilly Irani, Paul Dourish and others. While recognizing the promise of this paradigm, Ali detects several concerning oversights - including postcolonial computing’s tendency to prioritize cultural analysis over political economy, its grounding within European critical theory rather than decolonial scholarship, and its reluctance to engage with issues of past injustice and current beneficiary status. As a remedy to these shortcomings, Ali calls for the development of an alternative, more radically “decolonial computing” building directly upon decolonial scholarship emerging from Latin America thinkers like Walter Mignolo, Ramón Grosfoguel and Nelson Maldonado-Torres. This would involve applying what decolonial theorists call “body-political” and “geo-political” analysis to computational technologies - questioning, for instance, the politics of knowledge encoded within artificial intelligence as well as the racialized power relations between regions that shape high-tech production systems. To concretize what decolonial computing might involve in practice, Ali considers two case studies - humanoid robotics and augmented reality systems. In analyzing existing humanoid robots, for example, Cog and Kismet developed at MIT, Ali provocatively asks: “What race is Cog?” Pointing to the racialization of faces and bodies, he suggests the tendency to design humanoids as race-neutral likely obscures important questions of racial representation and erasure. Likewise for augmented reality systems - while appreciating the “embodied turn” in recent work by Paul Dourish and others - Ali argues this risks centering a universal, white, European notion of embodiment that renders other, racialized corporeal experiences invisible. A decolonial computing approach would highlight these hidden racial biases in areas like phenomenological HCI. One possible shortcoming of this paper is regarding the specifics of how to enact a decolonial computing research program remain hazy. Ali references concepts like “body-politics” and “geo-politics” but leaves the precise meaning of such terms unclear. He also focuses exclusively on racial oppression without considering how decolonial computing might engage gender, sexuality, disability and other axes of power - an omission that risks reproducing the very erasures he critiques in postcolonial theory. Still, in just a few pages, Ali opens new lines of inquiry at the intersection of postcolonial theory, critical race thought, and human-computer interaction. He demonstrates eloquently why existing technology criticism remains insufficient for excavating the sedimented “coloniality” that lives on within modern computing systems and practices. And he issues an urgent call for cultivating alternative, decolonial imaginations and ways of building technologies otherwise. This paper is a must-read for anyone working at the cutting edge of critical postcolonial technology studies!hich

Dec 23, 2023 · 5:22

Episode #2: On Being Iterated: The Affective Demands of Design Participation (2020) Dourish, Paul, Christopher Lawrence, Tuck Wah Leong, and Greg Wadley

Postcolonial HCI

Welcome to the Postcolonial HCI podcast, where we delve into the realm of human-computer interaction from a postcolonial perspective. In each episode, we present a concise summary and analysis of thought-provoking publications, allowing you to gain valuable insights in just 5-7 minutes. Today we'll be unpacking the 2020 CHI paper “On Being Iterated: The Affective Demands of Design Participation” by Paul Dourish, Christopher Lawrence, Tuck Leong, and Greg Wadley. This compelling paper critically examines the prevalent HCI practice of iterative design through a postcolonial theory lens. The authors focus on how iteration makes emotional demands of marginalized users that challenge assumptions of user-centered methods. Grab a warm drink, settle in, and let’s explore this rich integration of technology studies and postcolonial thought..  Iterative design is a cornerstone of human-computer interaction methods. Whether through rapid prototyping, participatory workshops, or other techniques, iteration allows designers to incorporate user feedback into evolving versions of a technology. However, iterative methods encode cultural assumptions. Designers view each cycle as progress, but users may see “yet another” inadequate offering by those in power. The authors of today's paper argue that while iteration is central to HCI design processes, it also imposes problematic emotional and affective demands, particularly on marginalized user groups such as indigenous communities. This analysis prompts us to reconsider the assumptions and practices of HCI. An essential aspect of this paper is the authors' reflective analysis of their Australian indigenous app project, called ThisMyMob. Through this project, they came to realize that the optimism and novelty of iteration for designers did not translate to the users, who were deeply embedded in intergenerational struggles. Through Deborah Bird Rose's concept of the "long transitive moment", the authors highlight the continuity that iterative methods create for indigenous peoples, contrasting with the imagined rupture envisioned by designers. The authors further ground their analysis in postcolonial theorist Arturo Escobar’s concept of “designs for the pluriverse”. Escobar advocates design pluralism to counter the homogenizing effects of global capitalism on marginalized communities. A key point in this paper is that iterative methods demand patience, hope, and trust from users that the not-yet-finished product will improve. But after centuries of colonialism, this may be unreasonable for indigenous participants. Aboriginal worldviews, Deborah Bird Rose argued, center “the long transitive moment” rather than modernist epochal breaks. Iterative cycles also echo colonial schemes of control masked as an improvement. Anthropologist Elizabeth Povinelli describes Indigenous Australians’ weariness at being sites of experimentation and “aggressively abandoned” within a future timeframe. Another related point is that participatory design offloads the labor of representing communities onto minority participants. Drawing on Sara Ahmed’s idea of the “feminist killjoy”, this emotional work isolates those asked to embody inclusion. For example, women employees often bear the brunt of leading gender equity programs. From a user-centered view, the authors argue that iteration imposes problematic emotional demands. Users are expected to exhibit patience, hope, and trust throughout the iterative process, even though there is no guarantee of tangible benefits. This expectation is particularly challenging for indigenous groups who have a history of compromising solutions in various areas such as healthcare, housing, and education. In essence, iteration requires users to set aside their entire history of encounters with settler colonial power structures. The paper calls for a reconsideration of core issues within HCI, such as its ahistorical orientation, the emotional burdens of participation, and design centrism. While it remains optimistic about the potential of "decolonial design," it emphasizes the need to critically examine methods like iteration to foster more just and inclusive design relations. This analysis exemplifies how postcolonial theory can unpack troubling assumptions within fields like HCI.

Dec 23, 2023 · 4:52

Episode #0: Welcome!

Postcolonial HCI

Welcome, welcome, welcome to the very first episode of Postcolonial HCI Podcast - a podcast aiming to unpack publications in the exciting field of Postcolonial Human-Computer Interaction. My name is Pedro, and I am your podcast maestro. You may notice my voice sounds rather robotic - that's because it is. I have resorted to producing content through a synthetic voice as I find it more pleasant than my own. I have found this to be an empowering way to help me provide digestible downloads on seminal scholarship shaping this difficult and inspiring domain. Very broadly speaking, HCI examines how humans and computers interact, seeking to make tech more intuitive and empowering for diverse users. Postcolonialism critically analyzes how colonialism's oppressive political, social, and cultural legacies persist globally today. Postcolonial HCI is the combination of both these lenses, questioning existing technology design through a postcolonial perspective. It sheds light on how digital tools and platforms may perpetuate colonial power imbalances and marginalize certain identities and contexts. This podcast aims to share concise snapshots of key texts advancing this discourse. We'll be releasing one or two 5-7 minute episodes per week, so you can conveniently listen on the go as you commute, exercise, or unwind. While we won't dissect every detail, our discussions will highlight the core themes, arguments, and contributions of each publication. The goal is to provide accessible overviews to help you decide which full articles merit deeper reading. So plug in, relax, and get ready to ponder the complex intersections of postcolonialism, HCI, and computing. Let's dive into expanding our perspectives. I hope you'll join us each week - thanks for listening!

Sep 25, 2023 · 2:04

Episode #1: Postcolonial computing: A tactical survey (2012) Philip, Kavita, Lilly Irani, and Paul Dourish

Postcolonial HCI

Welcome to the Postcolonial HCI podcast, where we delve into the fascinating world of literature surrounding postcolonial Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) to uncover its profound impact on technology and society. Get ready to embark on a thought-provoking journey as we explore the intersection between culture, technology, and the colonial legacy in the digital domain. In today's episode, we'll cover the "Postcolonial Computing" paper which explores how cultural contexts shape technology and provides critiques, tactics, and interdisciplinary frameworks for technology research.. Today, we're diving into a fascinating paper titled "Postcolonial Computing: A Tactical Survey," written by Kavita Philip, Lilly Irani, and Paul Dourish. This thought-provoking piece was published back in 2010 in the esteemed journal Science, Technology, & Human Values. At its core, the paper asserts that postcolonial science studies can offer fresh perspectives and raise new questions about technology design and usage. It goes beyond expanding existing frameworks and delves into the realms of colonial and postcolonial technoscience histories and theories. In doing so, the authors provide analytical insights and practical suggestions for technology research and practice. The authors introduce the captivating concept of "Postcolonial Computing," where they examine how cultural contexts shape the design and use of information and communication technologies. With a critical eye, they challenge approaches that view culture as fixed and technology as merely diffusing from the West. Instead, they advocate for investigating hybrid knowledge practices and translations across differences. One key point emphasized in the paper is that postcolonial computing isn't only about avoiding biases from the past. It goes further by offering tactics for the ongoing reinvention of cultural-technical situations. This perspective encourages us to view methods and design objects as transnationally produced, rather than simply transferred between cultures. The authors also shed light on the limitations of binaries, such as technology versus culture, and advocate for unveiling impure crossings. By tracing networks and excluding boundaries, we can reveal the contingent nature of these intersections. Postcolonial computing takes a holistic approach, examining how global configurations link technology, culture, economics, and development narratives. This broader perspective allows for a deeper analysis of the complex interplay between these factors in shaping technological landscapes. Let's turn our attention to the merits of this influential paper. First and foremost, it provides an incredibly valuable interdisciplinary framework. By linking postcolonial studies with Science and Technology Studies (STS) perspectives on technology, it opens up new avenues for exploration. The paper also offers concrete analytical tactics that challenge assumptions in technology research and practice. These tactics provide researchers and practitioners with the tools to critically examine their work and make more informed decisions. Furthermore, the authors thoughtfully center the importance of contexts, particulars, and hybridities. Rather than seeking universal models, they emphasize the value of understanding the unique dynamics of each situation. This approach encourages a more nuanced understanding of technology and its impact. Additionally, the paper highlights the significance of politics, capital, and labor in the field of computing. It reminds us that technology cannot be divorced from its larger social, economic, and political contexts. This perspective encourages a more comprehensive exploration of the role and implications of technology. Of course, no paper is without its critiques. One valid criticism is that the authors could engage more substantially with prior studies on technology in development. By building upon existing research, the paper could offer a more comprehensive view of the field. Another critique is that the tactics presented in the paper remain quite abstract. It would be helpful to have more specific examples demonstrating how these tactics can be applied in real-world scenarios. Concrete demonstrations would enhance the practicality and applicability of the suggested approaches. Furthermore, the authors could delve deeper into the possibilities opened up by adopting postcolonial computing approaches. By exploring the potential implications and outcomes of these perspectives, the argument could be further strengthened. Lastly, some readers might find the discussion of postcolonial theory to be somewhat general and lacking specificity. Delving into more specific examples and case studies could provide a more nuanced understanding of the theory's application. In conclusion, this influential paper puts forth a compelling argument for adopting postcolonial perspectives in technology research. While it provides useful critiques and tactics for analysis and practice, it could benefit from more concrete demonstrations and engagement with prior research. Nonetheless, it opens up exciting new avenues for conversation at the intersection of postcolonial studies, STS, and human-computer interaction.

Sep 24, 2023 · 6:47