Reflections on a Model of Culturally Influenced Human–Computer Interaction to Cover Cultural Contexts in HCI Design

Abstract

This article presents an approach covering cultural contexts in human–computer interaction (HCI) design using a model of culturally influenced HCI. Cultural influence on HCI is described using cultural variables for user interface design. Assumptions regarding the influence of culture on HCI, considering the path of the information processing and the interaction style between Chinese and German users are explained on the basis of cultural models. Subsequent indicators represent the relationship between culture and HCI (culturally imprinted by the user). Correlations adopted theoretically between cultural dimensions and variables for HCI design are investigated. These correlations represent first relevant constituents of a model for culturally influenced HCI. Considerations applying such a model and evidence for the proper application of the method are presented. The proposed analysis of the context of users in general is presented, and some challenges evolving from the intercultural HCI design process from local and indigenous perspectives are addressed. The descriptive intercultural model for HCI design serves to inspire HCI engineers in the requirement analysis phase as well as HCI designers in the design phase. Finally some implications for practitioners are shown, including HCI style scores, to prognosticate the effort and the expenditure for taking into account the cultural context in intercultural user interface design.

Notes

¹Compare also Chapters 4, 6, 7, and 10 in Hall (1976).

²“The matter of contexting requires a decision concerning how much information the other person can be expected to possess on a given subject” (Hall, 1989, p. 61).

³Monocausal reasoning means that a syllogism is generated sequentially (e.g., if A then B then C then D). Multicausal reasoning allows many causes in parallel, that is, conclusions can be generated from a mix of sequential and parallel steps (Röse, 2002, p. 37).

⁴Please refer to Heimgärtner (2012) for extensive details of the study.

⁵These taxonomic results partially resembles the findings of Galtung (1981) on “Saxonic,” “Teutonic,” “Gallic,” and “Nipponic” styles. Compare also Nisbett (2003) for holistic versus analytic perception.

⁶In the future, also the sixth dimension indulgence versus restraint (IVR; Hofstede et al., 2010) containing aspects of happiness and life control contributing to the set of Hofstede's cultural dimensions on national level should be taken into account as well as the corresponding questionnaire (VSM08; Hofstede et al., 2010) should be used.

⁷In fact, every cultural dimension can be considered, which is expressed by quantitative values.