Skip to main content
main-content
Top

Hint

Swipe to navigate through the chapters of this book

Published in:
Cover of the book

2015 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

Human Data Interaction: Historical Lessons from Social Studies and CSCW

share
SHARE

Abstract

Human Data Interaction (HDI) is an emerging field of research that seeks to support end-users in the day-to-day management of their personal digital data. This is a programmatic paper that seeks to elaborate foundational challenges that face HDI from an interactional perspective. It is rooted in and reflects foundational lessons from social studies of science that have had a formative impact on CSCW, and core challenges involved in supporting interaction/collaboration from within the field of CSCW itself. These are drawn upon to elaborate the inherently social and relational character of data and the challenges this poses for the ongoing development of HDI, particularly with respect to the ‘articulation’ of personal data. Our aim in doing this is not to present solutions to the challenges of HDI but to articulate core problems that confront this fledgling field as it moves from nascent concept to find a place in the interactional milieu of everyday life and particular research challenges that accompany it.
Footnotes
1
The model also permits a user to operate multiple catalogues, independent of each other, thereby providing a means to control the problems of linking accounts across different sources. Interactions between such catalogues are not considered an explicit feature of the system.
 
2
HDI construes of the recipient as the processor, which presents a particular request for computation to be carried out to the data source after it has been granted permission. While this hold true, the issue is to enable the user to design permission with respect to just what of the data is available to the processor, and to others within a particular cohort too. Recipient design draws our attention for the need to support human judgement, decision-making and intervention in the course of human data interaction.
 
3
The requirement is reflected in the Article 29 Data Protection Working Party report on the IoT (14/EN WP 223 2014) and the recommendation that end-users be able to “locally read, edit and modify the data before they are transferred to any data controller … Therefore, device manufacturers should provide a user-friendly interface for users who want to obtain both aggregated data and/or raw data.” The challenge, of course, is bring this about in practice, particularly as personal data sources expand and diversify with the advent of the IoT.
 
4
All of this, as with so many interactions within the dataware model, trades on reliable identity mechanisms. The general problem of authentication in networked systems has been long studied and several solutions exist: TLS certificates (both server and client) or PGP-based web-of-trust seem feasible initial approaches, though both have weaknesses and would require careful engineering with respect to HDI.
 
5
Controlling presentation of your meter readings may seem odd, but in a near future world where metering could be done on an appliance or device level, enabling users to control the granularity of energy consumption data (for example) becomes a much more coherent proposition.
 
Literature
go back to reference Bannon, L. & Bødker, S. (1997). Constructing common information spaces. Proceedings of ECSCW ’97, pp. 81–96, Lancaster, Kluwer. Bannon, L. & Bødker, S. (1997). Constructing common information spaces. Proceedings of ECSCW ’97, pp. 81–96, Lancaster, Kluwer.
go back to reference Cafaro, F. (2012). Using embodied allegories to design gesture suites for human-data interaction. Proceedings of UbiComp’12, pp. 560–563, Pittsburgh, ACM. Cafaro, F. (2012). Using embodied allegories to design gesture suites for human-data interaction. Proceedings of UbiComp’12, pp. 560–563, Pittsburgh, ACM.
go back to reference Kee, K., Browning, L., Ballard, D., & Cicchini, E. (2012). Sociomaterial processes … towards effective collaboration and collaboration tools for visual and data analytics. Austin, NSF: Science of Interaction for Data and Visual Analytics Workshop. Kee, K., Browning, L., Ballard, D., & Cicchini, E. (2012). Sociomaterial processes … towards effective collaboration and collaboration tools for visual and data analytics. Austin, NSF: Science of Interaction for Data and Visual Analytics Workshop.
go back to reference McAuley, D., Mortier, R. & Goulding, J. (2011). The dataware manifesto. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Communication Systems and Networks, pp. 1–6, Bangalore: IEEE. McAuley, D., Mortier, R. & Goulding, J. (2011). The dataware manifesto. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Communication Systems and Networks, pp. 1–6, Bangalore: IEEE.
go back to reference Mortier, R., Haddadi, H., Henderson, T., McAuley, D., & Crowcroft, J. (2014). Human-data interaction: The human face of the data-driven society. Social Science Research Network, doi: 10.​2139/​ssrn.​2508051. Mortier, R., Haddadi, H., Henderson, T., McAuley, D., & Crowcroft, J. (2014). Human-data interaction: The human face of the data-driven society. Social Science Research Network, doi: 10.​2139/​ssrn.​2508051.
go back to reference Schmidt, K., & Bannon, L. (1992). Taking CSCW seriously. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, 1(1), 7–40. CrossRefMATH Schmidt, K., & Bannon, L. (1992). Taking CSCW seriously. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, 1(1), 7–40. CrossRefMATH
go back to reference Schmidt, K. (1994). COMIC deliverable 3.2 social mechanisms of interaction. Esprit Basic Research Action 6225, ISBN 0-901800-55-4. Schmidt, K. (1994). COMIC deliverable 3.2 social mechanisms of interaction. Esprit Basic Research Action 6225, ISBN 0-901800-55-4.
go back to reference Star, S. L. & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects. Social Studies of Science 19(3), 387–420. Star, S. L. & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects. Social Studies of Science 19(3), 387–420.
go back to reference Star, S. L. (1999). The ethnography of infrastructure. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 377–391. CrossRef Star, S. L. (1999). The ethnography of infrastructure. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 377–391. CrossRef
go back to reference Star, S. L. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology and Human Values, 35(5), 601–617. CrossRef Star, S. L. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology and Human Values, 35(5), 601–617. CrossRef
go back to reference Strauss, A. (1985). Work and the division of labor. The Sociological Quarterly, 26(1), 1–19. CrossRef Strauss, A. (1985). Work and the division of labor. The Sociological Quarterly, 26(1), 1–19. CrossRef
go back to reference Suchman, L. (1995). Making work visible. Communications of the ACM, 38(9), 56–64. CrossRef Suchman, L. (1995). Making work visible. Communications of the ACM, 38(9), 56–64. CrossRef
go back to reference Tolmie, P., Crabtree, A., Rodden, T., Greenhalgh, C. & Benford, S. (2007). Making the home network at home: Digital housekeeping. Proceedings of ECSCW ’07, pp. 331–350. Limerick: Springer. Tolmie, P., Crabtree, A., Rodden, T., Greenhalgh, C. & Benford, S. (2007). Making the home network at home: Digital housekeeping. Proceedings of ECSCW ’07, pp. 331–350. Limerick: Springer.
Metadata
Title
Human Data Interaction: Historical Lessons from Social Studies and CSCW
Authors
Andy Crabtree
Richard Mortier
Copyright Year
2015
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20499-4_1