Workshop:
Challenges in the Multicultural
HCI Development Environment

 

Kerstin Röse

Centre for Human -Machine -Interaction, Institute for Production Automation 

University of Kaiserslautern

P.O. Box 3049, 67653 Kaiserslautern, Germany

roese@mv.uni-kl.de

http://pak.mv.uni-kl.de

 

Globalisation

The trend is towards globalisation. It is a phraseterm, which nowadays can beis found everywhere. The globalisation process is very closely connected linked with the increaseing use ofin computer based work places, a process which that has set in in all industrial branches including the production technology, were I still working inthe area I am working in.

The demands on the users operator of a modern machines and on the machine itself are becoming increasingly complex., and tThe globalisation trend towards globalisation involves the needcalls for a globally applicable presentation of information for in user interfaces. This involves includes also the question whether the same industrial standards can be employed in otheracross all culture areas, or whether there are local peculiarities (or differences).

As an For Eexample: compared to European countries, the Asian countries those in East Asia have a totally quite different culture compared to European countries. Since a culture generally developss over centuries and has an influences on thinking, life, thinking and work of the people, the European way of thinking and behaviour cannot beis not applicableed to Asian countries. Considering that Asians think and live differently, why should they not also work in a differently way to Europeans? Following this chain of reasoning to its endone step further, one might ask, how Asians can can operate machines successfully and satisfactorily which were designed and produced for Europeans?

 

The iInformational Aspect

To make enable communication between individuals possible one has to follow certain rules have to be followed. The iInterpersonal communication is based on cultural and social influences, and has developed over millennia into many regional communication forms. In the same way as in interpersonal communications, the human machine communication needs defined rules, so that the information displayed by the machine expresses the current process state of the process in an understandable way..

As anFor Eexample: TThe anthropological aspect is already not even taken into consideration since most machines can  be adjusted in height. However, Oone should not only consider the differentce in culture and consequently the different way of thinking of the Asians but also the question of the difference in presenting information and its  processing by Europeans and Asians. Is it therefore justifiable to export information processing to Asia when if it was has been optimised according tofor the European way of thinking and working? This question is especially of importance in the area of design of user -interfaces and the development of user philosophies for machines.

 

Multicultural Communication

With tThe globalisation process starts has developed the need for communication that goes beyond the borders of countries and cultures. The global interaction between different cultures shares the values of the interaction partners and who sometimes they define their own communication culture to interact (Honold, P.,  (1999). A former single-culture user (familiar with rules and values of his their own culture) becomes to a multi-culture user (familiar with rules and values of more than one culture). It isWe need therefore interesting to know more about the similarities and differences in user philosophies, e.g. of European and Asian culture.

Questions: Is it possible to create a global design in an era of multi-cultural users, and where are the limits of such a global design? What is the optimum of a global design for all? And Wwhen doid we need a local designs?

 

Useware and Use cases

Useware, is being after hard- and software the third component, after Hard- and Software. It describes the Uusability of Aappliances, in my this particular case of industrial Aappliances.

In tThe Ssoftware developing process are contains a lot of usually parts areas (subsystems), where the developer must have bear in mind the cultural differences in his mind, e.g. language and data formats. It The product must be adaptable for different users, i.e; the task aim is to create a multi-cultural user interface. Since cCulture has an influenced effect on the whole life of a userthe user, and the interaction of human and computer is strongly influenced by human habits  an himselfe.g. capabilities of learning, problem solving and information retrieval,. Therefore, the human -computer -interaction is influenced from directly by the culture., because the interaction of human and computer is strongly influenced from the habits of the human, e.g. his facilities of learning, problem solving, information retrieval. However, these so-called soft facts are usually a lot of not (or difficult) to measurable. softfacts influenced the user.

Questions: Is it enough sufficient to translate and changed symbols, and colours and other measurable points? What are the “culture soft facts” and how do they influenced the human computer interactionuser interface? If there are different facts how influenced the human- computer-interaction and, especially in terms of the information coding and information presentation?, Is it possible to categorise and weigh these soft facts for their does exist a categorisation for the different influence strength of influence?this facts? (like a hierarchy with weight factors)

Applications

In the field of oOffice appliances applications there are a lotcontain tasks with a high level of similar tasks for the user. I think there is a task similarity for the user nearly (typically 70-80 %), if you look on differentacross all cultures. What is does the situation look like in the area of industrial Appliancesapplications? The ccomparison of different technical devices and technologies shows reveals a a great difference between themdifferent picture:. These differences based on technology specialities. T the task similarity for the end -user is much lower than in office appliancesapplications. This fact is especially important for the information handling. For a global design is it necessary to have reach a task similarity nearly of 70 %.

Questions: Does it this mean that there is no chance for a global design in this application area of application? ? How important is the local technical knowledge for the usability of a user-interface? Which developer experiences are would be transferable from the office applications to industrial applications? Where are gaps in the developers’ knowledge gaps in the areaterms of multi-cultural design?, especially developer of industrial applications?

 

 

 

 

I will would like to stop on at this point. Multi-cultural user -interface design is a huge research field with constant challenges always and everywhere. A special point of this research field is theIt requires an inter-disciplinarity approach with. input from There are engineers, computer scientists, psychologists, sociologists, linguists, product designers etc and so on. That is necessary for that really complex challenge. Only an integral attempt it the key for to lasting solutions.

With Tthis position paper I has triedis an attempt to describe my view on the challenges and problems of this area. I look forward to a lively discussion and an interesting workshop to this topic.

 

References

Choong, Y.; Salvendy; G.(1998): Designs of icons for use by Chinese in mainland China. In Interacting with Computers: The interdisciplinary Journal of Human-Computer-Interaction, (Vol.9) February 1998, pp. 417-430. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

E. M. del Gado & J. Nielsen (1996): International User Interfaces. John Wiley & Sons: New York.

Honold, P. (1999):Focus groups: A qualitative method to elicit culture-specific user requirements. In Bullinger, H.-J.; Ziegler, J. (Eds.): Human-Computer Interaction: Communication, Cooperation, and Application Design. (Vol. 2), Proceedings 8th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI International ’99, Munich, Germany, August 22-26), pp.3-7.

Marcus, A.; Frank, V.; Armitage J. & Guttman E. (1999): Global User-Interface Design. In Bullinger, H.-J.; Ziegler, J. (Eds.): Human-Computer Interaction: Communication, Cooperation, and Application Design. (Vol. 2), Proceedings 8th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI International ’99, Munich, Germany, August 22-26), pp.772-776.

Bourges-Waldegg, P.; Scrivener, S. A.R. (1998): Meaning, the central issue in cross-cultural HCI design. In Interacting with Computers: The interdisciplinary Journal of Human-Computer-Interaction, (Vol.9) February 1998, pp. 287-309, Elsevier Science.

Piamonte, D.P. T.; Abeysekera, J.D.A.; Ohlsson, K. (1999): Testing Videophone Graphical Symbols in Southeast Asia. In Bullinger, H.-J.; Ziegler, J. (Eds.): Human-Computer Interaction: Ergonomics and User Interfaces. (Vol. 1), Proceedings 8th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI International ’99, Munich, Germany, August 22-26), pp.793-797.

Prabhu, G.; Harel, D. (1999): GUI Design Preference Validation for Japan and China – A Case for KANSEI Engineering? In Bullinger, H.-J.; Ziegler, J. (Eds.): Human-Computer Interaction: Ergonomics and User Interfaces. (Vol. 1), Proceedings 8th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI International ’99, Munich, Germany, August 22-26), pp. 521-525.

Zühlke, D.; Romberg, M.; Röse, K.(1998): Global demands of Non-European Markets for the design of User-Interfaces. (Proceedings of 7th IFAC/IFIP/IFORS/IEA Symposium, Analysis, Design and Evaluation of Man-Machine-Systems Kyoto, Japan 1998 ‑ 09 ‑  16-18). Kyoto: IFAC, Hokuto Print: Japan, pp. 143-147.