HCI grad program at CSU Northridge

1 Aug 2007 - 4:10pm
450 reads
Rob Adams-Kane
2007

Folks,

Can anyone tell me about their experience with or knowledge of the HCI program at CSU Northridge?

Many thanks,

Rob Adams-Kane
W.A. Hynes & Company, Inc.
(800) 823-1470
(707) 586-2222
fax (888) 562-1471
rkane at waHco-it.com
www.waHco-it.com
This email, and any files attached, contains information intended only for the use of the addressee and may include information that is privileged, confidential or exempt from other disclosure under applicable law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying, printing or other use of this email is prohibited.  If you have received this email in error, please delete it from you computer.  A reply email notifying the sender of the error would be greatly appreciated.  Thank you.

-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan Arnowitz
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 2:06 PM
To: Robert Reimann
Cc: Interaction Design Association (IxDA)
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Ethical Issues for Interaction Designers

Do No Harm, also recalls the Designer's Hippocratic oath that appeared in interactions Magazine:

http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1016991&coll=Portal&dl=ACM&CFID=30430127&CFTOKEN=55581660

http://arnoland.blogspot.com/2007/07/designers-hippocratic-oatha.html

On 8/1/07, Robert Reimann <rmreimann at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> A set of ethical guidelines allows designers to take an ethical stand.
> You didn't "have" to design that home page you mentioned. You weighed
> the ethics vs. the ethical imperative for you to put dinner on your
> family's table, and made a choice.
>
> The point of a professional code of ethics is to give professionals a
> bit more leverage in making those kinds of ethical choices. Without a
> professional code of ethics, it is easy for a client to say "if you
> won't do it today, I'll find someone who will tomorrow". A
> professional code in theory makes this harder for the client to say,
> and more likely for them to listen to arguments that their strategy,
> while productive in the short run, will not build them the kind of
> customer relationships that would serve them best in the long run, and
> that other creative solutions exist.
>
> As you say, however, there are applications that don't have that sort
> of wiggle room:
> gambling applications and military applications come immediately to mind.
> A
> former
> colleague of mine is now an interaction designer for battlefield
> intelligence applications, which for me is enough of a gray area that
> I would not seek that kind of work. While at Cooper, we took on a
> client who created software for tracking and directing the orbits of
> satellites... they could be weather satellites or spy satellites; the
> software was application agnostic-- so we took the business. The
> client later came back wanting us to design a module for tracking and
> directing cruise missles... and we refused the business. The point is
> that you're right, there are many subtle shades to consider, but I
> feel that a standard of ethics is a tool for informing such decisions
> more than it is for proscribing an absolute response.
>
> And what about gambling? Would a code of ethics make it more difficult
> for such clients to procure their seductive and misleading designs?
> Hard to know, but it would at least allow us as ethical professionals
> to take a public stand on such issues, which could in the long run
> have a positive effect.
>
> Some people, including some who are regarded as spokepersons for our
> field, believe that it is wrong to have any designer's code of ethics,
> and that the client is always right, regardless of what they ask us to
> do. I believe it is the responsibility of designers as advocates of
> the users (and others affected by the design) to point out to clients
> when their choices are not good for either their customers or their
> business in the long run. I believe that among other things this can
> lead to greater respect both for customers and for designers as
> professionals.
>
> Personally I draw the line at not designing products that will
> intentionally directly harm or help harm people (I would include
> gambling applications: predatory financial harm).
> "Do no (intentional) harm" is a basic ethical idea I'm almost always
> comfortable sticking by.
> Not surprisingly therefore, my favorite design projects have been
> medical applications...
> at the other end of the spectrum. My choice.
>
> Robert.
>
> On 7/31/07, Christopher Fahey <chris.fahey at behaviordesign.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thomas J. Froehlich wrote:
> > > What kinds of ethical issues arise in IxD or IA practice...?
> >
> > What a coincidence, given my last post RE: gambling user experience
> > design.
> >
> >
> > Dan Saffer wrote:
> > > I suggest that the ethical baseline for interaction designers
> > > should be that the behaviors we engender through the products and
> > > services we create treat both the actor and the receiver of the
> > > action with dignity and respect.
> > >
> > > It is surprisingly easy to do otherwise.
> >
> > Not just easy, but sometimes it's a fundamental requirement.
> >
> > Your ethical proscriptions are great, but we should recognize and
> > examine the fact that there are plenty of top-notch user experience
> > designs out there whose fundamental design constraint is to treat
> > the user with utter contempt and disrespect. Not just gambling, but
> > scammers, spammers, and pornographers. The challenges they face in
> > their practice and craft are entirely parallel with ours, minus the
> > moral compass.
> >
> > What's interesting is that this disrespect crosses over into the
> > legitimate business sphere. Once, working for a former employer
> > designing a web site for a financial institution, I noticed that the
> > client stakeholders were unanimous in instructing us to make the
> > legally-mandated friendly-language legal notices as hard to find and
> > read as we possibly could, basically to try to hide them as much as
> > possible without breaking the law. Suffice to say that we stayed
> > within the letter of the law.
> >
> > I've also had to design a home page that forced users to enter their
> > email address just to give the product a test drive, and I knew full
> > well that the company planned to then send the user marketing emails
> > nearly daily until the user either figured out how to unsubscribe or
> > signed up for the product/program. I was told, in no uncertain
> > terms, that removing the signup form from the home page, thus
> > letting users check out the service without giving personal
> > information, would have a huge negative impact on their bottom line.
> > Apparently the relentless spamming actually worked in converting a
> > large number of prospects into paying customers, prospects who the
> > client was convinced would not have signed up if they simply were
> > allowed to try the product out in their initial experience with the
> > site. What's more, simply having a large number of registered
> > prospect emails was helpful for the company's VC efforts. We kept
> > the form. Was I showing dignity and respect for their users? I don't think so.
> >
> > In terms of UX Ethics, is there a gray area between, say, designing
> > a web site to trick people into entering email addresses for
> > spamming and harvesting and something more benign like, say,
> > designing a corporate site navigation scheme where the customer
> > service form is deliberately a little bit hard to find? Or a gray
> > area between designing hot-stock-tip spam and desiging a short
> > full-screen interstitial ad for a content web site? That gray area
> > is worth exploring, because so much of what we think are ethical absolutes start to get a little blurry.
> >
> > -Cf
> >
> > Christopher Fahey
> > ____________________________
> > Behavior
> > http://www.behaviordesign.com
> > me: http://www.graphpaper.com
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> > To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org List Guidelines
> > ............ http://beta.ixda.org/guidelines List Help
> > .................. http://beta.ixda.org/help Unsubscribe
> > ................ http://beta.ixda.org/unsubscribe Questions
> > .................. list at ixda.org Home .......................
> > http://beta.ixda.org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Robert Reimann
> President, IxDA
>
> Manager, User Experience
> Bose Corporation
> Framingham, MA
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org List Guidelines
> ............ http://beta.ixda.org/guidelines List Help
> .................. http://beta.ixda.org/help Unsubscribe
> ................ http://beta.ixda.org/unsubscribe Questions
> .................. list at ixda.org Home .......................
> http://beta.ixda.org
>

--
---
Jonathan Arnowitz
Co-Author, Effective Prototyping for Software Makers Now Available from Morgan Kaufman www.mkp.com/prototyping

j.s.arnowitz at acm.org
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org List Guidelines ............ http://beta.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://beta.ixda.org/help Unsubscribe ................ http://beta.ixda.org/unsubscribe Questions .................. list at ixda.org Home ....................... http://beta.ixda.org

Syndicate content Get the feed