The chapter first presents a general approach to HCI research. The general approach comprises addressing the topic or problem of designing human–computer interactions, performing of actions to progress that approach to designing human–computer interactions, evaluating of the success of the actions performed to progress that approach to designing human–computer interactions and cumulating of the successes as a way of establishing whether the topic or problem of designing human–computer interactions has been addressed or not. The chapter then proposes a General Framework for HCI research (including a core framework) comprising discipline, general as common, general problem, particular scope, general research, general knowledge and general practices. The General Framework is followed by a general design research exemplar as general design research cycles. The lower-level general framework comprises application, interactive system and performance.

HCI frameworks, including the General Framework, are largely substantive in nature at this time. This is in spite of some lesser reference to practices and methods. Knowledge, however, is both methodological and substantive. Hence the requirement for a greater methodological component for such frameworks. The research framework and theory elements, which reference practices and methods, are in many respects very different. However, they have common aspects. The latter, in some cases, may even be identical to the elements appearing in HCI design practices and methods. The latter, then, could form the starting point for meeting the methodological framework requirement identified here. The HCI design practices and methods include user-centred design methods, structured analysis and design methods and research structured analysis and design methods. Suggestions are made as to the research needed to develop a greater methodological component. The latter would be for the General Framework and for other such generic frameworks. In this way, the requirement could be met.

The chapter introduces the concept of the validation of knowledge. The latter comprises concepts of conceptualisation, operationalisation, test and generalisation. In addition, validation of knowledge also comprises superordinate criteria for each of the superordinate concepts – as completeness, coherence and fitness for purpose. These concepts and criteria are then applied to HCI knowledge acquired by HCI research. The concept of validation is applied to approaches to HCI research as topic or problem addressed, actions performed, evaluation conducted and successes cumulated. The concept of validation is also applied to frameworks for HCI research as discipline, general as common, general problem, particular scope, general research, general knowledge and general practices. The state of the validation of HCI frameworks assessed and failings identified. Case studies of HCI research are needed to make good these shortcomings of framework validation.

The chapter presents the specific applied approach to HCI research, including an illustration from the literature. The latter explores interspecies sense-making in the context of dog-tracking and in the light of multi-species ethnography. The chapter presents the specific applied framework for HCI research comprising applied as discipline, general problem, particular scope, research, knowledge and practices. The specific applied framework is followed by the applied design research exemplar, as the applied design cycle and the applied design research cycle. The lower-level applied framework comprises the applied application, the applied interactive system, and the applied interactive system performance. Both the exemplar and the lower-level framework are applied to the same illustration of the applied approach taken from the literature, which explores interspecies sense-making in the context of dog-tracking and in the light of multi-species ethnography.

The chapter defines the concept of approach, along with its derivation and exemplification. A general definition of approach is proposed. The latter is then applied to HCI research in particular. An approach to HCI comprises the addressing of the topic or problem of human–computer interaction research; the performing of actions to progress the approach to the addressing of the topic or problem of human–computer interaction research; the evaluating of the success of the actions performed to progress an approach to the addressing of the topic or problem of human–computer interaction research; and the cumulating of the successes of whether the topic or problem of human–computer interaction research has been addressed or not. The definition is both explicit and sufficiently well specified for the later application of frameworks to the approaches, retained here – innovation, art, craft, applied, science and engineering.

The chapter assesses the General Framework for HCI research for completeness against other frameworks for HCI. The General Framework comprises concepts of discipline, general as common, general problem, particular scope, general research, general knowledge and general practices. These concepts are assessed for completeness against 10 individual other frameworks, which are in turn assessed for completeness against the General Framework. Overall, the General Framework is considered to be complete, although this depends much on the coherence of individual concepts. This assessment, however, does not constitute a validation of the General Framework. It is nevertheless indicative of its comparability with other HCI frameworks with respect to its completeness. The frameworks are further considered as concerns their dissemination in the HCI research literature. Dissemination is understood to include the framework’s disseminators, as well as the dissemination’s content, media and means. The General Framework is then assessed for its accommodation of the factors that appear to influence the success of framework dissemination.

The chapter presents the science approach to HCI research, including an illustration from the literature. The latter presents the case for developing new forms of psychology deep theory, based on generic systems of interactors. The chapter then presents the specific science framework for HCI research comprising science as discipline, general problem, particular scope, research, knowledge and practices. The specific science framework is followed by the science design research exemplar, as the science design cycle, the applied design research cycle and the science design research cycle. The lower-level science framework comprises the science application, the science interactive system, and the science interactive system performance. Both the exemplar and the lower-level framework are applied to the same illustration of the science approach, taken from the literature, which presents the case for developing new forms of psychology deep theory, based on generic systems of interactors.

We live in an algorithmic world. There is currently no area of our lives that has not been touched by computation and its language and tools. Since when, in the early 1940s, a small group of people led by John von Neumann gathered to turn into reality the vision of a universal computing machine, humankind is experiencing a sort of permanent revolution in which our understanding of the world and our ways of acting on it are steadily transformed by the steps forward we make in processing information. Such a condition is vividly depicted by Alan Turing in one of the founding documents of the quest for artificial intelligence (AI): “in attempting to construct machines … we are providing mansions for the souls.”1 Computers and algorithms can be seen as the building blocks of a new, ever-expanding building – a cathedral, to use George Dyson’s metaphor2 – in which every human activity is going to be shaped by the digital architecture hosting it.

Algorithms in society are both innocuous and ubiquitous. They seamlessly permeate both our on- and offline lives, quietly distilling the volumes of data each of us now creates. Today, algorithms determine the optimal way to produce and ship goods, the prices we pay for those goods, the money we can borrow, the people who teach our children, and the books and articles we read – reducing each activity to an actuarial risk or score. “If every algorithm suddenly stopped working,” Pedro Domingos hypothesized, “it would be the end of the world as we know it.”1

Public administration in Norway and in many other countries has used computers for more than fifty-five years. It is normal and necessary. Of course, it is possible to imagine many more office buildings where thousands of men and women would do all the detailed processing of individual cases that are processed today by computers, but this alternative is not very realistic: Modern taxation systems, national social insurance schemes and management of many other welfare programs would not be feasible without the use of computers and the algorithmic law that is integrated in the software. Thus, the question is not if public administration should apply computer technology, but how this should be done. This chapter deals with important how-to questions.