research-article

Tech Worker Perspectives on Considering the Interpersonal Implications of Communication Technologies

Authors:

Kelly B. Wagman,

Rachel Bergmann,

Danielle BraggAuthors Info & Claims

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Volume 7, Issue GROUP

Article No.: 16, Pages 1 - 22

https://doi.org/10.1145/3567566

Published: 29 December 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Communication technologies, from social media to video conferencing, are used by billions of people globally and contribute to shaping relationships between people. As these technologies become increasingly ubiquitous, the tech workers building them are increasingly making product decisions that can have far-reaching interpersonal ramifications. At the same time, few workplace tools and support exist to help tech workers understand and navigate these potential ramifications, and tech worker perspectives on such tools are not fully understood. In this work, we explore the needs, challenges, and opportunities encountered by tech workers in thinking through the interpersonal implications of their products. To do this, we ran a semi-structured interview study with 10 diverse tech workers. To ground the discussion, study participants interacted with a design probe prototype, InterAct, which provides research-grounded information about interpersonal implications of product features. Our findings suggest a desire by tech workers to consider the social implications of the technologies they build, and the potential for structured tooling to help provide the required knowledge and build organizational support. Based on these findings, we provide design considerations for creating future workplace tools to support thinking about the social implications of technologies.

References

[1]

Adobe. 2015. Captivate Prime. https://www.adobe.com/products/captivateprime.html

[2]

Ien Ang. 1991. Desperately seeking the audience. Routledge.

[3]

Daniel Ashbrook and Thad Starner. 2010. MAGIC: a motion gesture design tool. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2159--2168.

Digital Library

[4]

Atlassian. 2008. Bitbucket. https://bitbucket.org/product

[5]

Shaowen Bardzell. 2010. Feminist HCI: taking stock and outlining an agenda for design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1301--1310.

Digital Library

[6]

Nancy K Baym. 2015. Personal connections in the digital age. John Wiley & Sons.

[7]

Nancy K Baym, Yan Bing Zhang, Adrianne Kunkel, Andrew Ledbetter, and Mei-Chen Lin. 2007. Relational quality and media use in interpersonal relationships. New Media & Society, Vol. 9, 5 (2007), 735--752.

[8]

Gary Bente, Sabine Rüggenberg, Nicole C Kr"amer, and Felix Eschenburg. 2008. Avatar-mediated networking: Increasing social presence and interpersonal trust in net-based collaborations. Human Communication Research, Vol. 34, 2 (2008), 287--318.

[9]

Aditya Bharadwaj, Pao Siangliulue, Adam Marcus, and Kurt Luther. 2019. Critter: Augmenting Creative Work with Dynamic Checklists, Automated Quality Assurance, and Contextual Reviewer Feedback. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 539.

Digital Library

[10]

Nadine Bol, Tobias Dienlin, Sanne Kruikemeier, Marijn Sax, Sophie C Boerman, Joanna Strycharz, Natali Helberger, and Claes H De Vreese. 2018. Understanding the effects of personalization as a privacy calculus: analyzing self-disclosure across health, news, and commerce contexts. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 23, 6 (2018), 370--388.

[11]

Natilene Bowker and Keith Tuffin. 2003. Dicing with deception: People with disabilities' strategies for managing safety and identity online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 8, 2 (2003).

[12]

Danah Boyd. 2010. Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In A networked self. Routledge, 47--66.

[13]

Sketch B.V. 2010. Sketch. https://www.sketch.com/

[14]

Scott E Caplan. 2005. A social skill account of problematic Internet use. Journal of Communication, Vol. 55, 4 (2005), 721--736.

[15]

Justine Cassell and Dona Tversky. 2005. The language of online intercultural community formation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 10, 2 (2005).

[16]

Xiang'Anthony' Chen, Jeeeun Kim, Jennifer Mankoff, Tovi Grossman, Stelian Coros, and Scott E Hudson. 2016. Reprise: A design tool for specifying, generating, and customizing 3D printable adaptations on everyday objects. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 29--39.

Digital Library

[17]

Shruthi Sai Chivukula, Ziqing Li, Anne C Pivonka, Jingning Chen, and Colin M Gray. 2021. Surveying the Landscape of Ethics-Focused Design Methods. arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.08909 (2021).

[18]

Ronald Chung, Petrut Mirica, and Beryl Plimmer. 2005. InkKit: a generic design tool for the tablet PC. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI New Zealand Chapter's International Conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Making CHI Natural. 29--30.

Digital Library

[19]

Sasha Costanza-Chock. 2020. Design Justice: Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need. The MIT Press.

[20]

Max T Curran and John Chuang. 2022. Social Distancing and Social Biosensing: Intersubjectivity from Afar. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) (2022), 1--34.

[21]

Jenny L Davis and Nathan Jurgenson. 2014. Context collapse: Theorizing context collusions and collisions. Information, communication & society, Vol. 17, 4 (2014), 476--485.

[22]

Daantje Derks, Arjan ER Bos, and Jasper Von Grumbkow. 2007. Emoticons and social interaction on the Internet: the importance of social context. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 23, 1 (2007), 842--849.

[23]

Docebo. 2017. Docebo LMS. https://learningpool.com/solutions/learning-experience-platform-stream/

[24]

Judith Donath. 1999. Identity and deception in the virtual community. In Communities in Cyberspace, Marc A Smith and Peter Kollock (Eds.). Routledge, 29--59.

[25]

Pelle Ehn, Elisabet M Nilsson, and Richard Topgaard. 2014. Making futures: marginal notes on innovation, design, and democracy. The MIT Press.

Digital Library

[26]

Nicole B Ellison, Charles Steinfield, and Cliff Lampe. 2011. Connection strategies: Social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices. New Media & Society, Vol. 13, 6 (2011), 873--892.

[27]

Jerry Fails and Dan Olsen. 2003. A design tool for camera-based interaction. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. 449--456.

Digital Library

[28]

Norman Fairclough. 2013. Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Routledge.

[29]

Batya Friedman. 1996. Value-Sensitive Design. Interactions, Vol. 3, 6 (1996), 16--23.

Digital Library

[30]

Batya Friedman and David G Hendry. 2019. Value sensitive design: Shaping technology with moral imagination. The MIT Press.

[31]

Christian Fuchs. 2014. Social media: A critical introduction. SAGE Publications Limited.

Digital Library

[32]

Atul Gawande. 2010. Checklist manifesto, the (HB). Penguin Books India.

[33]

Timnit Gebru, Jamie Morgenstern, Briana Vecchione, Jennifer Wortman Vaughan, Hanna Wallach, Hal Daumeé III, and Kate Crawford. 2018. Datasheets for datasets. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.09010 (2018).

[34]

Inc. GitHub. 2008. GitHub. https://github.com/

[35]

Barney G Glaser and Anselm L Strauss. 2017. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Routledge.

[36]

Erving Goffman et al. 1978. The presentation of self in everyday life. Harmondsworth London.

[37]

Google. 2012. Google Drive. https://drive.google.com/

[38]

Sherri Grasmuck, Jason Martin, and Shanyang Zhao. 2009. Ethno-racial identity displays on Facebook. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 15, 1 (2009), 158--188.

[39]

Colin M Gray and Shruthi Sai Chivukula. 2019. Ethical mediation in UX practice. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--11.

Digital Library

[40]

Daniel Greene, Anna Lauren Hoffmann, and Luke Stark. 2019. Better, Nicer, Clearer, Fairer: A Critical Assessment of the Movement for Ethical Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning. In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2019.258

[41]

Brigette M Hales and Peter J Pronovost. 2006. The checklist-a tool for error management and performance improvement. Journal of Critical Care, Vol. 21, 3 (2006), 231--235.

[42]

Jeffrey T Hancock, Jennifer Thom-Santelli, and Thompson Ritchie. 2004. Deception and design: The impact of communication technology on lying behavior. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 129--134.

Digital Library

[43]

Lee Bee Hian, Sim Li Chuan, Tan Mon Kiat Trevor, and Benjamin H Detenber. 2004. Getting to know you: Exploring the development of relational intimacy in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 9, 3 (2004).

[44]

Otmar Hilliges, Lucia Terrenghi, Sebastian Boring, David Kim, Hendrik Richter, and Andreas Butz. 2007. Designing for collaborative creative problem solving. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity & Cognition. 137--146.

Digital Library

[45]

Courtenay Honeycutt. 2005. Hazing as a process of boundary maintenance in an online community. Journal of computer-mediated communication, Vol. 10, 2 (2005).

[46]

Figma Inc. 2016. Figma. https://www.figma.com/

[47]

InVisionApp. 2011. InVision. https://www.invisionapp.com/

[48]

Mikkel R Jakobsen and Kasper Hornbæk. 2016. Negotiating for Space?: Collaborative Work Using a Wall Display with Mouse and Touch Input. In CHI, Vol. 16. 2050--2061.

[49]

Aneta Karasek. 2019. IT tools supporting employee management in a high-tech enterprise. Applied Computer Science, Vol. 15, 1 (2019).

[50]

Jeeeun Kim, Qingnan Zhou, Amanda Ghassaei, and Xiang'Anthony' Chen. 2021. OmniSoft: A Design Tool for Soft Objects by Example. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 1--13.

Digital Library

[51]

Cliff Lampe, Paul Zube, Jusil Lee, Chul Hyun Park, and Erik Johnston. 2014. Crowdsourcing civility: A natural experiment examining the effects of distributed moderation in online forums. Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 31, 2 (2014), 317--326.

[52]

Jason Leigh and Andrew E Johnson. 1996. Supporting transcontinental collaborative work in persistent virtual environments. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, Vol. 16, 4 (1996), 47--51.

Digital Library

[53]

Mark L Lengnick-Hall and Steve Moritz. 2003. The impact of e-HR on the human resource management function. Journal of Labor Research, Vol. 24, 3 (2003), 365--379.

[54]

Jiahao Li, Jeeeun Kim, and Xiang'Anthony' Chen. 2019. Robiot: A Design Tool for Actuating Everyday Objects with Automatically Generated 3D Printable Mechanisms. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 673--685.

Digital Library

[55]

Eden Litt and Eszter Hargittai. 2016. The imagined audience on social network sites. Social Media Society, Vol. 2, 1 (2016), 2056305116633482.

[56]

Michael Xieyang Liu, Jane Hsieh, Nathan Hahn, Angelina Zhou, Emily Deng, Shaun Burley, Cynthia Taylor, Aniket Kittur, and Brad A Myers. 2019. Unakite: Scaffolding Developers' Decision-Making Using the Web. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 67--80.

Digital Library

[57]

Alfred Lua. 2022. 20 Top Social Media Sites to Consider for Your Brand in 2022. https://buffer.com/library/social-media-sites/

[58]

Michael A Madaio, Luke Stark, Jennifer Wortman Vaughan, and Hanna Wallach. 2020. Co-designing checklists to understand organizational challenges and opportunities around fairness in [AI]. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--14.

Digital Library

[59]

Noëmi Manders-Huits and Michael Zimmer. 2009. Values and pragmatic action: The challenges of introducing ethical intelligence in technical design communities. The International Review of Information Ethics, Vol. 10 (2009), 37--44.

[60]

Alice E Marwick. 2010. Status update: Celebrity, publicity and self-branding in Web 2.0. Ph.D. Dissertation. New York University.

[61]

Alice E Marwick and danah boyd. 2011. I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New media & society, Vol. 13, 1 (2011), 114--133.

[62]

J Nathan Matias. 2019. Preventing harassment and increasing group participation through social norms in 2,190 online science discussions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 116, 20 (2019), 9785--9789.

[63]

Jacob Metcalf, Emanuel Moss, and danah boyd. 2019. Owning Ethics: Corporate Logics, Silicon Valley, and the Institutionalization of Ethics. Social Research: An International Quarterly, Vol. 82, 2 (2019), 449----476.

[64]

Microsoft. 2007. OneDrive. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/onedrive/online-cloud-storage

[65]

Microsoft. 2017. Teams. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-teams/group-chat-software

[66]

Bonnie A Nardi. 2005. Beyond bandwidth: Dimensions of connection in interpersonal communication. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Vol. 14, 2 (2005), 91--130.

Digital Library

[67]

Safiya Noble. 2018. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. NYU Press.

[68]

Pattie Odgers. 1997. The Information Workplace: Training the InfoTech Worker. Issues and Instructional Delivery Examined. (1997).

[69]

Thomas Olsson, Pradthana Jarusriboonchai, Paweł Wo'zniak, Susanna Paasovaara, Kaisa V"a"an"anen, and Andrés Lucero. 2020. Technologies for Enhancing Collocated Social Interaction: Review of Design Solutions and Approaches. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Vol. 29, 1 (2020), 29--83.

Digital Library

[70]

Wanda J Orlikowski. 1992. The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization science, Vol. 3, 3 (1992), 398--427.

[71]

Learning Pool. 2015. Stream LXP. https://learningpool.com/solutions/learning-experience-platform-stream/

[72]

Anabel Quan-Haase, Joseph Cothrel, and Barry Wellman. 2005. Instant messaging for collaboration: A case study of a high-tech firm. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 10, 4 (2005).

[73]

Janet C Read, Matthew Horton, Gavin Sim, Peggy Gregory, Daniel Fitton, and Brendan Cassidy. 2013. CHECk: a tool to inform and encourage ethical practice in participatory design with children. In CHI'13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 187--192.

Digital Library

[74]

Daniel Saakes and Pieter Jan Stappers. 2009. A tangible design tool for sketching materials in products. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AI EDAM, Vol. 23, 3 (2009), 275.

Digital Library

[75]

Corina Sas, Kobi Hartley, and Muhammad Umair. 2020. ManneqKit Cards: A Kinesthetic Empathic Design Tool Communicating Depression Experiences. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 1479--1493.

Digital Library

[76]

Samantha Schmidt. 2017. `I'm not a sexist': Fired Google engineer stands behind controversial memo. Washington Post (2017). https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/10/im-not-a-sexist-fired-google-engineer-stands-behind-controversial-memo/

[77]

Nathan Schneider, Primavera De Filippi, Seth Frey, Joshua Z Tan, and Amy X Zhang. 2021. Modular Politics: Toward a Governance Layer for Online Communities. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.13701 (2021).

[78]

Michael Scriven. 2000. The logic and methodology of checklists. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.588.7093&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Accessed: 2021-03--15.

[79]

Katie Shilton. 2013. Values Levers: Building Ethics into Design. Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol. 38, 3 (May 2013), 374--397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243912436985

[80]

Janet Sternberg. 2012. Misbehavior in cyber places: The regulation of online conduct in virtual communities on the Internet. Rowman & Littlefield.

[81]

Jason Stewart, Benjamin B Bederson, and Allison Druin. 1999. Single display groupware: a model for co-present collaboration. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 286--293.

Digital Library

[82]

Balsamiq Studios. 2008. Balsamiq Wireframes. https://balsamiq.com/

[83]

Adobe Systems. 2016. Adobe XD. https://www.adobe.com/products/xd.html

[84]

Slack Technologies. 2013. Slack. https://slack.com/

[85]

Siva Vaidhyanathan. 2018. Antisocial Media: How Facebook Disconnects Us and Undermines Democracy. Oxford University Press.

[86]

José van Dijck. 2013. Facebook and the engineering of connectivity: A multi-layered approach to social media platforms. Convergence, Vol. 19, 2 (2013), 141--155. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856512457548

[87]

Barry Wellman, Janet Salaff, Dimitrina Dimitrova, Laura Garton, Milena Gulia, and Caroline Haythornthwaite. 1996. Computer networks as social networks: Collaborative work, telework, and virtual community. Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 22, 1 (1996), 213--238.

[88]

Renwen Zhang and Jiawei Sophia Fu. 2020. Privacy Management and Self-Disclosure on Social Network Sites: The Moderating Effects of Stress and Gender. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 25, 3 (2020), 236--251.

[89]

Zoom. 2020a. 90-Day Security Plan Progress Report: April 22. https://blog.zoom.us/90-day-security-plan-progress-report-april-22/

[90]

Zoom. 2020b. A Message to Our Users. https://blog.zoom.us/a-message-to-our-users/ io

Cited By

Strauss CHarr MPieper T(2024)Analyzing digital communication: a comprehensive literature reviewManagement Review Quarterly10.1007/s11301-024-00455-8Online publication date: 27-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-024-00455-8
Krauß VBerkholz JRecki LBoden A(2023)Beyond Well-Intentioned: An HCI Students’ Ethical Assessment of Their Own XR Designs2023 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR)10.1109/ISMAR59233.2023.00020(59-68)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR59233.2023.00020

Index Terms

Tech Worker Perspectives on Considering the Interpersonal Implications of Communication Technologies
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Collaborative and social computing
    1. Empirical studies in collaborative and social computing

Recommendations

Snap back to reality

This paper identifies and examines the factors that make Snapchat a unique social medium. Snapchat departs from mainstream media forms in that they are fundamentally visual and occur real-time, thus demonstrating a stronger sense of being present in ...
Migrant Farmworkers' Experiences of Agricultural Technologies: Implications for Worker Sociality and Desired Change
CHI '24: Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

This mixed method study situated in Ontario, Canada, investigates how migrant farmworkers’ experiences with agricultural technologies (agtech) affect their attitudes, conditions, and expectations of work, and how workers envision technologies serving as ...
Job burnout of the information technology worker: Work exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment

The unique environment of the information technology (IT) worker is prone to create work exhaustion, a conceptual component of job burnout. Prior research on the IT worker focuses primarily on the antecedent conditions to work exhaustion, uniquely ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction Volume 7, Issue GROUP

GROUP

January 2023

414 pages

EISSN:2573-0142

DOI:10.1145/3578937

Editor:
Jeff Nichols
Apple Inc., United States

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2023 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 29 December 2022

Published in PACMHCI Volume 7, Issue GROUP

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
234
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)70
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5

Reflects downloads up to 05 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Strauss CHarr MPieper T(2024)Analyzing digital communication: a comprehensive literature reviewManagement Review Quarterly10.1007/s11301-024-00455-8Online publication date: 27-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-024-00455-8
Krauß VBerkholz JRecki LBoden A(2023)Beyond Well-Intentioned: An HCI Students’ Ethical Assessment of Their Own XR Designs2023 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR)10.1109/ISMAR59233.2023.00020(59-68)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR59233.2023.00020

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents