Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 31

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The concept of “interaction” in debates on human-machine interaction

Schleidgen, Sebastian, Friedrich, Orsolya, Gerlek, Selin, Assadi, Galia, Seifert, Johanna·2023·Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
DOI 10.1057/s41599-023-02060-8
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The concept of “interaction” is central to debates on Human–machine interaction (HMI). At the same time, however, it is vague and ambiguous: “interaction” is understood in different ways within and between the scientific disciplines involved in debates on HMI. Ultimately, this makes it difficult to reasonably debate questions of ethics, politics, engineering, and the sciences regarding HMI. Against this background, we elaborate and analyze the different meanings and dimensions of the term “interaction” in the disciplines and discourses relevant to debates on modern HMI. For this purpose, we introduce a four-dimensional SMPC model, according to which “interaction” is specified with a view to its subjects, modes, purposes, and contexts. With this, we aim to provide a basis for a fruitful intra- and particularly inter disciplinary discourse on HMI.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1057/s41599-023-02060-8

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Research works printed but not linked: 81

  1. Bahr GS, Stary C (2016) What is interaction science? Revisiting the aims and scope of JoIS. J Interact Sci 4(2):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40166-016-0015-5 · DOI
  2. Bales RF (1950) Interaction process analysis. Addison-Wesley, Boston/MA
  3. Barad K, Kleinman A (2012) Intra-actions. Mousse Magazine 34:76–81
  4. Barad K (2007) Meeting the universe halfway. Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press, Durham/NC · doi:10.2307/j.ctv12101zq · Paper page
  5. Barnes SB (1997) Douglas Carl Engelbart: developing the underlying concepts for contemporary computing. IEEE Ann Hist Comput 19(3):16–26. https://doi.org/10.1109/85.601730 · DOI
  6. Biddle JB (2022) On predicting recidivism: epistemic risk, tradeoffs, and values in machine learning. Can J Philos 52(3):321–341. https://doi.org/10.1017/can.2020.27 · DOI
  7. Blumer H (1986) Symbolic interactionism: perspective and method. University of California Press, Berkeley/CA
  8. Bolis D, Schilbach L (2020) ‘I interact therefore I am’: the self as a historical product of dialectical attunement. Topoi 39(3):521–534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-018-9574-0 · DOI
  9. Brey P (2005) The epistemology and ontology of human-computer interaction. Minds Mach 15(3-4):383–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-005-9003-1 · DOI
  10. Bromley AG (1982) Charles babbage’s analytical engine, 1838. IEEE Ann Hist Comput 4(3):196–217. https://doi.org/10.1109/85.728228 · doi:10.1109/85.728228
  11. Brooks Jr FP, Ouh-Young M, Batter JJ et al. (1990) Project GROPE. Haptic displays for scientific visualization. ACM SIGGraph Comput Graph 24(4):177–185. https://doi.org/10.1145/97880.97899 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Bruin B (2005) Game theory in philosophy. Topoi 24:197–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-005-5055-3 · DOI
  13. Bucy EP (2004) Interactivity in society: locating an elusive concept. Inf Soc 20(5):373–383 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Bucy EP, Tao C-C (2007) The mediated moderation model of interactivity. Med Psych 9(3):647–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260701283269 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Bush V (1945) As we may think. Atl Monthly 176(1):101–108
  16. Buxton W (2010) A touching story: a personal perspective on the history of touch interfaces past and future. Sid Symposium Digest of Technical Papers 41(1):444–448. https://doi.org/10.1889/1.3500488 · DOI
  17. Buxton W, Hill R Rowley P (1985) Issues and techniques in touch-sensitive tablet input. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. pp. 215–224 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Charman-Anderson S (2015) Ada Lovelace: victorian computing visionary. Ada User J 36(1):35–41
  19. Cross ES, Ramsey R (2021) Mind meets machine: towards a cognitive science of human–machine interactions. Trends Cogn Sci 25(3):200–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.11.009 · DOI
  20. Dimond T (1957) Devices for reading handwritten characters. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Managing Requirements Knowledge. pp. 232–237
  21. Dix A, Finlay J, Abowd GD et al. (2003) Human-computer interaction. Pearson Education, London
  22. Duncan S (1989) Interaction, face-to-face. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  23. Farwell LA, Donchin E (1988) Talking off the top of your head: toward a mental prosthesis utilizing event-related brain potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 70(6):510–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(88)90149-6 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Floridi L (2013) The ethics of information. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  25. Floridi L (2019) The logic of information: a theory of philosophy as conceptual design. Oxford University Press, Oxford · DOI · Paper page
  26. Gallagher S (2020) Action and interaction. Oxford University Press, Oxford · DOI · Paper page
  27. Gold J (2004) Object-oriented game development. Pearson Education, London
  28. Ha L, James EL (1998) Interactivity reexamined: a baseline analysis of early business web sites. J Broadcast Electron Media 42(4):457–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838159809364462 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Hayes PJ, Reddy DR (1983) Steps toward graceful interaction in spoken and written man-machine communication. Int J Man-Mach Stud 19(3):231–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7373(83)80050-9 · DOI
  30. Heide L (2009) Punched-card systems and the early information explosion, 1880–1945. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore/MD · DOI
  31. Isotalus P (1998) Television performance as interaction. Nordicom Rev 19(1):175–184
  32. Janlert L-E, Stolterman E (2017) The meaning of interactivity—some proposals for definitions and measures. Hum-Comput Interact 32(3):103–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2016.1226139 · DOI
  33. Jensen JF (1998) ‘Interactivity’: Tracking a new concept in media and communication studies. Nordicom Rev 19(1):185–204
  34. Jensen JF (2008) The concept of interactivity-revisited: four new typologies for a new media landscape. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Designing Interactive User Experiences for TV and Video. pp. 129–132 · DOI
  35. Johnson J, Roberts TL, Verplank W et al. (1989) The xerox star: a retrospective. Comp 22(9):11–26. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.35211 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Krämer NC, Eimler S, von der Pütten A et al. (2011) Theory of companions: what can theoretical models contribute to applications and understanding of human-robot interaction.? App Artif Intell 25(6):474–502 · DOI
  37. Krappmann L (1998) Interaktion. In: Endruweit G, Trommsdorff G (eds.) Wörterbuch der Soziologie. UVK Verlag, Konstanz, p. 250
  38. Krueger MW (1983) Artificial reality. Addison-Wesley, Boston/MA
  39. Krueger MW (1977) Responsive environments. Proceedings of the June 13–16, 1977, National Computer Conference. pp. 423–433 · doi:10.1145/1499402.1499476
  40. Krull FN (1994) The origin of computer graphics within General Motors. IEEE Ann Hist Comput 16(3):40–56. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.1994.298419 · doi:10.1109/mahc.1994.298419
  41. Laffont JJ (1997) Game theory and empirical economics: the case of auction data. Eur Econ Rev 41(1):1–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(96)00017-7 · DOI
  42. Latour B (2005) Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford · DOI · Paper page
  43. Lee S, Buxton W, Smith K (1985) A multi-touch three dimensional touch-sensitive tablet. ACM SIGCHI Bull 16(4):21–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/1165385.317461 · DOI
  44. Li Y, Carboni G, Gonzalez F et al. (2019) Differential game theory for versatile physical human-robot interaction. Nat Mach Intell 1:36–43. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-018-0010-3 · doi:10.1038/s42256-018-0010-3
  45. Licklider JC (1960) Man-computer symbiosis. IEEE Trans Hum Mach Syst 1(1):4–11. https://doi.org/10.1109/THFE2.1960.4503259 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Maes P, Mistry P (2009) Meet the sixthsense interaction. Available via https://www.ted.com/talks/pattie_maes_pranav_mistry_meet_the_sixthsense_interaction · DOI · Paper page
  47. Massey BL, Levy MR (1999) Interactivity, online journalism, and English-language web newspapers in Asia. J Mass Commun Q 76(1):138–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909907600110 · DOI
  48. McMillan SJ (2005) The researchers and the concept: moving beyond a blind examination of interactivity. J Interact Advert 5(2):1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2005.10722096 · DOI
  49. McMillan SJ (2002) Exploring models of interactivity from multiple research traditions: users, documents, and systems. In: Lievrouw LA, Livingstone S (ed) Handbook of new media. Sage, Thousand Oaks/CA, pp. 162–182
  50. Meyer-Drawe K (1996) Menschen im Spiegel ihrer Maschinen. Wilhelm Fink, München · doi:10.30965/9783846730874
  51. Müller VC (2011) Interaction and resistance: the recognition of intentions in new human-computer interaction. In: Esposito A, Esposito AM, Martone R et al. (ed) Toward autonomous, adaptive, and context-aware multimodal interfaces. Theoretical and practical issues. Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 1–7 · DOI
  52. Müller O, Liggieri K (2019) Mensch-Maschine-Interaktion seit der Antike: Imaginationsräume, Narrationen und Selbstverständnisdiskurse. In: Liggieri K, Müller O (eds.) Mensch-Maschine-Interaktion. Handbuch zu Geschichte—Kultur—Ethik. J.B. Metzler, Stuttgart, pp. 3–14 · doi:10.1007/978-3-476-05604-7_1
  53. Newman W (2012) Design case study: the bravo text editor. Interactions 19(1):75–80. https://doi.org/10.1145/2065327.2065342 · DOI
  54. Neumann Jvon (1928) Zur Theorie der Gesellschaftsspiele. Math Annal 100:295–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01448847 · DOI · Paper page
  55. Neuman WR (1991) The future of the mass audience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/MA
  56. Norman DA (2013) The design of everyday things: revised and expanded edition. Basic Books, New York/NY
  57. Norman DA (1984) Stages and levels in human-machine interaction. Int J Man-Mach Stud 21(4):365–375. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7373(84)80054-1 · DOI
  58. Nowogrodzki A (2018) The research hardware in your video-game system. Nature 553(7686):115–116. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-017-08968-x · doi:10.1038/d41586-017-08968-x
  59. Osborne MJ (2011) An introduction to game theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  60. Parsons M, Ebinger P (1968) Interaction: I. Social Interaction. In: Sills DL, Merton RK (ed.) The international encyclopedia of the social sciences. McGraw-Hill, New York/NY, pp. 429–441
  61. Perkins R, Keller DS, Ludolph F (1997) Inventing the Lisa user interface. Interactions 4(1):40–53 · DOI
  62. Rafaeli S (1988) Interactivity: from new media to communication. In: Hawkins RP, Wiemann JM, Pingree S (eds.) Advancing communication science: merging mass and interpersonal processes. Sage, Thousand Oaks/CA, pp. 110–134
  63. Rafaeli S, Sudweeks F (1998) Interactivity on the nets. In: Rafaeli S, Sudweeks F, McLaughlin ML (eds.) Network and netplay: virtual Groups on the internet. AAAI/MIT Press, Boston/MA, pp. 173–189
  64. Schumann DW, Artis A, Rivera R (2001) The future of interactive advertising viewed through an IMC lens. J Interact Advert 1(2):43–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2001.10722050 · doi:10.1080/15252019.2001.10722050
  65. Schwarting W, Alonso-Mora J, Rus D (2018) Planning and decision-making for autonomous vehicles. Annu Rev Control Robot Auton Syst 1:187–210. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-control-060117-105157 · DOI · Paper page
  66. Sharp HY (2019) Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction. John Wiley & Sons, New York/NY
  67. Simon HA (1952) A formal theory of interaction in social groups. Am Sociol Rev 17(2):202–211 · doi:10.2307/2087661
  68. Steuer J (1995) Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence. In: Biocca F, Hillsdale MR (eds.) Communication in the age of virtual reality. Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale/NJ, pp. 33–56
  69. Stromer-Galley J (2004) Interactivity-as-product and interactivity-as-process. Inf Soc 20(5):391–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240490508081 · DOI · Paper page
  70. Sturman DJ, Zeltzer D (1994) A survey of glove-based input. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 14(1):30–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/38.250916 · DOI
  71. Sutherland IE (1968). A head-mounted three dimensional display. Proceedings of the December 9–11, 1968, Fall Joint Computer Conference, Part I. pp. 757–764 · DOI · Paper page
  72. Sutherland IE (1964) Sketchpad: a man-machine graphical communication system. Simulation 2(5):3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/003754976400200514 · DOI · Paper page
  73. Swedberg R (2001) Sociology and game theory: contemporary and historical perspectives. Theor Soc 30(3):301–335. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017532512350 · DOI
  74. Thomas PC, David WM (1992) Augmented reality: an application of heads-up display technology to manual manufacturing processes system sciences. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences II:659–669. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.1992.183317 · DOI · Paper page
  75. Tomlinson IPM (1997) Game-theory models of interactions between tumour cells. Eur J Cancer 33(9):1495–1500. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-8049(97)00170-6 · DOI
  76. Vannini P (2016) Body/embodiment: symbolic interaction and the sociology of the body. Routledge, London · doi:10.4324/9781315569635
  77. Verbeek P-P (2015) Beyond interaction: a short introduction to mediation theory. Interactions 22(3):26–31. https://doi.org/10.1145/2751314 · DOI · Paper page
  78. Verbeek P-P (2005) What things do: philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park/PA · DOI · Paper page
  79. Webb JN (2007) Game theory. Decision, interaction and evolution. Springer, London
  80. Weiser M (1991) The computer for the 21st century. Sci Am 265(3):94–105. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0991-94 · DOI · Paper page
  81. Williams F, Rice RE, Rogers EM (1988) Research methods and the new media. The Free Press, New York/NY

Cited by

See all 31

Metadata

Authors
Schleidgen, S., Friedrich, O., Gerlek, S., Assadi, G., & Seifert, J.
ORCID
Venue
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2023-09-02
Volume
10
Issue
1
ISSN
2662-9992
DOI
10.1057/s41599-023-02060-8
Cited by
31
References
8
Language
en
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The concept of “interaction” in debates on human-machine interaction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1057/s41599-023-02060-8
The paper
Schleidgen, S., Friedrich, O., Gerlek, S., Assadi, G., & Seifert, J. (2023). The concept of “interaction” in debates on human-machine interaction. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02060-8

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.