From Mice to Men - 24 Years of Evaluation in CHI
Abstract
This paper analyzes trends in the approach to evaluation taken by CHI papers in the last 24 years. A set of papers was analyzed according to our schema for classifying type of evaluation. Our analysis traces papers ’ trend in type and scope of evaluation. Findings include an increase in the proportion of papers that include evaluation, and a decrease in the median number of subjects in quantitative studies. We also critique the types of subjects, in particular an over reliance on students, and lack of appropriately gender balanced samples. We contextualize these findings in historical trends as we move from machines intended for the technical elite in laboratories to computers integrated into the daily life of everyone.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
HCI scholarship has a distinctive role in translating abstract principles into concrete, citizen-centred practices by offering insights into participatory design methods for AI systems and policy, tools to facilitate stakeholder engagement, and socio-technical evaluation.
“HCI scholarship has a distinctive role here: by offering established insights into participatory design methods for AI systems and policy [87, 103, 183], tools to facilitate stakeholder engagement [97], and socio-technical evaluation [12, 110, 131], it helps translate abstract principles into concrete, citizen-centred practices.”
From “It’s Just a Wild, Wild West”: Harnessing Public Procurement as an AI Governance Mechanism (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 38 · Cited by 180
- Authors
- Barkhuus, L., & Rode, J. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Glasgow (GB)
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2007-04-29
- OpenAlex
- W2170386142
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 5.02
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Keywords
- clinical trial evaluation, mouse-to-human extrapolation, translational research
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
