Cited by 79Digital Economy and Work TransformationUsability and User Interface DesignInformation Systems Theories and Implementation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Worker-Centered Design: Expanding HCI Methods for Supporting Labor

Fox, Sarah E., Khovanskaya, Vera, Crivellaro, Clara, Salehi, Niloufar, Dombrowski, Lynn, Kulkarni, Chinmay, Irani, Lilly, Forlizzi, Jodi·2020·Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Abstract

HCI has long considered sites of workplace collaboration. From airline cockpits to distributed groupware systems, scholars emphasize the importance of supporting a multitude of tasks and creating technologies that integrate into collaborative work settings. More recent scholarship highlights a growing need to consider the concerns of workers within and beyond established workplace settings or roles of employment, from steelworkers whose jobs have been eliminated with post-industrial shifts in the economy to contractors performing the content moderation that shapes our social media experiences. This one-day workshop seeks to bring together a growing community of HCI scholars concerned with the labor upon which the future of work we envision relies. We will discuss existing methods for studying work that we find both productive and problematic, with the aim of understanding how we might better bridge current gaps in research, policy, and practice. Such conversations will focus on the challenges associated with taking a worker-oriented approach and outline concrete methods and strategies for conducting research on labor in changing industrial, political, and environmental contexts.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3334480.3375157

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Researchers have developed standards to promote fair working conditions for platform-mediated work and used worker-centered approaches to negotiate power imbalances.

    “Notably, researchers have developed standards to promote fair working conditions for platform-mediated work [12] and used worker-centered approaches to negotiate power imbalances [50].”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. 10.1145/3025453.3025633 · DOI
  2. Pelle Ehn. 1990. Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts. L. Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, USA.
  3. Sarah E. Fox, Kiley Sobel, and Daniela K. Rosner. 2019. Managerial Visions: Stories of Upgrading and Maintaining the Public Restroom with IoT. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 493:1-- 493:15.
  4. 10.1145/3022198.3022665 · DOI
  5. Tarleton Gillespie. 2018. Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the Hidden Decisions That Shape Social Media. Yale University Press, New Haven.
  6. Lilly C. Irani and M. Six Silberman. 2013. Turkopticon: Interrupting Worker Invisibility in Amazon Mechanical Turk. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 611--620.s
  7. 10.1145/3359310 · DOI
  8. 10.5555/2789319 · DOI
  9. 10.1145/2818048.2820026 · DOI
  10. 10.1145/3290605.3300253 · DOI
  11. Sarah T. Roberts. 2019. Behind the Screen: Content Moderation in the Shadows of Social Media. Yale University Press, New Haven.
  12. 10.1525/9780520970632 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1145/3173574.3174105 · DOI
  14. 10.1023/A:1008651105359 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Fox, S. E., Khovanskaya, V., Crivellaro, C., Salehi, N., Dombrowski, L., Kulkarni, C., Irani, L., & Forlizzi, J.
Affiliations
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • Cornell University (US)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
Venue
Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2020-04-25
Pages
1-8
OpenAlex
W3030654960
Cited by
79
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 2
FWCI
15.36
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) (publishedVersion)
  • IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
  • Purdue University Indianapolis (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
  • Author eBooks
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Economy and Work Transformation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
Keywords
labor, workplace collaboration, future of work, content moderation, automation and job displacement, employee well-being

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