Evaluating Interpretive Research in HCI
Open accessAbstract
Insights → HCI reviewers, often trained in positivist traditions, struggle to evaluate interpretive research, leading to inappropriate recommendations.→ There are multiple varieties of interpretive research, each of which demand careful consideration on their own merits.→ We can do more to educate our community on the unique demands and contributions of interpretive methods.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
Open-ended feedback on quality and alt text perception (human/AI) was analyzed for iterative thematic interpretations.
“Open-ended feedback on quality and alt text perception (human/AI) was analyzed for iterative thematic interpretations [16, 72].”
From How University Disability Services Professionals Write Image Descriptions for HCI Figures Using Generative AI (2026) · cites this paper as [72]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414 · see citing works
Lincoln, Y. S., Guba, E. G., & Pilotta, J. J. (1985) · International Journal of Intercultural Relations · doi:10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8 · Cited by 45,787 · see citing works
Analyzing social settings : a guide to qualitative observation and analysis
Lofland, J. (1971) · Works - Scholarship, Research, & Creative Expression (Swarthmore College) · Cited by 5,656 · see citing works
McDonald, N., Schoenebeck, S., & Forte, A. (2019) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3359174 · Cited by 1,206 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kumar, H., Xiao, R., Lawson, B., Musabirov, I., Shi, J., Wang, X., Luo, H., Williams, J. J., Rafferty, A. N., Stamper, J., et al. (2024) · Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale · doi:10.1145/3657604.3662042 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Raees, M., Iwamoto, Y., Papangelis, K., Heard, J., & Tigwell, G. W. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.08937 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“5 Two researchers transcribed the recorded sessions for qualitative analysis and performed a thematic analysis [15, 6, 67].”
Iwamoto, Y., Raees, M., Heard, J., & Tigwell, G. W. (2025) · Proceedings of the 27th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility · doi:10.1145/3663547.3759763 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Soden, R., Toombs, A., & Thomas, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Indiana University (US)
- University of Michigan (US)
- Venue
- Interactions
- Published
- 2024-01
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 38-42
- ISSN
- 1072-5520 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-3449
- OpenAlex
- W4390690827
- Cited by
- 92
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 20
- FWCI
- 116.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- interactions (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Keywords
- interpretive research, research evaluation, positivism, reviewer training, qualitative 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
