The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Out of Scandinavia: Alternative Approaches to Software Design and System Development
Open accessAbstract
This study set out to delineate the Scandinavian Approach to the development of computer-based systems. We aimed to help derive new ideas for human-oriented technology design in other countries. The study is based on the relevant literature, scientific contacts, and two field trips, and covers work in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. The study focuses on methodological questions and their theoretical foundations, on explicit strategies for social implementation, and on innovative design illustrated by reference to concrete projects. Though it makes no claim to present a sociopolitical analysis of Scandinavian technology design, the sociocultural background is given due consideration. There is no general agreement among Scandinavians as to whether or not there is a well-defined Scandinavian Approach. We have come to identify such an approach in certain common features shared by the different schools of thought. These include efforts toward humanization and democratization as overriding design goals, in keeping with the aim of building an egalitarian society. The theoretical foundations for the development of computer-based systems draw on computer science, organization theory, and the humanities. Specifically Scandinavian traditions in computer science provide the technical basis for discussions on work design. The most important schools in Scandinavia are the sociotechnical and the union-oriented collective resource approach, each associated with a distinct strategy for societal implementation. The Scandinavian Approach can be seen as a challenge to other countries, combining as it does technical sophistication with the explicit concern for using computers for the benefit of human beings.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Formalization in program development
Naur, P. (1982) · BIT · doi:10.1007/bf01934408 · Cited by 43
Cited by
User involvement: A review of the benefits and challenges
Kujala, S. (2003) · Behaviour & Information Technology · doi:10.1080/01449290301782 · Cited by 943
Muller, M. J., & Kuhn, S. (1993) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/153571.255960 · Cited by 909
A Survey of Value Sensitive Design Methods
Friedman, B., Hendry, D. G., & Borning, A. (2017) · Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1561/1100000015 · Cited by 389
Argumentation-based design rationale: what use at what cost?
Shum, S. B., & Hammond, N. (1994) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1006/ijhc.1994.1029 · Cited by 280
PD and joint application design: a transatlantic comparison
Carmel, E., Whitaker, R. D., & George, J. F. (1993) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/153571.163265 · Cited by 260
Metadata
- Authors
- Floyd, C., Mehl, W.-M., Resin, F.-M., Schmidt, G., & Wolf, G.
- Venue
- Human–Computer Interaction
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1989-12
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 253-350
- ISSN
- 0737-0024 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7051
- OpenAlex
- W1980813849
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 29.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Out of Scandinavia: Alternative Approaches to Software Design and System Development. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327051hci0404_1
- The paper
- Floyd, C., Mehl, W.-M., Resin, F.-M., Schmidt, G., & Wolf, G. (1989). Out of Scandinavia: Alternative Approaches to Software Design and System Development. Human–Computer Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci0404_1
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.