What do we study when studying politics and democracy? A semantic analysis of how politics and democracy are treated in SIGCHI conference papers

Matti Nelimarkka,Ville Vuorenmaa
2024-07-03
Abstract:Human-computer interaction scholars are increasingly touching on topics related to politics or democracy. As these concepts are ambiguous, an examination of concepts' invoked meanings aids in the self-reflection of our research efforts. We conduct a thematic analysis of all papers with the word `politics' in abstract, title or keywords ($n$=378) and likewise 152 papers with the word `democracy.' We observe that these words are increasingly being used in human-computer interaction, both in absolute and relative terms. At the same time, we show that researchers invoke these words with diverse levels of analysis in mind: the early research focused on mezzo-level (i.e., small groups), but more recently the work has begun to include macro-level analysis (i.e., society and politics as played in the public sphere). After the increasing focus on the macro-level, we see a transition towards more normative and activist research, in some areas it replaces observational and empirical research. These differences indicate semantic differences, which -- in the worst case -- may limit scientific progress. We bring these differences visible to help in further exchanges of ideas and human-computer interaction community to explore how it orients itself to politics and democracy.
Human-Computer Interaction
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The paper attempts to address the issue of understanding the usage and semantic differences of the concepts "politics" and "democracy" in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) literature. Specifically, the authors focus on the following two research questions: 1. **Thematic Association**: With which themes are the words "democracy" and "politics" associated in SIGCHI conference papers? 2. **Temporal Patterns**: What are the patterns of change in the meanings of these terms over time? Through these questions, the authors aim to reveal the usage of these concepts at different levels (such as group level and macro-social level) and explore how this semantic diversity affects academic communication and research progress. Additionally, the paper emphasizes that conceptual ambiguity may limit scientific advancement and attempts to promote broader discussion and consensus by analyzing different scholars' understandings of these concepts.