HUMAN FACTORS, CHI, AND MIS - Human-Computer Interaction and Management Information Systems: Foundations - page 385

researchers themselves. By contrast, in this essay HCI is extended to include related work in MIS
and in human factors and ergonomics (HF&E) that is not necessarily focused on cognitive or
computer science.
In a fifty-year retrospective, Banker and Kaufmann (2004) identify human-computer interac-
tion as one of five pillars of MIS research, originating in the mid-1960s, long before cognitive or
computer scientists showed interest in HCI. This chapter explores the relationship between the
forty-year MIS history and the twenty-year CHI history. Essays including Zhang et al. (2002),
Zhang et al. (2004), and chapters in these volumes identify interests shared by CHI and the AIS
special interest group on human-computer interaction (SIGHCI).
The sixty-year history of human factors and ergonomics research is intertwined with MIS. For
example, an early Management Science paper on the use of color and graphical displays cited five
Human Factors journal articles (Benbasat and Dexter, 1985). The leading human factors HCI jour-
nal, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies (IJHCS) , formerly International Journal of
Man-Machine Studies (IJMMS) , is twenty-third of fifty in a survey of the journals influential in
MIS research (Mylonopoulos and Theoharakis, 2001). 1 Special journal issues on HCI in MIS
resulting from SIGHCI workshops appear in IJHCS , Behaviour and Information Technology (BIT) ,
and International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (IJHCI) , all of which are oriented more
toward HF&E than CHI . Similarly, AIS SIGHCI leaders organized sessions for HCI International
2005, a conference with a strong human factors orientation.
Interaction between MIS and CHI has been less extensive. Both publish in Communications
of the ACM. The CHI-oriented journal Human-Computer Interaction ranked thirty-third in influ-
ence on MIS research. In the late 1980s, the Computer Supported Cooperative Work conference
series bridged MIS and CHI. Some prominent CHI researchers participate in AIS SIGHCI meet-
ings and contribute to these volumes. CHI began with a link to the Human Factors Society, which
co-sponsored the first CHI conference with ACM. The subtitle of the CHI conference series is
“Human Factors in Computing Systems.” Some researchers have been active in both groups or
moved from one to the other. But, as with MIS, the human factors trend has generally been toward
less interaction with CHI, not more.
The hope is that by examining the mixed results of past bridging efforts, we can better identify
and exploit common interests and surmount or circumvent challenges to communication and
cooperation. My analysis is based on examining literature, interviewing scores of participants,
and reflecting on what I lived through. Its central thesis is easily summarized. Although the
approaches have much in common, two differences keep them apart. One is a difference in the
activities focused upon. Human factors targets nondiscretionary use of systems and applications,
whereas CHI focuses on the discretionary use of software. The early MIS focus on managerial
issues had more in common with human factors. The success of the Internet and the Web have
created a customer focus for MIS (and IT organizations); discretion has become a more critical
concern. The second difference is cultural. CHI comprised a different generation of researchers,
and adopted the distinct academic culture of US computer science. In particular, human factors
and MIS regard conferences as forums for work in progress and journals as repositories of pol-
ished work. In CHI, conference proceedings are the final destination of quality work and journals
are largely irrelevant.
History is interpretation. This lesson of Rashomon is brought home by conflicting accounts of
principals in past events. A researcher can feel more like a participant in a Solomon Asch study
than like Asch himself. In the end, though, we need not have consensus on every detail to better
appreciate shared ground and confront the obstacles to working collectively.