HUMAN FACTORS, CHI, AND MIS - Human-Computer Interaction and Management Information Systems: Foundations - page 399

Table 19.1

Median Submissions and Percentage of Acceptances (rounded)

Journals: Journals: Conferences:

Number Submitted % Accepted % Accepted

HF&E 150 30 80

IS 200 10 60

CHI 50 30 20

management and no conference speakers from these schools. An ICIS CSCW session in 1990 was
not well attended and not repeated.
Undoubtedly several factors hindered this effort. MIS researchers criticized CHI researchers
for not citing relevant MIS work, whereas CHI researchers who approached the MIS literature
found the terminology and style confusing or off-putting. In a Computer Supported Cooperative
Work '88 panel, Rob Kling attacked the very term “cooperative work,” noting that work could be
competitive, coercive, or conflictual. Although valid from an organizational perspective, this con-
fused CHI researchers who sought a “killer app” for small group support; document co-authors,
for example, can usually be assumed to be cooperative.
MIS submissions to CSCW were rejected en masse by predominantly CHI conference review-
ers. 6 Terminology and style were factors (fondness for acronyms and explicit lists of hypotheses
annoyed CHI reviewers). Some MIS researchers submitted works in progress and probably antic-
ipated the higher acceptance rates found in similar conferences in their field. CHI authors sub-
mitted polished work and successfully pushed for high rejection rates. MIS researchers report
avoiding CSCW for the same reason HF&E researchers report avoiding CHI: papers of sufficient
polish could be submitted to a journal and earn more credit within their disciplines. In 1992, a
series of less selective annual Groupware conferences began, with heavy MIS participation. An
associated newsletter, Groupware Report , listed relevant conferences but omitted CSCW, reflect-
ing the exodus of MIS researchers from CSCW at that time.
Unlike HF&E and MIS conference proceedings, ACM proceedings are considered archival.
Print copies could be ordered; all are now in the ACM Digital Library. Republishing conference
results in journals is discouraged. With little opportunity for enforced revision, a premium on pol-
ished submissions is not surprising. 7
Computer science in Europe and Asia is more journal-oriented, with work-in-progress confer-
ences that are less selective and not archived. 8 This leads to similar tensions and dissatisfaction
with ACM conference management. The difference in orientation is reflected in the volume of
journal submissions and publications: the non-U.S. journals International Journal of Human-
Computer Studies and Interacting with Computers (an eclectic journal started in 1989) publish
over three times as many papers as the U.S. Human-Computer Interaction and ACM Transactions
on Computer-Human Interaction.

DISCUSSION

Labeling fields by their dominant tendencies risks overemphasizing differences and obscuring
commonalities. HF&E includes some studies of discretionary use. If use could be entirely man-
dated, major system failures documented in the MIS literature would not have occurred. Decision