Antti Oulasvirta on reforming CHI

I'm new to the CHI community, and have been involved with only one project that submitted a paper to CHI. I was struck by the cadence - it's a once-per-year submission deadline that sets the pattern of activity for an entire research lab. That feels weird. Maybe it's good, though, as it pushes people to publish their work on a regular basis rather than just at the end of a thesis or dissertation project…

9) Stressful once-per-year deadline. This is not only unnecessarily stressful, but it incentivizes short-term planning. If you have to choose a research problem that can be solved in 8 months versus another that takes 2-3 years, which one would you pick if you are under pressure to advance your career by churning out CHI papers? Worse, the risk of "losing one year" may incentivize authors to bloat their claims about contributions.

Source: We must reform CHI or start an alternative – Oulasvirta on User Interface Design


See Also

comments powered by Disqus