Review by: Haberer, Monika (2008-09-02)

Patricia Young’s article is a review of the literature on cultural issues in the field of human-computer interaction (HCI) and instructional design (ID) that has been published in recent years, reflecting the challenge to adapt ICT products to culturally divers target groups in a national and international context. Without claiming to be an exhaustive review, the focus of the article lies on discussing the findings of conceptual and empirical papers, while excluding the field of game design.

Starting with an approach to define the notion of culture inherent in the design process in HCI and ID, the author distinguishes between different research categories in both areas:

1. In the field of human-computer interaction, in which the integration of culture in the design of ICT products has been considered for almost twenty years, two major trends are dominant: the internationalisation and the localisation of user interfaces. Whereas internationalisation seeks to create a design made for universal usage across cultural boundaries and thus is based on culture-neutral design elements, the localisation process implies the adaptation to the particular cultural surrounding of the target group.

Considerations about internationalisation mostly focus on the knowledge of cultural differences and less on cultural similarities, therefore guidelines and studies in this area stress the avoidance of specific cultural elements like religious symbols or particular aspects of language use etc. (e. g. metaphors, humour).

As the author points out, the creation of localised products often refers to models of culture developed within the research context of intercultural communication (cf. models by G. Hofstede). One way of authenticating design with respect to a particular target audience consists in using ethnographic research methods, which includes not only the collection of culturally relevant data but also the interaction between designers and the target group.

2. In the area of instructional design, the consideration of cultural factors has been a less relevant topic over the last 20 years. In contrast to the tendencies in HCI, the references to notions of culture in the few existing publications are not focused on one particular model but on a broad scope of models. Design processes are influenced by empirical as well as conceptual research:

As to the empirical methods, the author distinguishes between cultural variations adapted according to the learner’s instructional needs (with respect to technological design, graphical layout and content) and cultural research specific to learning strategies and contexts of the target group.

The topics of recommendation put forward in the conceptual papers include the consideration of cultural demographics of learners and the providing of culturally diverse designs (including the involvement of cultural informants and culturally sensitive concepts). All of these approaches tend to emphasise more aspects of cultural specification than aspects of generalisation.

As a result of her review of literature covering two research fields, Young concludes that the creation of culturally adapted software and learning designs is an area which needs to be developed and improved, especially when considering the context of the present technological state of development. While current research approaches and design recommendation could be incorporated in future design specifications, the necessity to organise these specifications in models, frameworks or standardised guidelines is as apparent as the necessity to change design practices with the prospect of creating products and services adapted to a globalised world. This central assumption of the paper is supported by the choice of literature reviewed, which accounts for a slightly re-emerging interest in the field of integrating culture in ICT in recent years.

By summarising and categorising the different research trends, Young gives a comprehensive overview of predominantly Anglophone literature in the areas of HCI and ID. The individual, sometimes overlapping categories, however, could be outlined and developed more concisely, especially in the second part of the paper (ID). This could be achieved either by explicitly cross-referencing the common aspects inherent in the different categories  within each particular research field and beyond , delimiting the respective conceptual variations in a more detailed way, or by giving more explicit examples of design processes referred to in order to illustrate the existing differences more clearly. In general, Young’s review approaches a relevant but still rather overlooked area and opens prospects for future systematic research to which this article certainly gives an important impulse.