Prakash Shukla

Prakash Shukla, Phuong Bui, Sean S Levy et al.

The rapid adoption of generative AI (GenAI) in design has sparked discussions about its benefits and unintended consequences. While AI is often framed as a tool for enhancing productivity by automating routine tasks, historical research on automation warns of paradoxical effects, such as de-skilling and misplaced responsibilities. To assess UX practitioners' perceptions of AI, we analyzed over 120 articles and discussions from UX-focused subreddits. Our findings indicate that while practitioners express optimism about AI reducing repetitive work and augmenting creativity, they also highlight concerns about over-reliance, cognitive offloading, and the erosion of critical design skills. Drawing from human-automation interaction literature, we discuss how these perspectives align with well-documented automation ironies and function allocation challenges. We argue that UX professionals should critically evaluate AI's role beyond immediate productivity gains and consider its long-term implications for creative autonomy and expertise. This study contributes empirical insights into practitioners' perspectives and links them to broader debates on automation in design.

Suchismita Naik, Prakash Shukla, Ike Obi et al.

As generative AI tools become integrated into design workflows, students increasingly engage with these tools not just as aids, but as collaborators. This study analyzes reflections from 33 student teams in an HCI design course to examine the kinds of judgments students make when using AI tools. We found both established forms of design judgment (e.g., instrumental, appreciative, quality) and emergent types: agency-distribution judgment and reliability judgment. These new forms capture how students negotiate creative responsibility with AI and assess the trustworthiness of its outputs. Our findings suggest that generative AI introduces new layers of complexity into design reasoning, prompting students to reflect not only on what AI produces, but also on how and when to rely on it. By foregrounding these judgments, we offer a conceptual lens for understanding how students engage in co-creative sensemaking with AI in design contexts.

Paul Parsons, Prakash Shukla, Chorong Park

Data visualization design often requires creativity, and research is needed to understand its nature and means for promoting it. The current visualization literature on creativity is not well developed, especially with respect to the experiences of professional data visualization designers. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 data visualization practitioners, focusing on a specific aspect of creativity known as design fixation. Fixation occurs when designers adhere blindly or prematurely to a set of ideas that limit creative outcomes. We present practitioners' experiences and perspectives from their own design practice, specifically focusing on their views of (i) the nature of fixation, (ii) factors encouraging fixation, and (iii) factors discouraging fixation. We identify opportunities for future research related to chart recommendations, inspiration, and perspective shifts in data visualization design.

Paul Parsons, Prakash Shukla

Chartjunk is a popular yet contentious topic. Previous studies have shown that extreme minimalism is not always best, and that visual embellishments can be useful depending on the context. While more knowledge is being developed regarding the effects of embellishments on users, less attention has been given to the perspectives of practitioners regarding how they design with embellishments. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 data visualization practitioners, investigating how they understand chartjunk and the factors that influence how and when they make use of embellishments. Our investigation uncovers a broad and pluralistic understanding of chartjunk among practitioners, and foregrounds a variety of personal and situated factors that influence the use of chartjunk beyond context. We highlight the personal nature of design practice, and discuss the need for more practice-led research to better understand the ways in which concepts like chartjunk are interpreted and used by practitioners.