What We Talk About When We Talk About Frameworks in HCI
This addresses a gap in HCI research practices by analyzing framework usage and calling for more rigorous development, but it is incremental as it builds on existing review methods without introducing new paradigms.
The paper tackled the problem of understanding how frameworks are used and developed in HCI by conducting a systematic review of 615 papers from CHI proceedings (2015-2024), finding that enthusiasm for new frameworks exceeds iteration on existing ones and highlighting ambiguity in function and scarcity of validation.
In HCI, frameworks function as a type of theoretical contribution, often supporting ideation, design, and evaluation. Yet, little is known about how they are actually used, what functions they serve, and which scholarly practices that shape them. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic review of 615 papers from a decade of CHI proceedings (2015-2024) that prominently featured the term framework. We classified these papers into six engagement types. We then examined the role, form, and essential components of newly proposed frameworks through a functional typology, analyzing how they are constructed, validated, and articulated for reuse. Our results show that enthusiasm for proposing new frameworks exceeds the willingness to iterate on existing ones. They also highlight the ambiguity in the function of frameworks and the scarcity of systematic validation. Based on these insights, we call for more rigorous, reflective, and cumulative practices in the development and use of frameworks in HCI.