What Counts as ‘Creative’ Work? Articulating Four Epistemic Positions in Creativity-Oriented HCI Research

Title of the Paper

What Counts as ‘Creative’ Work? Articulating Four Epistemic Positions in Creativity-Oriented HCI Research

Paper Information

• Subject Area: Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) Research and Creative Technologies
• Keywords: Creative work, creativity definition, epistemic positions, human-computer interaction, tool-supported systems, creative technologies, interdisciplinary research, feminist epistemology, cognitive science, digital technologies

Research Background and Issues

• Challenges or Problems:

  • In HCI research, there is a lack of consensus on theories and practices centered around "creativity support," particularly regarding conceptual semantics, the role of technology, and methods for evaluating creative outcomes.
  • Current research offers vague definitions of "creativity," failing to adequately integrate social, cultural, and historical contexts.
  • Metrics for evaluating creativity often struggle to account for the complexity and diversity inherent in "creative work."

• Significance:

  • Digital technologies are increasingly applied in creative domains, ranging from design to artistic creation, becoming essential tools in the creative field, such as creative AI and computational design.
  • More precise and diverse definitions of creativity can better guide technological development and academic research, serving broader audiences.

• Research Motivation:

  • To analyze the implicit values in current HCI research and use feminist epistemology to uncover the knowledge and power dynamics behind technological innovation.

Solution

• Methods or Solutions:

  1. Propose four "epistemic positions" to summarize mainstream definitions and perspectives on creative work within the HCI domain:
     • Problem-solving: Views creative work as a systematic problem-solving process.
     • Cognitive Emergence: Creativity arises from cognitive processes and novel associations.
     • Embodied Action: Emphasizes human interaction with the material world within specific contexts.
     • Tool-mediated Expert Activity: Focuses on enhancing expert creativity through tools.
  2. Analyze the characteristics, historical origins, and reflections of each position in HCI methods and practices.
  3. Explore the power relations inherent in each position and their impact on creativity, offering critical insights for HCI researchers.

• Innovations:

  • Introduces feminist epistemology into the framework of creativity research to reveal the social-cultural constructs and power metaphors underlying different definitions of creativity.
  • Focuses not only on technical methods but also on the values embedded in technology design and their political consequences.

• Implementation Steps and Key Techniques:

  • Employ a critical hermeneutic approach to analyze literature in psychology, sociology, AI, and HCI.
  • Use case studies to demonstrate the theoretical foundations and practical applications of each epistemic position.

Research Outcomes

• Specific Findings:

  • Identified and articulated four epistemic positions regarding "creative work" in HCI, combining theoretical and practical perspectives.
  • Proposed value-oriented considerations and the underlying knowledge systems to focus on when evaluating tools and designing technologies.
  • Highlighted practical challenges and improvement suggestions for each position, such as:
    • The problem-solving position may overlook "invisible" or non-formalizable work.
    • The cognitive emergence position may reinforce linear and staged misconceptions.
    • The embodied action position risks losing the richness of practice when "translating" design concepts.
    • The tool-mediated position may neglect the diverse needs of creative processes.

• Advantages:

  • The framework uncovers blind spots in mainstream HCI creativity research and provides diverse and critical perspectives, enhancing social sensitivity in technology design.
  • By tightly integrating theory and practice, it offers more universal methods for evaluating creative technologies.

• Experimental or Evaluation Results:

  • This study is primarily based on theoretical analysis and critical reflection rather than experimental data. However, the framework's applicability was validated through literature analysis and case studies of tool practices.

• Limitations and Future Directions:

  • Limitations:
    • The research focuses mainly on computational and digital creative practices, excluding traditional non-digital forms of creativity.
    • The study team is predominantly based in Western academic contexts, limiting the inclusion of diverse global creative technology practices.
  • Future Directions:
    • Expand the research framework to encompass creative practices in more cultural contexts.
    • Develop more design methods for creative tools aimed at critical and diverse goals.
    • Conduct deeper investigations into the ethical dimensions and social impacts of HCI creative technologies.