arxiv: 2603.10681 · v3 · submitted 2026-03-11 · 💻 cs.HC · cs.CY

Recognition: no theorem link

Proceedings of CHIdeology 2026: CHI Workshop on Disentangling the fragmented politics, values and imaginaries of Human-Computer Interaction through ideologies

Felix Anand Epp , Matti Nelimarkka , Jesse Haapoja , Pedro Ferreira , Os Keyes , Shaowen Bardzell

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 13:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.HC cs.CY

keywords ideologyhuman-computer interactionpoliticsvaluesimaginariesCHI workshopdesign

0 comments

The pith

Ideologies offer a lens to disentangle the fragmented politics, values, and imaginaries in human-computer interaction.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This is the proceedings of the first CHI workshop on CHIdeology, which frames ideologies as a way to clarify the often scattered politics, values, and visions running through human-computer interaction. A sympathetic reader would care because design decisions in technology frequently carry unstated assumptions about power, society, and desirable futures. The workshop, held in Barcelona at the ACM CHI conference, positions ideological analysis as a tool to surface those assumptions. If the approach works, HCI work could become more explicit about its commitments rather than treating them as neutral or self-evident.

Core claim

The proceedings claim that the politics, values, and imaginaries already operating in human-computer interaction are fragmented and that ideologies provide a coherent analytical lens to disentangle them.

What carries the argument

Ideologies as an analytical lens that identifies and organizes the implicit political commitments and value systems in HCI research and design.

Load-bearing premise

Ideologies form a coherent and useful analytical lens capable of disentangling the politics and values already present in HCI.

What would settle it

A case study that applies ideological analysis to a sample of published HCI papers or systems and finds no additional clarification of politics or values beyond what value-sensitive design or ethical review already surfaces.

read the original abstract

This is the Proceedings of the First CHI Workshop on CHIdeology: Disentangling the fragmented politics, values, and imaginaries of Human-Computer Interaction through ideologies, held on Wednesday, 15 April, in Barcelona, Spain, at the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This is a workshop proceedings notice with no research claims, data, or findings to evaluate.

read the letter

The main thing here is that this isn't a research paper at all. It's the proceedings notice for a CHI workshop called CHIdeology, focused on using ideologies to look at politics and values in HCI. The whole thing is just a short description of the event that happened in Barcelona on 15 April. No derivations, experiments, or arguments appear anywhere in the available text. What the document does is set up a conversation among people interested in critical approaches to HCI. It brings together folks like the authors who have worked on these topics before, and it frames the workshop around disentangling fragmented politics through ideologies. That framing might help some researchers organize their thoughts on how values show up in design and technology. On the positive side, workshops like this can create space for discussions that don't fit neatly into standard paper tracks. If the goal is to push HCI toward more explicit reflection on its political side, this kind of event could play a small role in that. The clear limitation is that there's no actual analysis or findings in the document. It's purely organizational—no data, no methods, no results. You can't really assess soundness or novelty because nothing is being claimed beyond the fact that the workshop occurred. The assumption that ideologies are a useful lens is taken as given without any supporting argument here. This kind of thing is mainly for people already working in critical HCI or who are planning to attend similar events. A reader looking for new technical insights or empirical work won't find it useful. It doesn't rise to the level of something that needs peer review, since it's documenting an event rather than presenting work for evaluation. I'd recommend against sending it to referees. It's fine as a record of the workshop, but it doesn't have the substance for that process.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims to be the proceedings of the First CHI Workshop on CHIdeology: Disentangling the fragmented politics, values, and imaginaries of Human-Computer Interaction through ideologies, held on Wednesday, 15 April, in Barcelona, Spain, at the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.

Significance. If the claim holds, the manuscript would document an event exploring ideological lenses in HCI. However, with no workshop papers, discussions, or analyses included, it contributes no new insights, data, or arguments to the field and has negligible significance as a scholarly contribution.

major comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: The manuscript provides only a one-sentence announcement of the workshop event and contains no papers, participant contributions, summaries, or analytical content, which is required for proceedings to serve any substantive purpose in the HCI literature.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their review of the manuscript. We address the major comment below, clarifying the intended scope and purpose of this proceedings document as a record of the workshop event.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The manuscript provides only a one-sentence announcement of the workshop event and contains no papers, participant contributions, summaries, or analytical content, which is required for proceedings to serve any substantive purpose in the HCI literature.

Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript consists of a single sentence formally announcing the workshop. This format was selected to serve as an official record of the event's occurrence at CHI, providing a citable reference for the community tracking ideological analyses in HCI. In the absence of submitted full papers or participant contributions for inclusion, the proceedings document the workshop's place in the conference program and its thematic focus, which we maintain holds archival value even without expanded analytical content. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: proceedings announcement contains no derivation or equations

full rationale

The document is a short proceedings announcement for a CHI workshop. It states only that it records the event held on a specific date and location. No equations, predictions, first-principles derivations, or analytical claims appear in the available text. The reader's assessment correctly notes the absence of any reasoning chain, so no load-bearing step can reduce to its own inputs. This is the normal case of a non-scientific organizational document with zero circularity burden.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review with no technical content; no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be identified.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5339 in / 1047 out tokens · 34373 ms · 2026-05-15T13:21:12.875111+00:00 · methodology

Proceedings of CHIdeology 2026: CHI Workshop on Disentangling the fragmented politics, values and imaginaries of Human-Computer Interaction through ideologies

Core claim

What carries the argument

Load-bearing premise

What would settle it

discussion (0)