Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract The concept of “interaction” is central to debates on Human–machine interaction (HMI). At the same time, however, it is vague and ambiguous: “interaction” is understood in different ways within and between the scientific disciplines involved in debates on HMI. Ultimately, this makes it difficult to reasonably debate questions of ethics, politics, engineering, and the sciences regarding HMI. Against this background, we elaborate and analyze the different meanings and dimensions of the term “interaction” in the disciplines and discourses relevant to debates on modern HMI. For this purpose, we introduce a four-dimensional SMPC model, according to which “interaction” is specified with a view to its subjects, modes, purposes, and contexts. With this, we aim to provide a basis for a fruitful intra- and particularly inter disciplinary discourse on HMI.
Schleidgen et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: