Commentary: There is also a C in HCI

Andy Crabtree’s paper H is for human and how (not) to evaluate qualitative research in HCI (Human-Computer Interaction VOL [YEAR], PAGES) is a fine introduction to fundamental issues in the philosophy of social science, introduced by complaints about peer review responses to his own work. If I were teaching an introduction to social science, I might certainly consider recommending the essay, although preferably without that introduction. So far, so good. However, “H is for Human” is not aimed at social science students, but rather the (H-is-for-) Human Sciences. Why has this peculiar phrase been chosen? Other readers of this journal may have heard it before, but this was my first encounter.