In this video presentation I share my paper entitled "All Names are Pseudonyms":
A Critical Reflection on Pseudonymizing Names in HCI. My name is Nana Kesewaa Dankwa.
I am a black ghanaian woman in my mid 30s raising a son alone.
I am a PhD candidate at the University of Kassel in Germany. In this video I have on a black
and white blouse, hair in a top bun and red framed glasses for myopia.
The motivation for this paper emanated from reflection of my research work with elderly
white women from Germany. As a black woman of African descent, I learnt the complexities
in renaming participants as I had renamed my participants with common German names of women.
During reflection, I asked: What if my participants would never agree to their
names as assigned them? Or what would it mean to be renamed by a white researcher with an European
name without consent? These questions highlighted the intricacies of renaming and the power therein
especially when identity intersections come to play. I zone in on pseudonymization as an
example of silent technical practices that can inherently suppress identity facets
and be instruments in the oppression of voices hardly heard in the design and research
of Information Technology. Pseudonymization as a practice of replacing names embodies, for example,
political societal dimensions of changing names. The relationship between names and
identity constructions is espoused by Emilia Adrin in their work on names and identity published in
2016. The social power inherent in a name and its capacity to shift the life course
of the person becomes most evident when the name given is negative
To gain an understanding of the HCI practice of pseudonymization, I reviewed recent publications
of the CHI 2020 conference. I used the keyword "pseudonym*" to obtain 65 papers that had the word
anywhere in the paper. 50 papers had used a word to refer to work with participants or study group.
The results had over 80% of papers not sharing further details nor reflection of the process
but variations of the sentence "all names are pseudonyms". Heyer et al. ,in their work on
substance use discovery, share in a section their steps in keeping participants anonymous such as
not collecting demographic data nor signatures for compensation receipt. Hodge et al. discuss
in their work, the challenges of protection versus acknowledgement in dementia research. Five other
papers mentioned some level of participation involvement in the renaming process. Jo et
al. highlight the need when working with parents to encourage openness and voice stigmatization.
The findings show how pseudonymization is hardly discussed and silent in HCI. There is a gap in
literature in addressing power and the elements of identity constructions in the practice.
This screenshot of a blog article from the Mozilla research group shares their pseudonymization
process as inherited from Intel research. Names of participants are replaced with popular names
of their birth years from a database. This works until participants have non-European names.
I situate my work theoretically in Critical Race Theory as it provides an avenue to discuss
practices labelled as "objective", "good", "required" that oppressed marginalized people.
The advocacy for personal narratives by Critical Race Theory as a tool for less heard voices
is taken on as I share my personal story as a migrant Akan researcher in Germany.
I am Akan. My name has cultural and ancestral connotations.
The naming rites of the Akan emphasizes the significance of the name to society.
Thus renaming can hide these facets of identity. I also share my experience as a black researcher
working with white women and highlight how racism occurs using Michelle Brear's
reflection of their work with black participants in Swaziland. It is necessary researchers reflect
on their backgrounds and conflicts and how the researched are impacted.
I conclude my submission with three recommendations for consideration to the
HCI community. The first is to position research as the CRT movement for empowerment. In this way,
the research presents a platform for marginalized voices to be projected. Second,
means confronting the structures that inherently facilitate oppression. For example, which
organizational technicalities need to be modified to allow participants to be adequately reflected
in name and deed in research. Thirdly which specifics of the research and pseudonymization
processes have been examined and are the values of the research in every facet heralded?
I hoped this presentation presented a starting point for reflections and sparks discussions
on so-called technicalities that can and are more than ticking the boxes which are
the truths of practice hide identity or herald the silencing of voices.
Thank you to all who reviewed and gave me feedback for this paper.
I am grateful. The references on this slide are work I have referred to in this presentation
all of which can be found in the paper. Thanks once again for the audience