The ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems is the premier international conference of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI). CHI – pronounced 'kai' – annually brings together researchers and practitioners from all over the world and from diverse cultures, backgrounds, and positionalities, who have as an overarching goal to make the world a better place with interactive digital technologies.

CHI 2022 is structured as a Hybrid-Onsite full conference from April 30–May 5 in New Orleans, LA.

Hybrid Conference In-person conference

Making the First Hybrid CHI in 2022

Making the First Hybrid CHI in 2022

In the months since CHI 2022, “Running a hybrid conference is essentially like running two conferences” was the echoing comment I’ve heard on hybrid conferences. The error here is if one designs two conferences, then they do not have one hybrid conference. For CHI 2022, our goal was to have one blended conference. As researchers in the field, it is easy to have the “what does hybrid mean” discussion and to retell accounts of that great hybrid conference you went to with less than 57 people. None of this matters at scale, assembling a handful of Zoom rooms and a Slack channel doesnt work when you have hundreds of authors and thousands of attendees. A few people have asked us how did we build a hybrid conference, what worked and failed, and should be done differently; this article aims at detailing all of that and does step a bit into the technical weeds.  

First off, we were thinking about boots on the ground when planning. Here we focused on a few core deliverables:

  1. An architecture that utilizes SIGCHI infrastructure and that is reusable.
  2. Video pixels need to be streamed out clean and clear.
  3. People should have one place to go to consume content (locally or onsite).
  4. Blended interactions are essential.

And while we want to do all we can, we must stick to delivering the minimal viable product (MVP) first when designing the experience. I’ll speak mostly to the design of these systems and leave out the gritty bits of the vendor discussions but will include some of that where needed.


Having spent some years as SIGCHI’s VP of Operations, I was familiar with many of the systems in place. Stitching them together was possible but our SIGCHI Programs App would just have outbound links to the video stream, the slido for Q&A, the discord room for chat, the paper in the DL, and wherever else needed. In hindsight, I wish we did this, but we wanted to minimize the application windows and logins (trying to only use our registration system) to the best of our ability. The Programs App was not able to host embeds yet, which would have solved the task at hand. As an alternative, we picked a vendor (HUBB) which could host the page with the embeds and promised to deliver a WCAG 2.1 AA accessible experience while doing so. Lastly, this all has to be linked with presenters (remote and local), AV staff, and attendees (remote and local). In the end, we had the following flow:

A workflow that goes from the left to right with local/remote presenters to a mixing board which forks to a in room projector and a YouTube stream embedded in a Hubb page. Viewer entry point is the PWA on the right of the diagram.
Figure 1: CHI 2022 Hybrid Architecture

Here we see the audience can enter the experience using the SIGCHI Programs App (PWA) and navigate to Discord (for chatting with local and remote people) or get to the Slido for questions or to the livestream if they aren’t in the room. People presenting are all funneled through Zoom (no more plug in your laptop) which is projected to the room and streamed out via RTSP. If someone couldn’t make it (maybe they got sick or had technical issues), we had the pre-recorded video presentation for backup. These pre-recorded talk videos are also persisted and stored with the program (and are often reshared and viewed after the conference). This architecture was optimized for streaming pixels, reducing platforms, and hosting blended interactions. While some of this went great, not all of it went to plan.

Streaming Pixels

In many ways, this is the obvious core to any hybrid event. If remote people can’t consume the content in real time, then it’s just an asynchronous viewing party. While not uncommon to the Internet, live streams in our use case require a fair bit of infrastructure. First, we need a high quality feed so the slides are viewable. Second, we need that feed with closed captions delivered. Third, if someone is remote, they should be able to ask a question into the room. Finally, it would be nice to see the speaker, the audience, and the room. With regards to the MVP, that last point can be omitted if it has to be.

As we learned the core of this falls into the hands of the onsite AV vendor. You know these people; they are the ones who tape down microphone cables and set up booms at conferences you probably attended before the pandemic. They also set up cameras and mixing boards and manage streams. The connection to the Internet (and bandwidth therein) usually is under the jurisdiction of the convention center. AV and Internet account for the bulk of the added cost for hybrid; given that the SIGCHI EC did not allow for an increase in registration for 2022 (and CHI registration has increased in total by 40 USD in the last decade with no increase in the past 6 years), it is arduous to cut costs and add hybrid experiences. To go hybrid adds hunderds of thousands of dollars for each needed piece: AV and Internet, the virtual platform, and added project managment costs. If your curious official numbers will be posted over on SIGCHI’s site when finalized; also historical budgets are there already.

Referring to our architecture in Figure 1 above, if we have 4–5 speakers in a session, with two remotes we can set up a very complicated mixing board to read the HDMI feed from the slides in high def and spot a camera on the speaker with one or two people working the mixing board and the camera. For remote presenters, they will come in via a video conference tool anyhow (we used Zoom). So to simplify the rig, we had all attendees (local or remote) present through Zoom and that direct line was on the mixing board and broadcast to the room. The shuffle to change HDMI/DVI/VGA drops is replaced with presenting in Zoom and despite noting the change in pre-conference correspondence, presenters gave significant push back asking why can’t we change it back to the old way of just using a cable. A wide view stage camera takes the place of a camera operator and can capture some of the room and speakers. What’s happening is we are simplifying the configuration and human power needed to run this event (and saving costs as to have a full crew on site is prohibitively expensive).

Unfortunately staffing issues during the pandemic made it difficult to find trained AV experts. Being sandwiched by New Orleans Jazz Fest also didn’t help as the experts available were working (presumably) higher paying gigs. Many of the issues we faced on day one happened right at that mixing board: double audio streams, switching inputs between pre-recored video and Zoom, etc. In one session, I walked over to the mixing board to drop an audio level. We can’t blame the operators here; it’s a byproduct of recovering from a pandemic; still it was an issue we faced.

One Location for Consumption

The last thing we wanted was to hand out 3–5 URLs for each session for people to use for watching, chatting, asking questions, seeing who’s speaking, finding the paper in the DL, supplemental video and whatever else. The SIGCHI Programs App does a good job here for detailing the content and hosts several links under each session or paper. We wanted just a single landing for all of these interactions embedded so people didn’t need to go between platforms. The SIGCHI Programs App didn’t have the ability to handle the embeds at this point but that is and should be the solution for all future SIGCHI events. I’m working with the SIGCHI VP of Operations to make this path happen.

Now there’s a whole industry for this where we see Hubb (which we used this year), Delegate Connect (from last year), Midspace (formerly Clowder used at other SIGCHI events). I’ll personally go on record saying these all don’t meet the standards we set for CHI and SIGCHI. First of all, we have a superior program app. Second, none of them (really none of them) adhere to our accessibility standards (despite that they go on contract saying they do comply). Third, there’s a fair bit of effort duplication to stand up these sites once we have the SIGCHI Programs App in place as the program has to be replicated elsewhere. It’s a mess.

Unfortunately, the path was turbulent from the moment the vendor contract was signed. Much work had to be duplicated by the volunteers (migrating from the Programs App to HUBB). HUBB makes more logins for people. HUBB’s chat (for Q&A) was not accessible to our standards nor patchable so we had to (last minute) use Slido. HUBB’s navigation was overall poor compared to the SIGCHI Programs App. The list goes on. The “let’s have one platform” idea did not work.

But something more was happening here beyond one vendor not meeting our quality specifications. I realized by watching attendees, we don’t live in a one platform world. Stop right now and count how many tabs are open in your browsers (yes plural). We are used to juggling platforms. How many times does someone check Instagram or Twitter on their laptop versus their phone? Some people prefer to watch a video on their iPad and type questions into slido on their phone. SIGCHI’s IMX conference grew out of research on second screen experiences. The community dissected the Hubb platform and started sharing slido room numbers and the direct YouTube live stream links. Many of our attendees were sharing the Slido rooms with others on Discord (so much that we wrote a script to broadcast the Slido room numbers there). Others were sharing the direct Youtube stream links openly as the HUBB embed was prone to failure. This was great as we made the decision to just open up all the live streams to everyone (registered or not) so they were easily viewed. I know I was asking slido questions from the slido app on my phone with discord up on my iPad. It’s the Zero, One, Infinity rule in effect. One platform won’t work and people will want to consume content in native environments or just pick the one piece they want. Embrace the platforms and provide access to the atomic pieces.

Blended Interactions Are Essential

Being hybrid is not about segregating the online crowd into their own channel to discuss amongst themselves. Hybrid is about blending interactions. If you take live questions from the audience and have a volunteer in the room scanning an online chat room to find and surface remote questions, the remote attendees will basically be ignored. Here running all questions through Slido allowed everyone to put in a question and allowed the session chair to have a single feed to scan for questions to relay to the speaker. Now we will miss the occasional person who would take the mic and launch into a soliloquy on “why you didn’t cite my past work?” but personally I’m ok with that. What does get lost is people finding out who other people are. We could start a practice of people listing who they are in the question: “Why didn’t you cite my past work? (ayman • CHI22 TPC)” to help. You could probably try to enforce a one live question one remote question protocol but as any CHI organizer will tell you “enforcing anything at CHI is next to impossible”. Also there’s no promise that the presenter will be in the room anyhow since we now allow remote presenters.

Remote session chairs just didn’t work. Initially we didn’t want this feature but an equity argument was made and we didn’t have enough session chair volunteers. Having remote session chairs didn’t work because the first job of the chair is not to meet speakers and ask questions if there’s dead air after a talk. The session chair is to control the room (take the conn nautically speaking). This is impossible to do when remote. After day one of CHI we worked closely with our student volunteers and retrained the AV staff so things went smoother but in effect wasn’t perfect. I think remote chairs could work if we brief the SVs for those sessions in advance advising them how to take the conn. There is the cost of the added burden on the SVs to take on this role, but in situ at CHI 2022, many SVs did so to save the day. Thanks SVs you all are amazing!

Some venues just will need bifricating: most notably Interactivity. Watching a livestream of other people using a demo is less compelling than just watching a polished video of the demo and chatting with the authors and builders. Once upon a time there was a CHI video theather where we’d have popcorn and watch video demos. Perhaps bringing that back in some community chat space for live discussion might be the solution. Which brings me to perhaps one of my favorite things about CHI 2022: Discord.

Initially I’ll admit I didn’t want a Discord server (as I was focused on fighting platform creep). When weeks before launch it turned out the chat rooms in Hubb were not WCAG-2.1 AA compliant we added Discord (lead by Monica Pereira, Danilo Gasques, and Kashyap Todi who did amazing work setting it up, vetting attendees, and writing bots). Discord became the mechanism where people on site and people who were remote connected, chatted, complained, praised, and troubleshooted. It was kinda cool to see how quickly the community bloomed there. Pretty much the few voices I heard complain about Discord onsite just rejected using it or logging in.

Now at this point, you might say ‘Why not just let anyone ask a question and put all the remote attendees in a livestream room and nothing more?’ This seems simple but ultimately won’t work. First, to interact with the sessions (even if just asking a question) one would have to be registered for the conference (even if cheap or free) as that puts the person under our code of conduct. Second, the livestream platform would have to only allow those registered people in which would create another point of login or new logins to create for people (sound familiar?). Lastly and most importantly, this effectively walls off the remote viewers away from the local in-person attendees. The goal should be to blend spaces and people, not segregate them.There is the issue of the attendee who is onsite and “can’t be bothered with Discord” to which I’d just say the world has changed and it’s their loss; they get the lesser experience by not joining the discussion.

What About Future CHIs?

The good news here is the SIGCHI Programs App is now equipped to handle embeds too, so future conferences can offer a mostly “one login” experience as well as provide the outbound links to the individual platform tools. Many of the pipelines in our architecture offer reusable and easily scriptable datastreams. I’m working with the current SIGCHI VP of Operations (Hi Kash!) to build out a flexible path here. Not pictured in the architecture above is the SIGCHI QOALA app which links to PCS (our paper review system) allows conference chairs to design the sessions and layout the conference. If QOALA creates the embeds, live streams, and q&a rooms programmatically, then hundreds of hours of volunteer time can be saved. For example, imagine a talk is set for Monday morning but during planning that talk is moved to Wednesday afternoon. All the links and rooms and embeds around that talk have to be updated (and yes we did this manually in 2022). If QOALA can stand up the embeds, it can keep track of schedule changes and update things automatically. This architecture would take a new simplified form as seen in Figure 2. This would require only two logins: an ACM login and a Discord login. Both we can ensure will adhere to our privacy standards and the Discord can be shut down after the conference.

A workflow that goes from the left to right with local/remote presenters to a mixing board which forks to a in room projector and a YouTube stream embedded in the PWA. Viewer entry point is the PWA on the right of the diagram.
Figure 2: An ideal architecture, doable for future SIGCHI events, where we use our own web platform. Dashed line denotes possible embeds in the PWA to YouTube Stream and Slido.

In the early days of the pandemic, as SIGCHI VP of Operations, we worked hard to stand up Asynchronous Hybrid (with RecSys being the first on deck). Two years ago when we started planning, myself and Caroline Appert (the TPCs), and Simone Barbosa and Cliff Lampe (the GCs), and the rest of the CHI 2022 committee believed the path forward for hybrid is synchronous. With the successes and obstacles we faced in 2022, I still believe synchronous hybrid is the future. Moreso, by working with the EC on this solution, it allows all 24 SIGCHI conferences to follow the same mechanism and lets SIGCHI become a leading example for hybrid conferences with blended remote & local interactions.





General Program Hybrid Conference In-person conference

CHI2022 WrapUp

After a few weeks, we take the opportunity to look back and reflect on the CHI experience. 


More people reported cases of COVID infections than we had hoped. We always knew COVID infection was a risk at the conference, and took the steps we could – including having a strong online option for the conference.

As of writing, 127 people reported positive cases to the ACM. Of course, that number is likely higher – given that people may not have reported. Without asking people to report negative tests as well, we can’t really even generate a response rate. At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter if we’re talking about a 5% or 10% infection rate. Anyone getting sick is bad, and some realized their worst fears about in-person conferences. For everyone, we’ve reflected deeply on every cough, every moment of anxiety, and every hour stolen from already absent loved ones.

We could go back and forth about the steps we took to prevent COVID at the conference, or where the infections stemmed from. We’re not epidemiologists, so we’d be bad at that. There are really only two questions that matter: Should we have had an in-person conference? What should the next in-person conference do?

In terms of whether we should have had an in-person conference, we stand by our decision to have an in-person version of the conference. Everyone should be able to make the choices to protect their health without sacrificing their careers, so we need to put more thought into meaningful online experiences.  For advice for future conferences, it’s important to think about that hybrid experience and how the online experience creates value for people. In terms of future conferences meeting in person, we hope they have less infection than we saw. However, this may be the world we live in for a while – where we have to do our best to protect the safety of people in person, while realizing we have limited abilities to control outcomes.

How Hybrid Went

Our goal this year was to privilege a form of hybrid that emphasized synchronous presentation and interaction. We also wanted to allow both presenters and audience maximum flexibility, as we realized people would be deciding often at the last minute whether they would be in person or not. As with all decisions, we also prioritized accessibility as one of the major criteria that our system should have.

Frankly speaking, nothing worked as well as we hoped. The system was too clunky, and the flexibility we hoped for from AV turned mostly into points of potential failure. What worked and what didn’t? 

  • WORKED: The SIGCHI Progressive Web App. This app worked consistently and well. With some minor additions, it really could be a center for a conference’s hybrid strategy.
  • DID NOT WORK: Online platforms. People often got confused if they were in Hubb, or Zoom, or what. We had hoped we had found one vendor that would create a single online experience, but when that didn’t work, we had to pivot to other solutions in the moment to make our interaction goals work.
  • MIXED BAG: The AV set up. The AV industry has been hit hard by the pandemic. In addition, to save money we had hoped to use less staff and more volunteers. Overall, we spent 3x more on AV than any previous CHI – which is necessary because of the synchronous hybrid goal. Things got better quickly, but it was a rocky start.
  • WORKED: Discord. While it was “yet another platform”, it was free and worked consistently well.

There are teams at both the CHI Steering Committee and the SIGCHI Executive Committee post-gaming hybrid experiences and trying to make recommendations for the future. The scale of CHI is a challenge on many levels, but there are some consistent issues all conferences are facing.


This is an issue that surprised us – breakdowns in how we treated each other.

It’s interesting to think why this is. To some extent, norms have changed over the pandemic, often for the better. For example, people are more willing to say something if they feel uncomfortable. People have a better sense of what harassment is and feel more like they can report when conversations cross a line. That’s all good.

Another effect might be the general anxiety we feel from the ongoing pandemic expressing itself on underserving targets. The student volunteers were often the targets of bad behavior in the rooms they were helping to support. That’s never acceptable. Our hope is that this was unusual behavior shaped by stress, because we will not ever condone bad treatment of our SVs.

While some norms have seen positive change over time, some have changed for the worse. One of those we saw was the tendency to state things in sensationalist or absolutist terms in order to receive approbation. We see this all the time on social media, where signals of attention are poor so some people post the most extreme version of their message in order to get a reaction. 

Everyone deserves to feel safe at the CHI conference. No one should feel demeaned because of their country of origin, their research area, or their institutional affiliation among other things. While it’s a good thing that we raise critical points about issues in the tech industry, it’s possible to do so without demonizing or trying to score points. Whatever issues one has with any institution, the people at our conference who are part of that institution still deserve to feel safe and not demeaned. We will work better in the future to help our keynotes understand these values.

We continue to grow and learn to act better. This year tested and executed on our anti-harassment policies, but in that test we saw positive outcomes. Justice and safety for our members is a process, but we are encouraged by what parts of that process we saw.

Survey Results

A total of 749 people responded to the request to fill out the post-conference survey. 582 reported attending in person, 148 virtual, and 19 didn’t report their mode of attendance. This means that response rates for the virtual mode of the conference (~8%) are quite a bit worse than for those who attended the in-person mode (~29%). We don’t know why the response rates are so different.

A bar chart showing the frequency of Likert category responses to the question “How valuable was your CHI experience?” The pattern is that most people reported a high value in the conference.

One of the most essential questions we ask, and really the essential dependent variable we ask year-to-year is “How valuable was your CHI experience?” This is measured on a 5 point Likert scale where 1 is “Not at all valuable” and 5 is “Very Valuable”. When we collapse the modes of the conference, overall the ratings were fairly high. The median score is 4, and the mean is 4.27. The bar chart below shows the overall pattern.

A bar chart showing the frequency of Likert category responses to the question “How valuable was your CHI experience?” The pattern is that most people reported a high value in the conference.

The numbers look different when we compare the virtual and in-person modes. 


A bar chart showing the frequency of Likert category responses to the question “How valuable was your CHI experience?” The pattern is that most people reported a high value in the conference.


Alt text: a bar chart showing the frequency of Likert responses for in-person participants.

Descriptive StatsIn-PersonVirtual
N (Valid)576148
N (Missing)60
Mode 5.004.00

As usual with CHI, people value different parts of the conference. The chart below shows different ratings by different parts of CHI. It’s impossible to experience ALL of CHi, and in general people seemed pretty happy with the parts in which they participated.

 A series of stacked bar charts showing likert scale ratings for each technical program at CHI2022.

We asked people about how CHI2022 dealt with COVID-19. In general, people felt like the organizers did a decent job with the measures in place.

Q9. Do you agree or disagree that organizers adequately considered COVID-19 protocols at the convention center?

A horizontal bar chart showing likert responses to the question “Organizers adequately considered COVID-19 protocols.” The overall pattern is either agree or strongly agree to that statement.

In the open-ended responses, two possible different measures were mentioned. One was to encourage daily testing by participants. The second was to not offer food at breaks and receptions, given that sharing food obviated to some extent the benefits of masking. Participants also felt like they weren’t as careful as they could have been.

Q11. How informed did you feel regarding the conference’s COVID-19 protocols before attending the conference?

A horizontal bar chart showing the response frequencies to the question “I was informed regarding the conference’s COVID-19 protocols.”

There’s a lot more to the survey, all of which is being considered by the CHI Steering Committee and SIGCHI Executive Committee. For instance, having a cash bar was controversial. Some people loved it, some people felt like it didn’t go far enough in removing alcohol from the conference, and some people hated the move as punishing all attendees while not really preventing harassment. 


In summary, there are some things we’d like to change about how CHI2022 happened, given the clarity of being after the fact. However, we are also proud of the event that happened given the uncertainty, complexity and sheer difficulty of putting the event together during the pandemic. We want to end by appreciating the incredibly hard work of all of the volunteers who put time into the conference. This was very much like organizing 2.5 conferences, and it could not have happened without extraordinary effort by our organizing team.

Hybrid Conference

Allyship Crash Course, Quiz, and Fireside Chat

Allyship Crash Course, Quiz, and Fireside Chat

This ACM sigCHI 2022’s Allyship team is made up of Rina R. Wehbe, PhD (She/Her), Siobhan Day Grady, PhD (She/Her), and Christine Bauer PhD (She/Her).

We continued the initiatives created last year by Rina R. Wehbe as the Diversity Allyship Co-Chair of ACM SIGCHI 2021 Globalization Diversity and Inclusion (GDI) team with Nitesh Goyal, Maria Wolters, and Kirsten Ellis by maintaining and extending the YouTube Allyship Crash Course from 2021 for 2022.

In addition, we have also created a Quiz module to accompany the Crash Course. The quiz is intended to highlight some key points about Allyship based on the YouTube Allyship Crash Course. We decided to keep the quiz at a manageable length, as a result not all issues are highlighted. Instead, please treat this as another milestone on your own personal journal of Allyship to help you think about what it really means to be an ally. Use this form to get credit for passing the quiz, so you remember that you reached this personal milestone.

On Wednesday, May 4, 2022, at 14:15 – 15:30 (New Orleans, LA, local time), we will have the Allyship Fireside Chat. For the details (including the time in your timezone and the on-site location), have a look at the program:

In this fireside chat, we will discuss what it means to be an ally and to create a supportive CHI community. We aim at generating discussion and suggestions on how to be a supportive community member. Join the discussion with Rina R. Wehbe and invited discussants. You can use The Hub to post your questions.


Photo of Karen Holtzblatt

Karen Holtzblatt

Karen Holtzblatt is a thought leader, industry speaker, and author. As co-founder and CEO of InContext Design, Karen is the visionary behind Contextual Inquiry and Contextual Design, a user-centered design approach used by universities and companies worldwide. Recognized as a leader in requirements and design, Karen has been twice honored by the ACM SIGCHI. Karen is a member of the CHI Academy and the first recipient of the Lifetime Award for Practice presented in recognition of her impact on the field. Karen is also the Executive Director of WITops, a non-profit dedicated to understanding the issues faced by women in tech and finding practical interventions to retain women and help them thrive. The @Work Experience Framework identifies the six experiences women need in their everyday work experiences. WITops volunteer teams have also developed tested intervention techniques to encourage these experiences available at Karen has over 30 years’ experience presenting at conferences, coaching product teams, and advising universities on their HCI training.

Photo of Nazanin Andalibi

Nazanin Andalibi, PhD

Nazanin Andalibi, PhD (she/her/hers) is an Assistant Professor at the University of Michigan School of Information. Her research interests are in social computing and human-computer interaction. She examines the interplays between marginality and technology in sociotechnical contexts ranging from social media to artificial intelligence. She is committed to equity and justice in her research, teaching, mentoring, and service activities. She is also a member of the SIGCHI CARES team.

Photo of Christina Harrington

Christina Harrington

I am a designer and qualitative researcher who focuses on understanding and conceptualizing technology experiences that support health and wellness among older adults and individuals with disabilities. My research employs design as a catalyst for health equity and socially responsible technology experiences. I explore concepts of health through community-based participatory design and co-creation, considering health management as a sociotechnical experience. I believe that constructs of identity and social positioning impact our interactions with technology, including individual access to online information, the relevance of certain systems in our everyday lives, and the ways we accept certain interventions. Through participatory research methods I explore constructs of empowerment and access among communities marginalized along multiple dimensions of identity (age, race, ethnicity, income, class). I am an Assistant Professor in the HCI Institute at Carnegie Mellon University where I also have a courtesy appointment in the School of Design. I am also the Director of the Equity and Health Innovations Design Research Lab.

Photo of Nitesh Goyal

Nitesh Goyal

Tesh leads and manages Responsible AI Tools user research efforts at Google Research, and is also an Adjunct Professor at NYU. His works have been published at CHI, and CSCW and have received two best paper honorable mention awards at these venues. Tesh has been actively involved in the program and organization committees of multiple ACM SIGCHI conferences at various levels; including Globalization, Diversity and Inclusion efforts at CHI over the past years, and will serve as the Tech Program Co-Chair for CHI 2023.

Accessibility Hybrid Conference

Outstanding Access Issues with Hubb

Outstanding Access Issues with Hubb

While accessibility concerns played a huge role in choosing the digital platform for CHI 2022 and the accessibility chairs working tirelessly with Hubb to improve their system, we have not managed to have all identified issues ready in time for the conference. We do continue to check for and identify issues, and also improve the system where we can—please let us know if you encounter errors. We present here the list of outstanding issues so that attendants may identify how this potentially impacts their participation and contact the accessibility chairs to identify possible work-arounds.

  • General Issues
    • Generally viewing on a small screen or increasing the font for readability will result in text running off the page, which isn’t scrollable to be read, and other page elements appear to overlap.
  • Making appointments with others
    • The ordering of elements is confusing when scheduling meetings and on the message pages.
    • Meeting boxes act as buttons and the ‘+ Select’ button seems to be the same. It seems like it doesn’t matter where you click to get to the next screen, and for a screen reader it just mentions the larger box is the button.
    • The send invite button is at the top of the interface (next to the button labeled “select”), before the user enters the meeting details.
    • The cancel meeting option, though is activatable with a screen reader, does not announce itself as a link or a button unless it is pressed for the first time. After the first press, it announces itself as a link. This could result in the users assuming that the control is inaccessible.
    • When using the schedule an online meeting feature (the flow that lets us select one of pre-created zoom rooms), and selecting a room:
      • NVDA announces “table with 0 rows and 0 columns” when going through the rooms.
      • When going through each room, NVDA announces “button button”, 20, and “yes” or “no”. It is unclear what this information was mapping to.
  • Welcome Page
    • The settings icon on the teaser video can’t be selected using VO(control+option)+Space.
    • There is an H2 heading saying “Welcome To” but nothing else. This H2 heading is also above an H1 heading which says “CHI 2022”.
    • There are a bunch of links labeled “resized” after the text “FemWork: Critical Pivot towards design for inclusive labor features” in the main page.
  • Photobooth
    • When I navigate to the main content page it say “frame 0, main”. Participants then have to go into the frame before they can explore content.
    • The CHI logo within the frame has confusing alt text “Snapbar” rather than mentioning it is the CHI logo.
    • There’s a link with the text “here”. It should be more descriptive.
  • CHI Community
    • The heading in the main window goes from H2 to H1.
  • Program Page
    • There is an “add to schedule” clickable item in addition to the button that says “Add to schedule.” Same for remove.
    • In the program view that has multiple sessions (on or after May 2), each paper is tagged with a heading level 3. However, there is no such annotation for sessions, making it hard to jump between sessions.
  • Posters and Demos
    • There seems to be an unlabelled or empty link after each authors(s).
  • Notifications
    • Notifications message isn’t easy to access using a screen reader on mobile.
  • Mobile Use
    • When tapping through homepage, voiceover on mobile reads menus that aren’t visible because they are hidden behind the burger menu
Hybrid Conference

How to Hybrid at CHI

How to Hybrid at CHI

All of academia are all still figuring out what makes an effective hybrid conference. For CHI2022, we decided early on that there was no one platform or single channel where everyone would interact. While we are pushing the conference content through Hubb, we wanted to try a multi-pronged strategy for the other major activity of any conference – the social interaction.

Discord: If you are registered for the conference, you can join the CHI2022 Discord channel, where there are channels for every room at the conference, for seeking friends, for chatting about broader CHI issues and whatever else you’d like.

Twitter: Does any conference live without the tweet these days? There is always the #chi2022 conference hashtag, and the @acm_chi account to follow. Keep up-to-date on the latest drama! 😉 Our social media team is anxious to elevate you! Use #CHI2022nola for in-person experience what we should retweet and #CHI2022web for an online experience what we should retweet. Student volunteers use #CHI2022SV for their perspective on the conference.

LinkedIn: Yes, *that* LinkedIn. We have a CHI conference page on LinkedIn where we will share information ( and a CHI LinkedIn Group ( for you to follow.

Instagram: We want you to share your pictures of how you view CHI! Using the #chi2022 hashtag, share you set up at home, or your experience in New Orleans. Follow our account at

Facebook: For the classic, vanilla version of CHI, there is the CHI conference page ( If you also like to live dangerously, there’s CHI Meta (

Use one, use them all! If you are in New Orleans, or anywhere else in the world we want to see your pictures, how you’re experiencing CHI2022. We look forward to interacting with you on social media!

Hybrid Conference

February Site Visit Report

February Site Visit Report

This week, Cliff Lampe (General Chair), Ihudiya Finda Williams (Assistant to the General Chair), and Ayman Shamma (Technical Program Chair) traveled to New Orleans for a site visit supported by our support team from Executive Events. In between bites of New Orleans cuisine, we managed a lot of planning. Other members of the organizing team participated in spirit, supporting us at a distance and pre-loading us with good questions to bring to the meeting.

Cliff, Finda and Ayman at the New Orleans Convention Center.

Cliff, Ihudiya Finda, and Ayman at the New Orleans Convention Center.

The main thing we do at this visit is walk the site, and make sure we assign different rooms to different tasks. We want to make sure that we have rooms for things like religious observance, sensory breaks, childcare, operations – and of course technical content. We meet with the staff of the convention center to go over details like Internet access, sustainability practices, health and safety, and much more.

Ayman sitting in front of digital signage that says 'CHI22.'

Ayman sitting in front of digital signage that says “CHI22.”

While we are finalizing a couple of details on the experience, our goal has been to create great experiences for both in-person and online attendees. This means planning around AV and volunteer effort to help make sure all content is streamed in the way that ties together the two experiences. While we know there will be stumbles, we know the strong commitment of this community can carry us forward.

Workshops and courses are currently listed in their mode on the site. The solution we are working towards for the experience is to have live, synchronous sessions for both presenters and attendees for the technical content. Keynotes will present at the conference, with a livestream being simultaneously broadcast for remote viewers. As always, content will be made available on the SIGCHI YouTube channel as soon as it can be processed as well.

Ayman at the theater where keynotes will be presented.

Ayman at the theater where keynotes will be presented.

There are more details we are working hard to sort out, and more information coming soon. We hope to see you either in New Orleans or online to enjoy all of the work of the authors, reviewers, and volunteers who strive to make CHI happen during such turbulent times.

General Program Hybrid Conference

Hubb(le) Bubble – CHI2022 Updates

Hubb(le) Bubble – CHI2022 Updates

It’s been wonderful to see so many registrations to the conference since we opened the system, and exciting to see the previews of papers people are posting online. We’re working hard to figure out this very weird CHI. As always, we appreciate your patience and you should feel free to contact Simone or I if you have any questions.

Here are some updates about the conference!

We will be using Hubb as our online conference platform

Hubb ( is a system that has been used by comparable conferences like SIGGRAPH and SuperComputing. As a team, we looked at a dozen different platforms, with a very deep dive of a final list of four platforms. The decision teams were the general chairs, technical program chairs, and equity, justice and accessibility chairs – with plenty of feedback from others. Considerations included cost, accessibility features, stability, team experience and similar parameters.

Our volunteers are working hard with Executive Events to structure the site, streamline processes and make sure data is moving between all of our systems. SPOILER: things will go wrong. These platforms are often only roughly parallel to what we need. We’re doing everything we can to make the experience great for online participants – but we’re sure problems will arise. When they do, we’ll be there to listen and learn.

We will be using Discord to help build community and connect

Following the work SIGCHI has done in building communities on Discord, we will have a CHI2022 Discord channel where people will be able to interact more informally. That site will be limited to registered members of CHI and will go away after CHI is over. Research in online communities show ephemerality can be a powerful tool. We’ll still be interacting with you over Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and *of course* Hubb. Discord will be for fun and interaction.

We’re focusing our efforts on key content experiences

We had been planning to do a CHI preview event (a.k.a. the web exclusive) where some content was to be open and broadcasted a few weeks before the conference. While we were excited to offer a preview event, we decided to move to unlocking and opening some livestreams at the event itself by making them open for anyone to view, whether they are registered or not. Not only will these livestreams energize the conference with outreach, but they will also save time (for our volunteers and presenters) and reduce the overall monetary cost. We still have some details to work here, but we’ve removed references to the pre-conference event from our site. This does not affect the virtual courses and workshops that are scheduled before the main conference.

COVID Updates

At the time of this post, trends in the U.S. are looking decent. We’re now working on implementation details for our health and safety policies. For example, what full vaccination means, how to support testing, and what types of policies exist on the ground. We’ll be posting more about this after we have more conversations with some vendors we are working with.

General Program Hybrid Conference

Registration Now Open

Registration Now Open

We’re excited that registration for CHI2022 is now open for both the in-person conference as well as the online option. Here’s where to register:

A change this year is that we are following the example of CHI2021 in setting differential pricing by geographic region (see list of countries in each category below). We are extending that price reduction to the in-person conference fees in addition to maintaining the differential for the online conference registration rate.

We are still sorting out some of the COVID protocols that will be managed through registration, but we’ll make another announcement when we do.

We look forward to seeing you either online or in New Orleans in just a few months!

Frequently Asked Questions

  • What should I do if I run into problems with the registration? Please contact our registration team at
  • How do I get an invitation letter for a visa application? If you need an invitation letter for a visa application, you will have an opportunity to ask for it when registering. The registration team will email you an invitation letter within two business days after the registration is confirmed.

Categories (country list) 

Category C

All countries not listed in category H or I.

Category H

  • Albania
  • Algeria
  • Angola
  • Argentina
  • Armenia
  • Azerbaijan
  • Belarus
  • Belize
  • Bosnia
  • Botswana
  • Brazil
  • Bulgaria
  • Colombia
  • Cook Islands
  • Costa Rica
  • Cuba
  • Dominica
  • Dominican Republic
  • Ecuador
  • Fiji
  • French Guiana
  • Gabon
  • Georgia
  • Grenada
  • Guadeloupe
  • Guatemala
  • Guyana
  • Iran
  • Iraq
  • Jamaica
  • Jordan
  • Kazakhstan
  • Kosovo
  • Lebanon
  • Libya
  • North Macedonia
  • Malaysia
  • Maldives
  • Marshall Islands
  • Mauritius
  • Mexico
  • Montenegro
  • Namibia
  • Paraguay
  • Peru
  • Romania
  • Russian Federation
  • Saint Lucia
  • Samoa
  • Serbia
  • South Africa
  • Sri Lanka
  • St. Vincent
  • Suriname
  • Thailand
  • Tonga
  • Tunisia
  • Turkey
  • Turkmenistan
  • Tuvalu
  • Venezuela

Category I 

  • Afghanistan
  • Bangladesh
  • Benin
  • Bhutan
  • Bolivia
  • Burkina Faso
  • Burundi
  • C African Rp
  • Cambodia
  • Cameroon
  • Cape Verde
  • Chad
  • China
  • Comoros
  • Congo
  • Congo, Democratic Republic
  • Djibouti
  • Egypt
  • El Salvador
  • Eritrea
  • Eswatini
  • Ethiopia
  • Federal State of Micronesia
  • Gambia
  • Ghana
  • Guinea
  • Guinea-Bissau
  • Haiti
  • Honduras
  • India
  • Indonesia
  • Ivory Coast
  • Kenya
  • Kiribati
  • Kyrgyzstan
  • Lesotho
  • Liberia
  • Madagascar
  • Malawi
  • Mali
  • Mauritania
  • Mongolia
  • Morocco
  • Mozambique
  • Myanmar
  • Nepal
  • Nicaragua
  • Niger
  • Nigeria
  • North Korea
  • Pakistan
  • Palestine
  • Papua New Guinea
  • People’s Dem. Republic of Lao
  • Philippines
  • Republic Moldova
  • Rwanda
  • Sao Tome and Principe
  • Senegal
  • Sierra Leone
  • Solomon Isl
  • Somalia
  • South Sudan
  • Sudan
  • Swaziland
  • Syria
  • Tadzhikistan
  • Tanzania
  • Timor-Leste
  • Togo
  • Uganda
  • Ukraine
  • Uzbekistan
  • Vanuatu
  • Viet Nam
  • Yemen
  • Zambia
  • Zimbabwe
Hybrid Conference

Response to Open Letter Regarding CHI Format

Response to Open Letter Regarding CHI Format

On 9 October 2021, an Open Letter was given to the organizers of CHI2022 entitled “CHI 2022 Should Be a Virtual Only Event.” The letter was signed by 36 people. Issues in the open letter were addressed at two town halls scheduled to maximize time zone access, both in October of this year.

Town Hall A
Town Hall B

The authors of this letter have successfully advocated for many changes to the CHI conference over the years, which has made it more just. We thank them for bringing their concerns about these issues to us.

In the specifics of the letter, some things are under our purview while others are more under the auspices of the Steering Committee. Some are new problems caused by the pandemic, while others are long term issues we will continue to address no matter what. However, the broad point of the letter is much more important than the sum of its parts. My reframing of the letter is this:

“Deciding to hold an in-person event for CHI 2022 puts some people at risk, and historically excluded and marginalized people bear more of that risk than is just.”

We acknowledge that, and while the move to hybrid we hope increases equity, there are still gaps to overcome. We are of the mind that the future of CHI, for many reasons, is hybrid. The sooner we start trying out different hybrid formats and assessing their success the better able we will be to create meaningful hybrid experiences as a conference series.

Once again, we appreciate the authors and signers for bringing this issue to light, and for challenging us all to reconsider our options and decisions. Continually iterating on our decisions and the ethics around those decisions is the only way we will make forward progress as an organization.

Cliff Lampe
Simone Barbosa
CHI2022 General Chairs

Hybrid Conference

Student Volunteer

Student Volunteer

Become a Student Volunteer

The student volunteer organization is what keeps CHI running smoothly throughout the conference. You must have had student status for at least one semester during the academic year before CHI. We are more than happy to accept undergrad, graduate, and PhD students. We need friendly enthusiastic volunteers to help us out.

The SV lottery will be open on November 19, 2021, at and will be closed on February 17, 2022. Approximately 175 students will be chosen as SVs, including a number of online SVs and in-person SVs. All other students who registered will be assigned a position on the waitlist. For how the SV lottery works, please check the Student Volunteering page for more details. To sign up for the lottery, please visit, select the appropriate conference, and follow the steps to enroll.

We are accepting some ONLINE STUDENT VOLUNTEERS. You can apply for being either online or in-person SVs, or both. However, SVs cannot switch their participation mode in-between online and in-person. The registration form can be updated at any time before the lottery is run. We encourage all applicants to update the form once your participation mode is clearer later in the year.

The lottery result will be announced by February 24, 2022 for in-person SVs and March 24, 2022 for online SVs. Once you have a confirmed spot and registration is open you will be required to register, usually in two weeks. You will receive instructions on how to do this with a special code that will waive your registration fee for the conference. You will still be responsible for course/workshop fees.

Important Dates

All times are in Anywhere on Earth (AoE) time zone. When the deadline is day D, the last time to submit is when D ends AoE. Check your local time in AoE.

  • SV lottery registration opens: Friday, November 19, 2021
  • Close lottery
    • In-person SVs: Thursday, February 17, 2022
    • Online SVs: Thursday, March 17, 2022
  • Announce results
    • In-person SVs: Thursday, February 24, 2022
    • Online SVs: Thursday, March 24, 2022

What Will I Do When I Volunteer?

For CHI2022 SVs, you will agree to a volunteer contract, in which you agree to:

  • In-person SVs: Work at least 20 hours; Online SVs: Work at least 12 hours
  • Show up on time to tasks
  • Attend an orientation session
  • Arrive at the conference by Sunday morning at the latest (in person SVs only)

In return, we commit to:

  • For in-person SVs
    • Waive your registration fee
    • Provide 2 meals a day on site (breakfast and lunch)
    • Free SV t-shirt to be collected on site
    • Our fabulous SV thank-you party on Thursday night. When you are planning for your travel we highly recommend that you remember to leave on Friday or Saturday so you can attend the party. There is always food, drinks, dancing, and fun!
  • For online SVs
    • Waive your remote-participation attending registration
    • Free SV t-shirt shipped to you
    • An online SV party
  • More SV benefits TBA…

If you need to reach us, please always use the address so that both of us receive it. Reply-to-all on our correspondence so we all stay in the loop and can better help you.

A CHI 2022 note: With the rapid changing situation of the current COVID-19 pandemic and CHI 2022 going hybrid, there may be changes to the way the SV program will operate this year. We, the SV chairs, are monitoring the situation and will keep the community up to date on any changes to the SV program. If you have any comments or concerns, please feel free to email us at

Frequently Asked Questions

We get a lot of emails with the same kinds of questions, this is not a made up FAQ.

Q: I know the deadline for the lottery is passed, but I really, really want to be a student volunteer. Can you get me in?
A: You may go to at any time after the lottery is opened or even after it is run to put your name in the running. If the lottery has already been run your name will simply be added to the end of the waiting list. If you will be attending CHI anyway there is always a chance you may be able to be added to the last minute, you never know.

Q: I want to skip orientation, or work way less than 20 hours, or arrive on Monday, can I still be an SV?
A: No, sorry these are minimum expectations we expect from everyone. If after you commit extenuating circumstances appear (like volcanoes erupting and other strange things) please communicate with us (to All we ask is for you to communicate what your circumstances are as early as you realize a situation has come up.

Q: I didn’t get your emails and/or forgot to register by the deadlines you guys sent us and I lost my spot as an SV, can I get it back?
A: If this is due to you just not reading your emails, not taking care of your responsibilities, not keeping your email up to date in our system, forgetting or similar things then the answer is NO, no you may not. If there are extenuating circumstances, please communicate with us (to All we ask is for you to communicate what your circumstances are as early as you realize a situation has come up. (Yes, we’ll repeat this often).

Q: I was nominated for an SV spot by someone and got in, will I have to do the same kind of work as other SVs?
A: Yes, the obligations are the same.

We are looking forward to meeting all of you!

Bingjie Yu, University of Bath, Bath, UK
Ciabhan Connelly, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, U.S.