NORDICHI

This volume contains the proceedings of the 6th NordiCHI conference on Human-Computer Interaction. NordiCHI is the main forum for human-computer interaction research in the Nordic countries. The first five NordiCHI conferences were held in Stockholm (2000), Aarhus (2002), Tampere (2004), Oslo (2006) and Lund (2008). This year's conference, held on October 16-20 in Reykjavik, is hosted by Reykjavik University and the University of Iceland.

The theme of the conference is Extending Boundaries. Understanding, respecting, crossing and expanding boundaries is a part of our daily lives. Boundaries underpin not only geographical and cultural differences between countries, but also differences between sectors and scientific disciplines. Understanding boundaries is an integral part of human computer interaction. It is a part of understanding how people behave and what they value, of designing technologies, of learning how people express their needs, intentions and feelings, of designing HCI technologies and of evaluating them. Selecting Extending boundaries as the theme of NordiCHI 2010, organizers want to encourage contributors and participants to consider HCI's boundaries, staying within them, or to think beyond them to address grand challenges.

The call for participation created an excellent response and we are happy to offer a high-quality programme. The programme combines five different categories of submissions: full papers, short papers, design cases, industrial experience presentations and interactive demonstrations. The industrial experience presentation category follows the initiative from NordiCHI 2006 and the design case category follows the initiative from NordiCHI 2008.

This year, 218 full papers were submitted, of which 60 were accepted for presentation at the conference. A further 188 short papers, 5 design cases and 3 interactive demos were submitted. The acceptance rate for full papers was 28% and 31% for short papers. The submitted papers represent 31 countries, with the accepted ones representing 22. All papers were reviewed by at least three independent reviewers; most had four reviews. All papers were discussed at the Programme Committee meeting; those for which reviewers were unanimous in their recommendations were accepted or rejected in accordance with those recommendations. Where there were divergent views amongst reviewers, the substantive details of the reviews were discussed in order to reach a decision; in a few cases, a further review of a paper was commissioned to ensure that decisions were based on the best information possible.