Advertisement

User Methods and Approaches to Design Cognitive Systems

  • Heloisa CandelloEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9746)

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a review of existing literature on user research practices for designing cognitive systems. Three databases were analyzed to review the user methods and approaches researchers apply in this field. It was considered methods and approaches aimed to gather user information and provide insights to design systems that augment human knowledge. As a result 82 papers were examined. It was clear the design process of Cognitive systems depends of user input and interaction to be successful; therefore new research methods are necessary to investigate how design artifacts might influence in decision-making, considering user interpretation, trust and confidence.

Keywords

Design process Design methods Cognitive systems User experience 

References

  1. Antoniou, A., et al.: Modeling visitors’ profiles: a study to investigate adaptation aspects for museum learning technologies. J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 3(2), 1–19 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arshad, S.Z., et al.: Investigating user confidence for uncertainty presentation in predictive decision making. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Australian Special Interest Group for Computer Human Interaction. Parkville, VIC, Australia, ACM, pp. 352–360 (2015)Google Scholar
  3. Baillieul, J., et al.: Interaction dynamics: the interface of humans and smart machines. Proc. IEEE 100(3), 567–570 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baur, D. et al.: Rush: repeated recommendations on mobile devices. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Hong Kong, China, ACM, pp. 91–100 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. Behoora, I., Tucker, C.S.: Machine learning classification of design team members’ body language patterns for real time emotional state detection. Des. Stud. 39, 100–127 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. -Brereton, P., et al.: Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain. J. Syst. Softw. 80(4) 571--583 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. Chatley, A.R., et al.: Theatre as a discussion tool in human-robot interaction experiments - a pilot study. In: Third International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, ACHI 2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  8. Daradkeh, M.: Exploring the use of an information visualization tool for decision support under uncertainty and risk. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering & MIS 2015, Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 1–7. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  9. D'Mello, S., et al.: Gaze tutor: A gaze-reactive intelligent tutoring system. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 70(5) 377–398 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. Ferreira, N., et al.: Sample-oriented task-driven visualizations: allowing users to make better, more confident decisions. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, pp. 571–580. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  11. Forbes-Riley, K., Litman, D.: Designing and evaluating a wizarded uncertainty-adaptive spoken dialogue tutoring system. Comput. Speech Lang. 25(1), 105–126 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gustavsson, R., Lundberg, J.: Challenges and opportunities of sensor based user empowerment. In: IEEE International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control (ICNSC) (2011)Google Scholar
  13. Kelly, J.E., Hamm, S.: Smart Machines: IBM’s Watson and the Era of Cognitive Computing. Columbia Business School Publishing (2013)Google Scholar
  14. Kelly III, J., Hamm, S.: Smart Machines: IBM Watson and the Era of Cognitive Computing. Columbia University Press (2013)Google Scholar
  15. Ley, B., et al.: Supporting improvisation work in inter-organizational crisis management. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Austin, Texas, USA, ACM, pp. 1529–1538 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. Li, M., Mao, J.: Hedonic or utilitarian? Exploring the impact of communication style alignment on user’s perception of virtual health advisory services. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 35(2), 229–243 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lintern, G.: Cognitive systems and communication. Lang. Sci. 33(4), 708–712 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liu, L., et al.: Requirements cybernetics: elicitation based on user behavioral data. J. Syst. Softw. (2015)Google Scholar
  19. Lundberg, J., Gustavsson, R.: Challenges and opportunities of sensor based user empowerment. In: Networking, Sensing and Control (ICNSC) (2011)Google Scholar
  20. Meirelles, I.: Design for Information: An Introduction to the Histories, Theories, and Best Practices Behind Effective Information Visualizations. Rockport Publishers, Gloucester (2013)Google Scholar
  21. Nahamoo, D.: Cognitive computing journey. In: Proceedings of the First Workshop on Parallel Programming for Analytics Applications. ACM, pp. 63–64 (2014)Google Scholar
  22. Noor, A.K.: Potential of cognitive computing and cognitive systems. Open Eng. 5(1), 75–88 (2015)Google Scholar
  23. Oliver, D.M., et al.: Valuing local knowledge as a source of expert data: Farmer engagement and the design of decision support systems. Environ. Model Softw. 36, 76–85 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Piccardi, T., et al.: Towards crowd-based customer service: a mixed-initiative tool for managing Q&A sites. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Toronto, Ontario, Canada, ACM, pp. 2725–2734 (2014)Google Scholar
  25. Rieser, V., et al.: Natural language generation as incremental planning under uncertainty: adaptive information presentation for statistical dialogue systems. IEEE/ACM Trans. Audio, Speech, Lang. Process. 22(5), 979–994 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Robins, B., et al.: Human-centred design methods: Developing scenarios for robot assisted play informed by user panels and field trials. Int. J. Hum Comput Stud. 68(12), 873–898 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Slegers, K., et al.: EXC-Active collaboration in healthcare design: participatory design to develop a dementia care app. In: CHI 2013 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Paris, France, 475–480. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  28. Tinsley, H.E.A., Weiss, D.J.: Interrater reliability and agreement. In: Tinsley, H.E.A., Brown, S.D. (eds.) Handbook of Applied Multivariate Statistics and Mathematical Modeling, pp. 94–124. Academic Press, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  29. Tremblay, S., et al.: A multi-perspective approach to the evaluation of a portable situation awareness support system in a simulated infantry operation. In: Cognitive Methods in Situation Awareness and Decision Support (CogSIMA) (2011)Google Scholar
  30. Vasiliou, C., et al.: Understanding collaborative learning activities in an information ecology: A distributed cognition account. Comput. Hum. Behav. 41, 544–553 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vivacqua, A.S., et al.: BOO: Behavior-oriented ontology to describe participant dynamics in collocated design meetings. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(2), 1139–1147 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wilkinson, C.R., De Angeli, A.: Applying user centred and participatory design approaches to commercial product development. Des. Stud. 35(6), 614–631 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Xu, M., et al.: Intelligent agent systems for executive information scanning, filtering and interpretation: perceptions and challenges. Inf. Process. Manag. 47(2), 186–201 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yang, H., et al.: Understand users’ comprehension and preferences for composing information visualizations. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 21(1), 1–30 (2014)Google Scholar
  35. Zhou, F., Jiao, R.J.: An improved user experience model with cumulative prospect theory. Proc. Comput. Sci. 16, 870–877 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zimmerman, Z.: Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IBM ResearchSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations