Too much, too little, or just right? Ways explanations impact end users' mental models

Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing, VL/HCC

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 3-10

  Kulesza, Todd ^a   Stumpf, Simone ^b   Burnett, Margaret ^a   Yang, Sherry ^c   Kwan, Irwin ^a   Wong, Weng Keen ^a  

^a 1148 Kelley Engineering Center Corvallis   (United States)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c OREGON INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

end user debugging; explanations; intelligent agents; mental models; recommender systems

Indexed keywords

COST/BENEFIT; END USERS; EXPLANATIONS; INFORMATION TYPES; MENTAL MODEL; SOUNDNESS AND COMPLETENESS;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; PROGRAM DEBUGGING; RECOMMENDER SYSTEMS; VISUAL LANGUAGES;

INTELLIGENT AGENTS;

EID: 84891122976     PISSN: 19436092     EISSN: 19436106     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/VLHCC.2013.6645235     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Blackwell, A. (2002). First steps in programming: a rationale for attention investment models. In Proc. HCC, 2-10.
2. Bunt, A., Lount, M., & Lauzon, C. (2012). Are explanations always important? A study of deployed, low-cost intelligent interactive systems. In Proc. IUI, 169-178.
3. Carroll, J., & Rosson, M. (1987). Paradox of the active user. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), Interfacing Thought: Cognitive Aspects of Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 80-111). The MIT Press.
4. Cramer, H., Evers, V., Ramlal, S., Someren, M., Rutledge, L., Stash, N., et al. (2008). The effects of transparency on trust in and acceptance of a content-based art recommender. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 18(5), 455-496.
5. Craven, M., & Shavlik, J. (1997). Using neural networks for data mining. Future Generation Computer Systems, 13(2-3), 211-229.
6. Dunning, T. (1993). Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. Computational Linguistics, 19 (1), 61-74.
7. Hall, M., Frank, E., Holmes, G., Pfahringer, B., Reutemann, P., & Witten, I. H. (2009). The WEKA data mining software: an update. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 11(1), 10-18.
8. Herlocker, J., Konstan, J., & Riedl, J. (2000). Explaining collaborative filtering recommendations. In Proc. CSCW, 241-250.
9. Johnson-Laird, P. (1983). Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.
10. Kulesza, T., Burnett, M., Stumpf, S., Wong, W., Das, S., Groce, A., Shinsel, A., Bice, F., & McIntosh, K. (2011). Where are my intelligent assistant's mistakes? A systematic testing approach. In Proc. IS-EUD, 171-186.
11. Kulesza, T., Stumpf, S., Burnett, M., & Kwan, I. (2012). Tell me more?: the effects of mental model soundness on personalizing an intelligent agent. In Proc. CHI, 1-10.
12. Lim, B., & Dey, A. (2009). Assessing demand for intelligibility in context-aware applications. In Proc. Ubicomp, 195-204.
13. Lim, B., Dey, A., & Avrahami, D. (2009). Why and why not explanations improve the intelligibility of context-aware intelligent systems. In Proc. CHI, 2119-2128.
14. Norman, D. (1983). Some Observations on Mental Models. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mental Models. Psychology Press, 7-14.
15. Rosson, M., Carrol, J., & Bellamy, R. (1990). Smalltalk scaffolding: a case study of minimalist instruction. In Proc. CHI, 423-430.
16. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology. Handbook of Qualitative Research, 273-285.
17. Su, X., & Khoshgoftaar, T. (2009). A survey of collaborative filtering techniques. Advances in Artificial Intelligence, 2009(12), 1-19.
18. Tintarev, N., & Masthoff, J. (2011). Designing and evaluating explanations for recommender systems. Recommender Systems Handbook, 479-510.
19. Tullio, J., Dey, A., Chalecki, J., & Fogarty, J. (2007). How it works: a field study of non-technical users interacting with an intelligent system. In Proc. CHI, 31-40.
20. Wilson, A., Burnett, M., Beckwith, L., Granatir, O., Casburn, L., Cook, C., Durham, M., & Rothermel, G. (2003). Harnessing curiosity to increase correctness in end-user programming. In Proc. CHI, 305-312.