USING ETHNOGRAPHY IN BE DESIGN OF AN EXPLANATION SYSTEM

Authors
Citation
De. Forsythe, USING ETHNOGRAPHY IN BE DESIGN OF AN EXPLANATION SYSTEM, Expert systems with applications, 8(4), 1995, pp. 403-417
Citations number
46
Categorie Soggetti
Operatione Research & Management Science","System Science","Engineering, Eletrical & Electronic","Computer Science Artificial Intelligence
ISSN journal
09574174
Volume
8
Issue
4
Year of publication
1995
Pages
403 - 417
Database
ISI
SICI code
0957-4174(1995)8:4<403:UEIBDO>2.0.ZU;2-Z
Abstract
In order for knowledge-based explanation systems to be acceptable, the y must be useful and understandable to users. This implies that first, they should satisfy, users' information needs and rake account of the ir perspective; and second, they should be able to engage in dialogue with users. Much more progress has been made toward meeting the second condition than the first. Systems are still being produced that can e ngage in dialogue with users, but whose design reflects no systematic investigation of what people actually want (or need) to know about a g iven domain. Such lack of attention to the information needs of potent ial users is bound to limit the utility of any system, Because this is sue relates to the concerns of social science as well as artificial in telligence, social scientists can help designers address it. One way o f obtaining reliable data on the needs and characteristics of future u sers is ethnography, an anthropological method for gathering data in c omplex real-world settings. This article discusses some of the ways in which ethnography can contribute to the design process, drawing examp les from an ongoing project to build an explanation system in migraine . Four aspects of our experience in using ethnography in the design pr ocess are discussed: rethinking basic design assumptions, investigatin g information needs, addressing the problem of perspective, and develo ping explanatory material. Based on this experience, the article concl udes with the suggestion that the concept of explanation needs to be b roadened still further to include more types of knowledge in the dialo gue.