Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
Intelligence analysts frequently find themselves in situations of high uncertainty and ambiguity. The characteristics of those situations force the analyst to rely on creative generation of plausible explanations – ‘storytelling’. We argue that current interaction design approaches obstruct the storytelling process and impede analysts to perform well in their analytical reasoning process. Our Fluidity and Rigour Model combines storytelling with the interaction methods that are needed to support the variety of reasoning and thinking involved in the analytical process. We further contribute with an outline of how the model has informed our designs in the VALCRI project.
Ashby, W. R. (1958). Requisite variety and its implications for the control of complex systems. Cybernetica, 1(2), 83–99.
Bederson, B. B. (2004). Interfaces for staying in the flow. Ubiquity, 2004(September), 1–8. CrossRef
Dykes, J. (2005). Facilitating interaction for geo-visualisation. In J. Dykes, A. M. MacEachren, & M.-J. Kraak (Eds.), Exploring geovisualization (pp. 265–292). Amsterdam: Elsevier. CrossRef
Elmqvist, N., Moere, A. V., Jetter, H.-C., Cernea, D., Reiterer, H., & Jankun-Kelly, T. (2011). Fluid interaction for information visualization. Information Visualization, 10(4), 327–340. CrossRef
Gerber, M., Wong, B. L. W., & Kodagoda, N. (2016). How analysts think: Intuition, leap of faith and insight. In In proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society 60th annual meeting (Vol. 60, p. 173). Washington, DC: SAGE Publications.
Heuer, R. J. J., & Pherson, R. H. (2014). Structured analytic techniques for intelligence analysis (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE CQ Press.
Hollnagel, E., & Woods, D. D. (2005). Joint cognitive systems: Foundations of cognitive systems engineering. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. CrossRef
Johansson, B. J. E. (2014). Agility in Command and Control - Functional Models of Cognition. In E. Svensson, S. Nählinder, & P. Berggren (Eds.), Assessing Command and Control Effectiveness: Dealing with a Changing World (pp. 177–192). Farnham, England: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
Josephson, J. R., & Tanner, M. C. (1996). Conceptual analysis of abduction. In J. R. Josephson & S. G. Josephson (Eds.), Abductive inference: Computation, philosophy, technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kalawsky, R. S. (2009). Gaining greater insight through interactive visualization: A human factors perspective. In R. Liere, T. Adriaansen, & E. Zudilova-Seinstra (Eds.), Trends in interactive visualization (pp. 119–154). London: Springer. CrossRef
Kirsh, D. (1995). Complementary strategies: Why we use our hands when we think. Paper presented at the seventeenth annual conference of the cognitive science society, July 22-25, 1995, University of Pittsburgh.
Kirsh, D., & Maglio, P. (1994). On distinguishing epistemic from pragmatic action. Cognitive Science, 18(4), 513–549. CrossRef
Klein, G. (2014). Seeing what others don’t: The remarkable ways we gain insights. London, England: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.Nicholas Brealey Publishing 2014. London: England.
Klein, G., Philips, J. K., Rall, E. L., & Peluso, D. A. (2007). A data-frame theory of sense-making. In R. R. Hoffman (Ed.), Expertise Out of Context: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Naturalistic Decision Making (pp. 113–155). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kodagoda, N., Attfield, S., Wong, B. L. W., Rooney, C., & Choudhury, T. (2013). Using Interactive Visual Reasoning to Support Sense-making: Implications for Design. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19(12), 2217–2226. CrossRef
Munzner, T. (2014). Visualization analysis and design. Boca Raton: A K Peters/CRC Press.
National Policing Improvement Agency. (2008). Practice Advice on Analysis. Specialist Operations Centre, Wyboston Lakes, Bedfordshire, UK: Association of Chief Police Officers.
Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Pike, W. A., Stasko, J., Chang, R., & O’Connell, T. A. (2009). The science of interaction. Information Visualization, 8(4), 263–274. CrossRef
Rooney, C., Attfield, S., Wong, B. L. W., & Choudhury, S. (2014). INVISQUE as a tool for intelligence analysis: The construction of explanatory narratives. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 30(9), 703–717. CrossRef
Shneiderman, B. (1994). Dynamic queries for visual information seeking. IEEE Software, 11(6), 70–77. CrossRef
Shneiderman, B. (1996). The eyes have it: A task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. In Proceedings 1996 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages (pp. 336–343).
Walton, D. N. (2005). Abductive reasoning. Tuscaloosa, Alabama: The University of Alambam Press.
Wong, B. L. W. (2016). Fluidity and rigour: Addressing the design considerations for OSINT tools and processes. In B. Akhgar, P. S. Bayerl, & F. Sampson (Eds.), Open source intelligence investigation: From strategy to implementation (pp. 167–189). Cham, Switzeland: Springer International Publishing AG. CrossRef
Wong, B. L. W., & Kodagoda, N. (2016). How analysts think: Anchoring, laddering and associations. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 60(1), 178–182. CrossRef
Wong, B. L. W., & Varga, M. (2012). Black holes, keyholes and Brown worms: Challenges in sense making. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 56(1), 287–291. CrossRef
- Supporting Variability in Criminal Intelligence Analysis: From Expert Intuition to Critical and Rigorous Analysis
B. L. William Wong
- Chapter 1