Cognitive ergonomics for data analysis

V. Kalakoski, A. Henelius, Emilia Oikarinen, Antti Ukkonen, K. Puolamäki
{"title":"Cognitive ergonomics for data analysis","authors":"V. Kalakoski, A. Henelius, Emilia Oikarinen, Antti Ukkonen, K. Puolamäki","doi":"10.1145/3335082.3335112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Today's ever-increasing amount of data places new demands on cognitive ergonomics and requires new design ideas to ensure successful human–data interaction. Our aim is to identify the cognitive factors that require attention when designing systems to improve decision-making based on large amounts of data. We designed an experiment that simulates the typical cognitive demands people encounter in data analysis situations. We demonstrate some essential cognitive limitations using a behavioural experiment with 20 participants. The studied task presented the participants with critical and noncritical attributes that contained information on two groups of people. They had to select the response option (group) with a higher frequency of critical attributes. The results showed that accuracy of judgement decreased as the amount of information increased, and that judgement was affected by irrelevant information. Our results thus demonstrate critical cognitive limitations when people utilise data and suggest a cognitive bias in data-based decision-making. Therefore, when designing for cognition, we should consider the human cognitive limitations that are manifested in a data analysis context and develop general cognitive ergonomics guidelines for design to support the utilisation of data and improve data-based decision-making.","PeriodicalId":279162,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 31st European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics","volume":"671 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 31st European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3335082.3335112","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Today's ever-increasing amount of data places new demands on cognitive ergonomics and requires new design ideas to ensure successful human–data interaction. Our aim is to identify the cognitive factors that require attention when designing systems to improve decision-making based on large amounts of data. We designed an experiment that simulates the typical cognitive demands people encounter in data analysis situations. We demonstrate some essential cognitive limitations using a behavioural experiment with 20 participants. The studied task presented the participants with critical and noncritical attributes that contained information on two groups of people. They had to select the response option (group) with a higher frequency of critical attributes. The results showed that accuracy of judgement decreased as the amount of information increased, and that judgement was affected by irrelevant information. Our results thus demonstrate critical cognitive limitations when people utilise data and suggest a cognitive bias in data-based decision-making. Therefore, when designing for cognition, we should consider the human cognitive limitations that are manifested in a data analysis context and develop general cognitive ergonomics guidelines for design to support the utilisation of data and improve data-based decision-making.
数据分析的认知工效学
当今不断增长的数据量对认知人体工程学提出了新的要求,并需要新的设计思想来确保成功的人与数据交互。我们的目标是确定在设计系统时需要注意的认知因素,以改善基于大量数据的决策。我们设计了一个实验,模拟人们在数据分析情境中遇到的典型认知需求。我们通过20名参与者的行为实验证明了一些基本的认知局限性。研究任务向参与者展示了包含两组人信息的关键和非关键属性。他们必须选择关键属性出现频率较高的响应选项(组)。结果表明,判断的准确性随着信息量的增加而降低,判断受到无关信息的影响。因此,我们的结果表明,当人们利用数据时,关键的认知局限性,并建议在基于数据的决策中存在认知偏差。因此,在为认知进行设计时,我们应该考虑在数据分析背景下表现出来的人类认知局限性,并制定通用的认知工效学设计指南,以支持数据的利用和改进基于数据的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信