skip to main content
research-article

ForSense: Accelerating Online Research Through Sensemaking Integration and Machine Research Support

Published: 04 November 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Online research is a frequent and important activity people perform on the Internet, yet current support for this task is basic, fragmented and not well integrated into web browser experiences. Guided by sensemaking theory, we present ForSense, a browser extension for accelerating people’s online research experience. The two primary sources of novelty of ForSense  are the integration of multiple stages of online research and providing machine assistance to the user by leveraging recent advances in neural-driven machine reading. We use ForSense  as a design probe to explore (1) the benefits of integrating multiple stages of online research, (2) the opportunities to accelerate online research using current advances in machine reading, (3) the opportunities to support online research tasks in the presence of imprecise machine suggestions, and (4) insights about the behaviors people exhibit when performing online research, the pages they visit, and the artifacts they create. Through our design probe, we observe people performing online research tasks, and see that they benefit from ForSense’s integration and machine support for online research. From the information and insights we collected, we derive and share key recommendations for designing and supporting imprecise machine assistance for research tasks.

References

[1]
M. J. Adler and C. Van Doren. 2014. How to read a book: The classic guide to intelligent reading (Touchstone ed.).
[2]
Saleema Amershi, Dan Weld, Mihaela Vorvoreanu, Adam Fourney, Besmira Nushi, Penny Collisson, Jina Suh, Shamsi Iqbal, Paul N. Bennett, Kori Inkpen, Jaime Teevan, Ruth Kikin-Gil, and Eric Horvitz. 2019. Guidelines for human-AI interaction. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland, UK) (CHI’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13.
[3]
Michelle Q. Wang Baldonado and Terry Winograd. 1997. SenseMaker: An information-exploration interface supporting the contextual evolution of a user’s interests. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 11–18.
[4]
Benjamin B. Bederson. 2004. Interfaces for staying in the flow. Ubiquity 5, 27 (2004), 1.
[5]
Kirsten Boehner, Janet Vertesi, Phoebe Sengers, and Paul Dourish. 2007. How HCI interprets the probes. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1077–1086.
[6]
John Brooke. 2013. SUS: A retrospective. J. Usability Studies 8, 2 (Feb. 2013), 29–40.
[7]
Kelly Caine. 2016. Local standards for sample size at CHI. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA) (CHI’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 981–992.
[8]
Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2019. BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers). Association for Computational Linguistics, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 4171–4186.
[9]
Mira Dontcheva, Steven M. Drucker, Geraldine Wade, David Salesin, and Michael F. Cohen. 2006. Collecting and organizing web content. In Personal Information Management-Special Interest Group for Information Retrieval Workshop. 44–47.
[10]
Evernote. 2020. Evernote is the home for everything you need to remember, and everything you want to achieve.https://evernote.com/. Accessed October 2020.
[11]
Marti A. Hearst and Duane Degler. 2013. Sewing the seams of sensemaking: A practical interface for tagging and organizing saved search results. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Human-computer Interaction and Information Retrieval. 1–10.
[12]
Fred Hohman, Andrew Head, Rich Caruana, Robert DeLine, and Steven M. Drucker. 2019. Gamut: A design probe to understand how data scientists understand machine learning models. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland, UK) (CHI’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13.
[13]
Eric Horvitz. 1999. Principles of mixed-initiative user interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA) (CHI’99). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 159–166.
[14]
Shamsi T. Iqbal and Eric Horvitz. 2007. Disruption and recovery of computing tasks: Field study, analysis, and directions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 677–686.
[15]
Rune Møberg Jacobsen, Lukas Bjørn Leer Bysted, Patrick Skov Johansen, Eleftherios Papachristos, and Mikael B. Skov. 2020. Perceived and measured task effectiveness in human-AI collaboration. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI EA’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–9.
[16]
Melanie Kellar, Carolyn Watters, and Michael Shepherd. 2007. A field study characterizing web-based information-seeking tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58, 7 (2007), 999–1018.
[17]
Aniket Kittur, Andrew M. Peters, Abdigani Diriye, and Michael Bove. 2014. Standing on the schemas of giants: Socially augmented information foraging. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. 999–1010.
[18]
Gary Klein, Jennifer K. Phillips, Erica L. Rall, and Deborah A. Peluso. 2007. A Data-frame Theory of Sensemaking.Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJ, US, 113–155.
[19]
J. Knapp, J. Zeratsky, and B. Kowitz. 2016. Sprint: How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days. Simon & Schuster.
[20]
Simone Kriglstein and Gunter Wallner. 2005. HOMIE: An artificial companion for elderly people. In CHI’05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Portland, OR, USA) (CHI EA’05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2094–2098.
[21]
Rhema Linder, Nic Lupfer, Andruid Kerne, Andrew M. Webb, Cameron Hill, Yin Qu, Kade Keith, Matthew Carrasco, and Elizabeth Kellogg. 2015. Beyond slideware: How a free-form presentation medium stimulates free-form thinking in the classroom. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition. 285–294.
[22]
Jiasen Lu, Dhruv Batra, Devi Parikh, and Stefan Lee. 2019. ViLBERT: Pretraining Task-Agnostic Visiolinguistic Representations for Vision-and-Language Tasks. arxiv:1908.02265 [cs.CV]
[23]
Yoelle S. Maarek, Michal Jacovi, Menachem Shtalhaim, Sigalit Ur, Dror Zernik, and Israel Z. Ben-Shaul. 1997. WebCutter: A system for dynamic and tailorable site mapping. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 29, 8–13 (1997), 1269–1279.
[24]
Catherine C. Marshall and Sara Bly. 2005. Saving and using encountered information: Implications for electronic periodicals. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Portland, Oregon, USA) (CHI’05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 111–120.
[25]
P. H. Nguyen, K. Xu, A. Bardill, B. Salman, K. Herd, and B. L. W. Wong. 2016. SenseMap: Supporting browser-based online sensemaking through analytic provenance. In 2016 IEEE Conference on Visual Analytics Science and Technology (VAST). 91–100.
[26]
Notion. 2020. Notion: All in one workplace.https://www.notion.so/. Accessed October 2020.
[27]
I. Peters and P. Becker. 2009. Folksonomies: Indexing and Retrieval in Web 2.0. De Gruyter/Saur. 2009504190
[28]
Pinterest. 2020. Pinterest: Welcome to visual discovery. https://www.pinterest.com/. Accessed October 2020.
[29]
Peter Pirolli and Stuart Card. 2005. The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis. In Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligence Analysis, Vol. 5. McLean, VA, USA, 2–4.
[30]
Pocket. 2020. Pocket. https://app.getpocket.com/. Accessed October 2020.
[31]
Morgan N. Price, Bill N. Schilit, and Gene Golovchinsky. 1998. XLibris: The active reading machine. In CHI 98 Conference Summary on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Los Angeles, California, USA) (CHI’98). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 22–23.
[32]
Gonzalo Ramos, Christopher Meek, Patrice Simard, Jina Suh, and Soroush Ghorashi. 2020. Interactive machine teaching: A human-centered approach to building machine-learned models. Human-Computer Interaction 35, 5–6 (2020), 413–451.
[33]
Gonzalo Ramos, Felicia Ng, Nicole Sultanum, Chris Meek, Jina Suh, and Soroush Ghorashi. 2019. Do machine teachers dream of algorithms? Workshop on Human-Centric Machine Learning at the 33rd Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. (December 2019).
[34]
Pew Research. 2020. 53% of Americans Say the Internet Has Been Essential During the COVID-19 Outbreak. https://tinyurl.com/y7lvxmkr. Accessed October 2020.
[35]
Pew Research. 2020. Most Americans rely on their own research to make big decisions, and that often means online searches. https://tinyurl.com/yaay6vbr. Accessed September 2020.
[36]
Daniel M. Russell, Mark J. Stefik, Peter Pirolli, and Stuart K. Card. 1993. The cost structure of sensemaking. In Proceedings of the INTERACT’93 and CHI’93 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) (CHI’93). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 269–276.
[37]
M. C. Schraefel and Yuxiang Zhu. 2001. Interaction design for web-based, within-page collection making and management. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia. 125–125.
[38]
Monica C. Schraefel, Yuxiang Zhu, David Modjeska, Daniel Wigdor, and Shengdong Zhao. 2002. Hunter gatherer: Interaction support for the creation and management of within-web-page collections. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on World Wide Web. 172–181.
[39]
Chen Sun, Austin Myers, Carl Vondrick, Kevin Murphy, and Cordelia Schmid. 2019. VideoBERT: A Joint Model for Video and Language Representation Learning. arxiv:1904.01766 [cs.CV]
[40]
Emily Wall, Soroush Ghorashi, and Gonzalo Ramos. 2019. Using expert patterns in assisted interactive machine learning: A study in machine teaching. In Human-Computer Interaction - INTERACT 2019-17th IFIP TC 13 International Conference, Paphos, Cyprus, September 2–6, 2019, Proceedings, Part III. 578–599.
[41]
Christopher D. Wickens, Justin G. Hollands, Simon Banbury, and Raja Parasuraman. 2015. Engineering Psychology and Human Performance. Psychology Press.
[43]
Xiaolong Zhang, Yan Qu, C. Lee Giles, and Piyou Song. 2008. CiteSense: Supporting sensemaking of research literature. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Florence, Italy) (CHI’08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 677–680.
[44]
Luowei Zhou, Hamid Palangi, Lei Zhang, Houdong Hu, Jason J. Corso, and Jianfeng Gao. 2019. Unified Vision-Language Pre-Training for Image Captioning and VQA. arxiv:1909.11059 [cs.CV]

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems
ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems  Volume 12, Issue 4
December 2022
321 pages
ISSN:2160-6455
EISSN:2160-6463
DOI:10.1145/3561952
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 04 November 2022
Online AM: 11 May 2022
Accepted: 11 April 2022
Revised: 14 March 2022
Received: 30 July 2021
Published in TIIS Volume 12, Issue 4

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Human-AI collaboration
  2. sensemaking

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)199
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)14
Reflects downloads up to 18 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Full Text

View this article in Full Text.

Full Text

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media