REVIEW 3 cited by
Question-Driven Design Process for Explainable AI User Experiences
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
A pervasive design issue of AI systems is their explainability--how to provide appropriate information to help users understand the AI. The technical field of explainable AI (XAI) has produced a rich toolbox of techniques. Designers are now tasked with the challenges of how to select the most suitable XAI techniques and translate them into UX solutions. Informed by our previous work studying design challenges around XAI UX, this work proposes a design process to tackle these challenges. We review our and related prior work to identify requirements that the process should fulfill, and accordingly, propose a Question-Driven Design Process that grounds the user needs, choices of XAI techniques, design, and evaluation of XAI UX all in the user questions. We provide a mapping guide between prototypical user questions and exemplars of XAI techniques to reframe the technical space of XAI, also serving as boundary objects to support collaboration between designers and AI engineers. We demonstrate it with a use case of designing XAI for healthcare adverse events prediction, and discuss lessons learned for tackling design challenges of AI systems.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
From Following to Understanding: Investigating the Role of Reflective Prompts in AR-Guided Tasks to Promote Task Understanding
Embedding reflective prompts in AR instructions improved objective task understanding and increased voluntary information-seeking in a 16-person within-subject study.
-
Better Together? The Role of Explanations in Supporting Novices in Individual and Collective Deliberations about AI
A qualitative study finds modular explanations support shared understanding and argument-building in groups, while individuals engage more deeply and perform better on tasks, trading depth for exchange.
-
A Question Bank to Assess AI Inclusivity: Mapping out the Journey from Diversity Errors to Inclusion Excellence
A 253-question bank for assessing AI inclusivity, organized into five pillars, built from guidelines, literature, and LLM assistance, but validated only through AI-generated personas.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.