Pith. sign in

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

arxiv 2104.03483 v3 pith:MBKND5XQ submitted 2021-04-08 cs.HC cs.AI

classification cs.HCcs.AI
keywords designchallengesprocesstechniquesuserworkdesignersexplainable
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
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.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. From Following to Understanding: Investigating the Role of Reflective Prompts in AR-Guided Tasks to Promote Task Understanding

    cs.HC 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Embedding reflective prompts in AR instructions improved objective task understanding and increased voluntary information-seeking in a 16-person within-subject study.

  2. Better Together? The Role of Explanations in Supporting Novices in Individual and Collective Deliberations about AI

    cs.HC 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    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.

  3. A Question Bank to Assess AI Inclusivity: Mapping out the Journey from Diversity Errors to Inclusion Excellence

    cs.AI 2025-06 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    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.

Pith tools