The Use and Effects of Knowledge-Based System Explanations: Theoretical Foundations and a Framework for Empirical Evaluation

Abstract

Ever since MYCIN introduced the idea of computer-based explanations to the artificial intelligence community, it has come to be taken for granted that all knowledge-based systems (KBS) need to provide explanations. While this widely-held belief has led to much research on the generation and implementation of various kinds of explanations, there has been no theoretical basis to justify the use of explanations by KBS users. This paper discusses the role of KBS explanations to provide an understanding of both the specific factors that influence explanation use and the consequences of such use. The first part of the paper proposes a model based on cognitive learning theories to identify the reasons for the provision of KBS explanations from the perspective of facilitating user learning. Using the feedforward and feedback operators of cognitive learning the paper develops strategies for providing KBS explanations and classifies the various types of explanations found in current KBS applications. This second part of the paper presents a two-part framework to investigate empirically the use of KBS explanations. The first part of the framework focuses on the potential factors that influence the explanation seeking behavior of KBS users, including user expertise, the types of explanations provided and the level of user agreement with the KBS. The second part of the framework explores the potential effects of the use of KBS explanations and specifically considers four distinct categories of potential effects: explanation use behavior, learning, perceptions, and judgmental decision making.

ITSM ProcessGuide – A Process Guidance System for IT Service Management

“…In doing so, we contribute to research and practice. First, we apply the existing framework by Dhaliwal and Benbasat [5] in a real-world environment in the context of process guidance and demonstrate its validity. Second, as we intend to develop a design theory for PGS, we need to evaluate our design principles.…”

“…First, adapting the framework on explanation use by Dhaliwal and Benbasat [5] we developed a survey. In a longitudinal study we intend to invite approximately 300 IT users of the case company to complete the survey at two points of time: immediately before and three months after the ITSM ProcessGuide introduction.…”

“…Moreover, we assess the effects of process guidance on users' process model understanding, perceptions, process execution effectiveness as well as efficiency, and their process compliance performance. As a side effect, we also evaluate the proposed model by Dhaliwal and Benbasat [5] for the process guidance context in a real-world environment.…”

“…In the third cycle, a new artifact will be evaluated again by engaging employees of our case company in order to provide feedback on the artifact as proposed by Peffers et al [3]. Thereby, the evaluation of the third cycle bases on the framework for explanation use by Dhaliwal and Benbasat [5] as theoretical foundation. In addition, the artifact is used to solve existing challenges in the case company.…”

“…First, the article contributes to research since it applies the explanation use framework in a real-world environment for the context of process guidance. To our knowledge, such an application of Dhaliwal and Benbasat's [5] framework in the process guidance context is the first attempt to evaluate the effects of process guidance in a real-world setting. Second, our research aims to develop a design theory [6] for the class of Process Guidance Systems -which is at the moment missing in the current body of knowledge.…”