skip to main content
10.1145/2678025.2701371acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Improving Controllability and Predictability of Interactive Recommendation Interfaces for Exploratory Search

Authors Info & Claims
Published:18 March 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

In exploratory search, when a user directs a search engine using uncertain relevance feedback, usability problems regarding controllability and predictability may arise. One problem is that the user is often modelled as a passive source of relevance information, instead of an active entity trying to steer the system based on evolving information needs. This may cause the user to feel that the response of the system is inconsistent with her steering. Another problem arises due to the sheer size and complexity of the information space, and hence of the system, as it may be difficult for the user to anticipate the consequences of her actions in this complex environment. These problems can be mitigated by interpreting the user's actions as setting a goal for an optimization problem regarding the system state, instead of passive relevance feedback, and by allowing the user to see the predicted effects of an action before committing to it. In this paper, we present an implementation of these improvements in a visual user-controllable search interface. A user study involving exploratory search for scientific literature gives some indication on improvements in task performance, usability, perceived usefulness and user acceptance.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

iuifp0172-file3.mp4

mp4

20.6 MB

References

  1. Anick, P. Using terminological feedback for web search refinement: A log-based study. In Proc. of SIGIR, ACM (2003), 88--95. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Brooke, J. SUS - A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability Evaluation in Industry 189 (1996), 194.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Chau, D. H., Kittur, A., Hong, J. I., and Faloutsos, C. Apolo: making sense of large network data by combining rich user interaction and machine learning. In Proc. of CHI, ACM (2011), 167--176. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Cutting, D. R., Karger, D. R., Pedersen, J. O., and Tukey, J. W. Scatter/gather: A cluster-based approach to browsing large document collections. In Proc. of SIGIR, ACM (1992), 318--329. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Glowacka, D., Ruotsalo, T., Konyushkova, K., Athukorala, K., Kaski, S., and Jacucci, G. Directing exploratory search: Reinforcement learning from user interactions with keywords. In Proc. of IUI, ACM (2013), 117--128. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Karimzadehgan, M., and Zhai, C. Exploration exploitation tradeoff in interactive relevance feedback. In Proc. of CIKM, ACM (2010), 1397--1400. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Kelly, D., and Fu, X. Elicitation of term relevance feedback: An investigation of term source and context. In Proc. of SIGIR, ACM (2006), 453--460. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Kules, B., Wilson, M., Schraefel, M. C., and Shneiderman, B. From keyword search to exploration: How result visualization aids discovery on the web. Tech. rep., 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Parra, D., Brusilovsky, P., and Trattner, C. See what you want to see: Visual user-driven approach for hybrid recommendation. In Proc. of IUI, ACM (2014), 235--240. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Pu, P., Chen, L., and Hu, R. A user-centric evaluation framework for recommender systems. In Proc. of RecSys, ACM (2011), 157--164. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Radlinski, F., Kleinberg, R., and Joachims, T. Learning diverse rankings with multi-armed bandits. In Proc. of ICML, ACM (2008), 784--791. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Teevan, J., Alvarado, C., Ackerman, M. S., and Karger, D. R. The perfect search engine is not enough: a study of orienteering behavior in directed search. In Proc. of CHI, ACM (2004), 415--422. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Verbert, K., Parra, D., Brusilovsky, P., and Duval, E. Visualizing recommendations to support exploration, transparency and controllability. In Proc. of IUI, ACM (2013), pp. 351--362. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Weber, R. Basic content analysis. Sage, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Yee, K.-P., Swearingen, K., Li, K., and Hearst, M. Faceted metadata for image search and browsing. In Proc. of CHI, ACM (2003), 401--408. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Improving Controllability and Predictability of Interactive Recommendation Interfaces for Exploratory Search

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        IUI '15: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces
        March 2015
        480 pages
        ISBN:9781450333061
        DOI:10.1145/2678025

        Copyright © 2015 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 18 March 2015

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        IUI '15 Paper Acceptance Rate47of205submissions,23%Overall Acceptance Rate746of2,811submissions,27%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader