Electronic Business: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (4-Volumes) P247

Dialogue Act Modeling uses both views, because it aims to focus on both pragmatics and semantics of the system in WBIS analysis. It uses the pragmatic view in dialogue act modeling and the descriptive view in object modeling and behavior modeling. Part Two: Dialogue Act Modeling for Building Dialogue Act Model for the Web Site of WBIS To cope with the WBIS culture in WBIS analysis, a modeling technique is needed for capturing and specifying the interaction pattern (i.e., interac-tive communication) required by the user. Such user requirements are called communicational requirements in this approach. However, none of current modeling approaches (Conallen, 2003) has provided this needed technique, because they do not focus on communicational requirements. Although some lifecycle models for Web develop-ment such as ones presented by Burdman (1999), Fleming (1998), and Lynch and Horton (1999) have DGGUHVVHGWKHVSHFL¿FQHHGRI:HEVLWHVWKH\ have limited user input to such requirements. In terms of these approaches, Web developers only FDQJXHVVRULPDJLQHZKDWXVHUV¿QGHDV\RU confusing in interactive communication, but they cannot capture what the user actually wants. To overcome this problem, the dialogue act model-ing approach provides a dialogue act modeling technique that creates a dialogue act model for the Web site part of WBIS by WBIS analysis (see Figure 3). This modeling technique focuses on commu-nicational requirements and the pragmatic aspects of WBIS. It describes business participants as speakers and hearers of dialogues, performers of dialogue acts, and seekers of business information in the dialogue act model. (a) Communicational Requirements In traditional IS analysis, user requirements are eitherfunctional requirements (i.e., what the sys-tem needs to do) or nonfunctional requirements (i.e., what constraints are on the system, such as performance and security constraints). However, in WBIS analysis, users can make additional re-quirements for the Web site part of WBIS. They may provide their own opinions and judgments on layout and display of a Web site and request to develop the Web site of WBIS according to their needs (e.g., easy-to-understand and follow) rather than according to the developer’s need (e.g., easy-to-implement). To distinguish them from functional and nonfunctional requirements, Figure 3. Dialogue act modeling in WBIS analysis WBIS analysis with dialogue act modelling approach Dialogue act modelling WBIS developer creates WBIS user (speaker/ hearer) Dialogue act (responsibility/ commitment) Business contexts and states WBIS (speaker/hearer) Website part IS part (Dialogue act model) interact Dialogue Web page act Dialogue (obligation (communication) function) 2394 Dialogue Act Modeling they are called communicational requirements by this approach. Modeling communicational requirements can draw a developer’s attention to the user’s need for the Web site of WBIS at the early stage of development and avoid the WBIS FKDQJHVFDXVHGE\DGLI¿FXOWWRXVH:HEVLWHRI WBIS after development. The following user concerns about the WBIS Web site are considered communicational requirements of WBIS: be user-centered and not complicated and frustrating to use: The research on the use of the Web has found that errors occur frequently mainly because users GRQRWNQRZRUFDQQRW¿QGWKHULJKWZD\ to interact when communicating with the system. Therefore, it is very important to make the Web experience as predictable as possible and to create a predictable Web site that is understood quickly and easily used • Business contexts: They are the ranges of e-business and information resource man-agement. In WBIS, they are initiatives and entrances required by the user for starting interaction with the Web site. They can be EXVLQHVVDFWLYLWLHVVXFKDV³FDUIRUVDOH´RU EXVLQHVVLQGH[HVVXFKDV³FDUV´VHH)LJXUH Different business contexts may cover similar things or even another business context. For example, the car company may want a busi-QHVVFRQWH[W³FDUIRUVDOH´DQGLWVFXVWRP-HUVPD\ZDQWDEXVLQHVVFRQWH[W³FDUV´WKDW LQFOXGHV³FDUIRUVDOH´ • Dialogues: They are the conversations preferable to the user in a business context. The user wants to use them to communicate with the system interactively on the Web site and will consider them visible feedbacks from the system in a business context. For example, after car buyers enter into the EXVLQHVVFRQWH[W³FDUV´WKHV\VWHPGLVSOD\V WKHGLDORJXH³FDUOLVW´RQWKHVFUHHQDVWKH IHHGEDFNUHVXOWRIWKHGLDORJXHDFW³RIIHU car” demanded by car buyers (see Figure 7). Commitments of the user or the system VXFKDV³RIIHUFDU´FDQEHLGHQWL¿HGEDVHG on the dialogues. 7KHEHQH¿WVRIFDSWXULQJFRPPXQLFDWLRQDO by a user (Lazar & Norcio, 2000). Although Lazar and Norico (2000) pointed out that, in fact, the Web experience is inherently unpredictable due to the nature of the Web itself, we still can try to predict a user’s Web experience by understanding the user’s way of interacting with WBIS from the user’s point of view. This at least can reduce er-rors caused by a user’s misunderstanding of interaction. A successful Web site of WBIS must offer contents needed by users, and the content must be found easily by inter-active communication. Otherwise, it will leave users frustrated and possibly unable to achieve their goals (Preece et al., 1994). This requires the developer to understand communicational requirements deeply. • Recognition of feedbacks displayed on the computer screen as dialogue:Dix, Finlay, Abowd, and Beale (2004) emphasize that interactivity is at the heart of all modern interfaces and is important at many levels. Interaction between user and computer is affected by social and organizational fac-tors. Awareness of the factors can help to limit any negative effects on the interaction. %DU¿HOGVDLG “The system’s role in the interaction is to provide the user with information about the interaction. This requirements in WBIS analysis are expected to be the following: information, this communication between the system and the user, is feedback and it is what helps the user build up the model • The Web site of WBIS developed based on communicational requirements should that the designer wants to build up. … Feedback is new media means keeping the 2395 Dialogue Act Modeling user informed about what is going on” (p. +HGH¿QHGWKUHHIHHGEDFNV tion of functions. Navigation structures and user interfaces should be designed and implemented { Feedback after: The usershouldknow that the system heard their request and is doing it. When the request is done, the user should be made aware of this and see the results. { Feedback before: The system should tell the user what will be going on if the user takes a particular action. The user must be told what actions he or she can initiate, and it should be clear how he or she can initiate them. { Feedback during: The user should EHQRWL¿HGDERXWZKDWLVKDSSHQLQJ when it has started happening, how it is progressing, and when it is expected to ¿QLVKGXULQJJHQHUDWLRQRIIHHGEDFN based on communicational requirements. (b) Speech Act Theory and Interactive Communication Analysis Although there are many theoretical frameworks developed by researchers in social science for con-versation analysis, the language/action perspective KDVEHHQPRVWLQÀXHQWLDOLQKXPDQFRPSXWHULQWHU-action and applied as a social approach for analysis and design of computer-mediated conversations for people interacting with each other (Preece et al., 1994). For example, Winograd (1988) showed an approach that used this perspective to view languages as a means by which people act. This perspective often refers to the speech act theory GH¿QHGLQLWLDOO\E\$XVWLQIRUGHVFULELQJ Capture of communicational requirements helps to identify the feedbacks expected by the user for the business context and decide what the system needs to do for them. It has been known that some modeling approaches and techniques for traditional IS analysis, such as use case model- the phenomenon in a social society that people use speech to act; for example, demanding or promising something. The theory was expanded E\6HDUOHZLWKWKHGH¿QLWLRQRIDVSHHFK act with four different subacts: ing, object modeling, and behavior modeling with 80/WKH8QL¿HG0RGHOLQJ/DQJXDJH%RRFK et al., 2005), can be adopted in order to capture and specify functional and nonfunctional require-ments for the IS part of WBIS (Conallen, 2003). However, none of them can help to capture and specify communicational requirements for the Web site part of WBIS. Therefore, we investigated 1. Utterance acts with uttering words. 2. Prepositional acts with referring and predi-cating. 3. Illocutionary acts with stating, questioning, commanding, and promising. 4. Perlocutionary acts with causing an effect on hearers. a wide range of approaches and found that the Speech Act Theory (Austin, 1962) in the social science could help do this because dialogue means speech to act. According to the theory, a dialogue between a user and a system means one or more dialogue acts in an e-business society. This can help to analyze the role of the user and the system as well as user commitments and system obliga-tions. In WBIS design and implementation, a system obligation may mean a function of WBIS, and a user commitment may mean a precondi- The expanded theory considers an utterance as the speech within each turn (person A says something, then person B says something, then person A says something again, etc.) Often, the utterances of the conversation can be grouped into pairs: a question and an answer or a state-ment and an agreement. An utterance should be XQGHUVWDQGDEOHWRWKHOLVWHQHUDQGVKRXOGEHVXI¿-ciently unambiguous for the listener to understand (Dix et al., 2004). This means that the speaker 2396 Dialogue Act Modeling should be aware of the model of understanding the listener and vice versa. The speech act theory explains how people in VXEDFWVWKDWUHIHUWRWKHRQHVGH¿QHGE\6HDUOH (1969): a society use language for talking about events in the external world as observers and also for the communication act within the world as actors in the society (Agerfalk & Erisson, 2004). In com-SXWHUVRFLHW\,6ZDVHYHQGH¿QHGDVODQJXDJH systems in general used to perform communica-tion acts (Goldkuhl & Lyytinen, 1982). Current modeling approaches based on this theory include COMMODIOUS (Holm & Ljungberg, 1996), con-version-for-action schema (Winograd & Flores, 1987), DEMO (Dietz, 2001), and action-oriented conceptual modeling (Agerfalk & Erisson, 2004). 1. Utterance act is production and commu-nication of physical written messages such DV ³EX\ FDU´ GLVSOD\HG RQ WKH FRPSXWHU screen. 2. Prepositional act is performed by an object VXFKDV³FDU´DQGLWVDWWULEXWHV 3. Illocutionary act is performed by a business VHUYLFHDFWLYLW\VXFKDV³VHOOFDU´ 4. Perlocutionary actVXFKDV³EX\FDU´LV performed by the hearer. It has the effect on the business context. Application of these approaches in IS analysis has SURYHGWKDWWKLVWKHRU\FDQVXSSRUWVLJQL¿FDQW understanding of the pragmatic aspects of the system. This success has encouraged us to use this theory in WBIS analysis, because WBIS also uses a language on a Web site for interactive com-munication and other things such as demanding and promising something. However, current modeling approaches ob-serve interaction between users and IS in the developer’s perspective and regard it as input/ RXWSXWRIWKHV\VWHPVXFKDVGDWDÀRZVDQG communication acts as data transformations internal through different media such as a com-SXWHUVFUHHQ6XFKREVHUYDWLRQLVQRWVXI¿FLHQWLQ WBIS modeling because WBIS in general not only deals with data transformations but also provides business information and customer services. The interactive communication between the user and :%,6LVPRUHWKDQGDWDÀRZVEHFDXVHLWFDQPHDQ RWKHUWKLQJVVXFKDVLQIRUPDWLRQÀRZVHJFDU OLVWRUJDQL]DWLRQÀRZVHJVDOHVGHSDUWPHQW DQGVHUYLFHÀRZVHJEX\FDU7KHGLDORJXHDFW modeling approach treats the interactive com-PXQLFDWLRQDVGLDORJXHV,WGH¿QHVDVHTXHQFH RIGLDORJXHVDVDGLDORJXHÀRZDQGDVSHHFKDFW DVDGLDORJXHDFW,QDGGLWLRQLWGH¿QHVWKHIRXU The problem with the language/action per-spective in practice is that conversations may be vague and may result in misunderstandings and promises failure. But Flores (1988) suggested that people would be better at communicating with each other if the types of commitments were made explicit to all parties involved during conversa-tions. This means that if the modeling approach can make commitments of the user and the system explicitly during interaction, misunderstanding can be reduced. The dialogue act modeling ap-proach thus aims to capture and specify such commitments and make them visible on the WBIS Web site for avoiding misunderstanding and for increasing usability. (c) Dialogue Act Model and Dialogue Act Diagram The approach provided a dialogue act diagram (see Table 1) along with the dialogue act modeling technique as a notation representing the dialogue act model. In WBIS analysis, this diagram is produced while building the dialogue act model for the Web site part of WBIS. It provides a com-munication medium in order for the analyst and the user to decide communicational requirements for the Web site of WBIS. 2397 Dialogue Act Modeling 7DEOH1RWDWLRQDQGGH¿QLWLRQRIGLDORJXHDFWGLDJUDP (d) Impact of Dialogue Act Model on User Interface Design in WBIS Design Communication requirements have an impact on design of WBIS user interface (Web site), which often is regarded as a whole of the system by the user (Dix et al., 2004). The user’s metal model of IS has a critical impact on the user’s ability to use systems effectively (Szewczak & Snodgrass, 2002). Different users may have different ideas (user model) on how to reach the goal of their tasks within a business context, and ideally, the WBIS analyst should consider different alternatives of communicational requirements in dialogue act modeling. Then, the analyst should let the user compare the alternatives and choose the ones most appropriate for him or her. However, the problem with system modeling is that user modeling tech-niques have been developed in order to instantiate user models as part of computer systems, but as yet, there are no usable conceptual user modeling techniques (Preece et al., 1994). Most user model-ing relies on checklists of user characteristics but QRWRQLGHQWL¿FDWLRQRIXVHUUHVSRQVLELOLWLHVDQG commitments in use of the system. The dialogue act modeling aims to support user modeling by visualizing different scenarios of interaction explicitly using dialogue act diagrams. The user and the developer then can discuss the model together in front of the diagrams. Dialogue act modeling also intends to provide a basis for designing user interface elements such as dialogue boxes displayed on the computer screen. Johnson (2000) has explored the problem with the current graphic user interface design in his book: ³$SDUWLFXODUDQQR\LQJGHVLJQHUURURQHRIWHQ sees in this is dialog boxes that provide no way out other than a direction that users do not really want to go in. Often dialog boxes only seem to trap users and none of the choices is what the user wants” (p. 316). Such dialog boxes force users to stop thinking about their task and, instead, force 2398 ... - tailieumienphi.vn