Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 7

1

Abduction and Web Interface Design


Lorenzo Magnani
University of Pavia, Italy
Emanuele Bardone
University of Pavia, Italy

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

According to Raskin (2000), the way we interact


with a product, what we do, and how it responds are
what define an interface. This is a good starting
definition in one important respect: an interface is
not something given or an entirely predefined property, but it is the dynamic interaction that actually
takes place when a product meets the users. More
precisely, an interface is that interaction that mediates the relation between the user and a tool explaining which approach is necessary to exploit its functions. Hence, an interface can be considered a
mediating structure.
A useful exemplification of a mediating structure
is provided by the so-called stigmergy. Looking at
the animal-animal interactions, Raskin (2000) noted
that termites were able to put up their collective nest,
even if they did not seem to collaborate or communicate with each other. The explanation provided by
Grass (Susi et al., 2001) is that termites do interact
with each other, even if their interactions are mediated through the environment. According to the
stigmergy theory, each termite acts upon the work
environment, changing it in a certain way. The
environment physically encodes and stores the
change made upon it so that every change becomes
a clue that affects a certain reaction from it. Analogously, we might claim that an interface mediates
the relation between the user and a tool affording
him or her to use it a certain way1. Understanding the
kind of mediation involved can be fruitfully investigated from an epistemological point of view. More
precisely, we claim that the process of mediating can
be understood better when it is considered to be an
inferential one.

Several researchers (Kirsh, 2004; Hollan et al.,


2000) recently have pointed out that designing interface deals with displaying as many clues as possible
from which the user can infer correctly and quickly
what to do next. However, although the inferential
nature of such interactions is acknowledged, as yet,
no model has been designed that takes it into account. For instance, Shneiderman (2002) has suggested that the value of an interface should be
measured in terms of its consistency, predictability,
and controllability. To some extent, these are all
epistemological values. In which sense could an
interaction be predictable or consistent? How can
understanding the inferential nature of human-computer interaction shed light on the activity of designing good interfaces? Here, the epistemological task
required is twofold: first, investigating what kind of
inference is involved in such an interaction; and
second, explaining how the analysis of the nature of
computer interaction as inferential can provide useful hints about how to design and evaluate inferences.
Regarding both of these issues, in both cases we
shall refer to the concept of abduction as a keystone
of an epistemological model.

THE ROLE OF ABDUCTION IN


DESIGNING INTERFACES
More than one hundred years ago, Charles Sanders
Peirce (1923) pointed out that human performances
are inferential and mediated by signs. Here, signs
can be icons or indexes but also conceptions, images,

Copyright 2006, Idea Group Inc., distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI is prohibited.

Abduction and Web Interface Design

and feelings. Analogously to the case of stigmergy,


we have signs or clues that can be icons but also
symbols and written words from which certain conclusions are inferred.
According to Peirce (1972), all those performances that involve sign activities are abductions.
More precisely, abduction is that explanatory process of inferring certain facts and/or hypotheses that
explain or discover some phenomenon or observation (Magnani, 2001). Abductions that solve the
problem at hand are considered inferences to the
best explanation. Consider, for example, the method
of inquiring employed by detectives (Eco & Sebeok,
1991). In this case, we do not have direct experience
of what we are taking about. Say, we did not see the
murderer killing the victim, but we infer that given
certain signs or clues, a given fact must have happened. Analogously, we argue that the mediation
activity brought about by an interface is the same as
that employed by detectives. Designers that want to
make their interface more comprehensible must
uncover evidence and clues from which the user is
prompted to infer correctly the way a detective
does; this kind of inference could be called inference to the best interaction.
We can conclude that how good an interface is
depends on how easily we can draw the correct
inference. A detective easily can discover the murderer, if the murderer has left evidence (clues) from
which the detective can infer that that person and
only that person could be guilty. Moreover, that an
inference could be performed easily and successfully also depends upon how quickly one can do that.
Sometimes, finding the murderer is very difficult. It
may require a great effort. Therefore, we argue that
how quick the process is depends on whether it is
performed without an excessive amount of processing. If clues are clear and well displayed, the inference is drawn promptly. As Krug (2000) put it, it
does not have to make us think.
In order to clarify this point even more, let us
introduce the important distinction between theoretical and manipulative abduction (Magnani, 2001).
The distinction provides an interesting account to
explain how inferences that exploit the environment
visually and spatially, for instance, provide a quicker
and more efficient response. Sentential and manipulative abductions mainly differ regarding whether
the exploitation of environment is or is not crucial to
2

carrying out reasoning. Sentential abduction mostly


refers to a verbal dimension of abductive inference,
where signs and clues are expressed in sentences or
in explicit statements. This kind of abduction has
been applied extensively in logic programming (Flach
& Kakas, 2000) and in artificial intelligence, in
general (Thagard, 1988).
In contrast, manipulative abduction occurs when
the process of inferring mostly leans on and is driven
by the environment. Here, signs are diagrams, kinesthetic schemas, decorated texts, images, spatial
representations, and even feelings. In all those examples, the environment embodies clues that trigger
an abductive process, helping to unearth information
that otherwise would have remained invisible. Here,
the exploitation of the environment comes about
quickly, because it is performed almost tacitly and
implicitly. According to that, many cases have demonstrated that problem-solving activities that use
visual and spatial representation, for instance, are
quicker and more efficient than sentential ones. We
can conclude that, in devising interfaces, designers
have to deal mostly with the latter type of abduction.
Interfaces that lean on the environment are tacit and
implicit and, for this reason, much quicker than
sentential ones.
Investigating the activity of designing interfaces
from the abductive epistemological perspective described previously helps designers in another important respect: how to mimic the physical world within
a digital one to enhance understanding.
As we have seen previously, the environment
enables us to trigger inferential processes. But it can
do that if and only if it can embody and encode those
signs from which one can infer what to do next. For
example, if you are working in your office and would
appreciate a visit from one of your colleagues, you
can just keep the door open. Otherwise, you can
keep it closed. In both cases, the environment encodes the clue (the door kept open or closed), from
which your colleagues can infer whether you do or
dont want to be disturbed. Here are the questions
we immediately come up: How can we encode those
signs in a digital world? How can we enrich it so as
to render it capable of embodying and encoding
clues?
The question of how to enrich the digital world
mainly concerns how to mimic some important features of the physical world in the digital one. Often,

Abduction and Web Interface Design

common people refer to an interface as easy-to-use,


because it is more intuitive. Therefore, we dont need
to learn how the product actually works. We just
analogically infer the actions we have to perform
from ordinary ones. More generally, metaphors are
important in interface design, because they relate
digital objects to the objects in the physical world,
with which the user is more familiar.2
In the history of computer interface, many attempts have been made to replace some physical
features in the digital one. For instance, replacing
command-driven modes with windows was one of
the most important insights in the history of technology and human-computer interaction (Johnson, 1997).
It enabled users to think spatially, say, in terms of
where is what I am looking for? and not in terms of
Wat sequence of letters do I type to call up this
document?
Enriching the digital world deals to some extent
with faking, transforming those features embedded
in the physical world into illusions. For example,
consider the rule of projection first invented by
Filippo Brunelleschi and then developed by such
painters as Leon Battista Alberti and Leonardo da
Vinci. In Peircean terms, what these great painters
did was to scatter those signs to create the illusion of
three-dimensional representations. It was a trick that
exploited the inferential nature of visual construction
(Hoffman, 1998). 3
Now, the question is, how could we exploit inferential visual dimensions to enhance the interaction in
the digital world? In the window metaphor, we do not
have rooms, edges, or folders, such as in the physical
world. They are illusions, and they are all produced
by an inferential (abductive) activity of human perception analogously to what happens in smashing
three to two dimensions. Here, we aim at showing
how visual as well as spatial, temporal, and even
emotional abductive dimensions can be implemented
fruitfully in an interface. Roughly speaking, we argue

that enriching the digital world precisely means


scattering clues and signs that in some extent fakes
spatial, visual, emotional, and other dimensions,
even if that just happens within a flat environment.
We argued that the nature of signs can be verbal
and symbolic as well as visual, spatial, temporal, and
emotional. In correspondence with these last cases,
one can recognize three abductive dimensions: visual, spatial, and emotional abduction.4 We will
discuss each of them in detail, providing examples
taken from Web designs.

Abductive Inference
Visual dimension is certainly one of the most ubiquitous features in Web interaction. Users mainly
interact with Web pages visually (Kirsh, 2004;
Shaik et al., 2004). Here, signs and clues are colors,
text size, dotted lines, text format (e.g., bold, underline, italics); they convey visual representations and
can assign weight and importance to some specific
part. Consider, for example, the navigation menu in
Figure 1.
Here, colors, capital letters, and text size provide
visual clues capable of enhancing the processing of
information. The attention immediately is drawn to
the menu header that represents its content (conference and research); capital letters and colors
serve this function.
Then, the dotted list of the same color of the
menu header informs the user about the number of
the items. Hence, the fact that items are not marked
visibly as menu headers gives a useful overview
(Figure 2). Once the user has chosen what to see
(conference or research), he or she can proceed to
check each item according to his or her preference
(Figure 3).
In this example, the user is guided to draw the
correct inference; it enables the user to understand
what he or she could consult.

Figure 1.
CONFERENCES:

MBR98
MBR01
MBR04
E-CAP2004_ITALY

RESEARCH

Logic
Philosophy of Science
Epistemology and Foundations of Mathematics
Visual and spatial reasoning

Abduction and Web Interface Design

Figure 2.
CONFERENCES:

Figure 3.
RESEARCH

MBR98
MBR01
MBR04
E-CAP2004_ITALY

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Spatial Abductive Inference

In contrast, consider, for example, the same


content represented in Figure 4.
In this case, even if the content is identical, the
user does not have any visual clue to understand
what he or she is going to consult. The user should
read all the items to infer and, hence, to understand,
that he or she could know something about past and
future conferences and about the research topics. If
one stopped the users reading after the third item
(MBR04), the user could not infer that this page
deals also with philosophy of science, with epistemology, and so forth. The user doesnt have enough
clues to infer that. In contrast, in the first example,
the user is informed immediately that this Web site
contains information about conferences and research.

As already mentioned, the windows metaphor is


certainly one of the most important insights in the
history of interface technology. This is due to the
fact that, as Johnson maintains, it enables the user to
think in terms of where is what I am looking for?
and not in terms of what sequence of letters do I
type to call up this document? as in a command line
system (Johnson, 1997). The computer becomes a
space where one can move through just doubleclicking on folders or icons, or dragging them. The
difference is described well in Figure 5 and Figure 6.
In Figure 5, the file named note.txt is deleted by
dragging it to the bin (i.e., the task of deleting is
accomplished by a movement analogous to that used
in the physical setting). Whereas, in Figure 6, the
task is carried out by typing a command line composed by the command itself (rm, which stands for
remove) and the file to be deleted (note.txt).
In designing Web pages, spatial dimension can be
mimicked in other ways. One of the most well known
examples is represented by the so-called tab. Tabs
usually are employed in the real world to keep track
of something important, to divide whatever they
stick out of into a section, or to make it easy to open
(Krug, 2000). In a Web site, tabs turn out to be very

Abduction and Web Interface Design

Figure 7.

important navigation clues. Browsing a Web site,


users often find themselves lost. This happens especially when the Web pages they are consulting do not
provide spatial clues from which the user can easily
infer where he or she is. For instance, several Web
sites change their layout almost on every page; even
if provided with a navigation menu, they are not
helpful at all. In contrast, tabs enhance spatial
inference in one important respect.
Consider the navigation bar represented in Figure 7.
In this example, when the user is visiting a certain
page (e.g., a homepage) (Figure 7), the correspondent tab in the navigation bar becomes the same
color of the body page. As Krug (2000) noted, this
creates the illusion that the active tab actually moves
to the front. Therefore, the user immediately can
infer where he or she is by exploiting spatial relations
in terms of background-foreground.

Emotional Abductive Inference


Recently, several researchers have argued that
emotion could be very important to improve usability
(Lavie & Tractinsky, 2004; Norman, 2004; Schaik &
Ling, 2004). The main issue in the debate is how
could emotionally evocative pages help the user to
enhance understanding?
Here, abduction once again may provide a useful
framework to tackle this kind of question. As Peirce
Figure 8.

(1923) put it, emotion is the same thing as a hypothetic


inference. For instance, when we look at a painting,
the organization of the elements in colors, symmetries, and content are all clues that trigger a certain
reaction.
Consider, for example, the way a computer program responds to the user when a forbidden operation is trying to be performed. An alert message
suddenly appears, often coupled with an unpleasant
sound (Figure 8).
In this case, the response of the system provides
clues (sounds and vivid colors such as red or yellow)
from which we can attribute a certain state to the
computer (being upset) and, hence, quickly react to
it. Moreover, engaging an emotional response renders that reaction instantaneous; before reading the
message the user already knows that the operation
requested cannot proceed. Thus, a more careful
path can be devised. Exploiting emotional reactions
also can be fruitful in another respect. It conveys a
larger amount of information. For instance, university Web sites usually place a picture of some
students engaged in social activity on their homepage.
This does not provide direct information about the
courses. However, this triggers a positive reaction in
connection with the university whose site is being
visited. Any way icons are drawn aims at emotionally affecting the user. Even if they do not strictly
resemble the physical feature, they can prompt a
reaction. Consider the icon in Figure 9.
The winded envelope suggests rapidity, quickness, and all the attributes that recall efficiency and
trustworthiness.

FUTURE TRENDS
In the last section, we have tried to provide a sketch
about the role of abduction in human-computer
interaction. Several questions still remain. We have
illustrated some examples related to visual, spatial,
and emotional abduction. However, other abductive
Figure 9.

Abduction and Web Interface Design

aspects can be addressed. For instance, it would be


useful to investigate the temporal dimension. How is
it possible to keep good track of the history of a
users actions?
Another question is related to the role of metaphors and analogies in designing interfaces. We
have pointed out that metaphors are important in
interface design, because they relate the digital
objects to the objects in the physical world. However, the physical objects that we may find in the real
world also are cultural ones; that is, they belong to a
specific cultural setting. Something that is familiar in
a given context may turn out to be obscure or even
misleading in another one. Here, the task required is
to investigate how cultural aspects may be taken into
account to avoid misunderstandings.

CONCLUSION
In this article, we have claimed that interfaces play
a key role in understanding the human-computer
interaction. Referring to it as a mediating structure,
we also have shown how human-computer interactions can be understood better using an inferential
model. The interface provides clues from which the
user can infer correctly how to cope with a product.
Hence, we have referred to that inferential process
as genuinely abductive. In the last section, we
suggested possible future trends relying on some
examples from Web interfaces design.

Hoffman, D. D. (1998). Visual intelligence. New


York: W. W. Norton.
Hollan, J., Hutchins, E., & Kirsh, D. (2000). Distributed cognition: Toward a new foundation for
human-computer interaction research. Retrieved
from http://hci.ucsd.edu/lab/publications.htm
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Johnson, S. (1997). Culture interface. New York:
Perseus Books Group.
Kirsh, D. (2004). Metacognition, distributed cognition and visual design. Retrieved from http://
consci.ucsd.edu/~kirsh/publications.html
Krug, S. (2000). Dont make me think. New York:
New Riders Publishing.
Lavie, T., & Tractinsky, N. (2004). Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of Web
sites. International Journal Human-Computer
Studies, 60, 269-298.
Magnani, L. (2001). Abduction, reason, and science: Processes of discovery and explanation.
New York: Kluwer Academic.
Norman, D. (2004). Emotional design: Why we
love (or hate) everyday things. New York: Basic
Books.
Peirce, C. S. (1923). Chance, love and logic.
Philosophical essays. New York: Harcourt.

REFERENCES

Peirce, C. S. (1972). Charles S. Peirce: The essential writings. New York: Harper & Row.

Collins, D. (1995). Designing object-oriented interfaces. Benji/Lamming Addison-Wesley.

Raskin, J. (2000). The humane interface. New


York: Addison-Wesley.

Eco, U., & Sebeok, T. (Eds.). (1991). The sign of


three: Dupin, Holmes, Pierce. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Shneiderman, B. (2002). Leonardos laptop. Human needs and the new computing technologies.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Flach, P., & Kakas, A. (2000). Abductive and


inductive reasoning: Essays on their relation
and integration. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.

Susi, T., & Ziemke, T. (2001). Social cognition,


artefacts, and stigmergy. Journal of Cognitive
Systems Research, 2, 273-290.

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The echological approach to


visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Thagard, P. (1988). Computational philosophy of


science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Abduction and Web Interface Design

Thagard, P., & Shelley, C.P. (1997). Abductive


reasoning: Logic, visual thinking, and coherence. In
M. L. Dalla et al. (Eds.), Logic and scientific
method (pp. 413-427). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
van Schaik, P., & Ling, J. (2004). The effects of
screen ratio on information retrieval in Web pages.
Computers in Human Behavior. Display, 24, 187195.

Interface: The way a user interacts with a


product, what he or she does, and how it responds.
Mediating Structure: What coordinates the
interaction between a user and a tool providing
additional computational resources that simplify the
task.
Stigmergy: The process that mediates the interaction between animals and animals through the
environment and provides those clues from which
any agent is able to infer what to do next.

KEY TERMS
Abduction: The explanatory process of inferring certain facts and/or hypotheses that explain or
discover some phenomenon or observation.

ENDNOTES
1

Affordance: Can be viewed as a property of an


object that supports certain kinds of actions rather
than others.
Enriching Digital World: The process of embedding and encoding those clues or signs within an
interface from which the user is enabled to exploit
the functionalities of a certain product.
Inference to the Best Interaction: Any interface provides some clue from which the user is
enabled to perform the correct action in order to
accomplish tasks with a product. The process of
inferring the correct action can be called inference
to the best interaction.

The concept of affordance is akin to that of


stigmergy. We might say that the change stored
within the environment affords a certain reaction rather than others. For more information
about the concept of affordance, see Gibson
(1979).
There are several problems related to metaphors in interface design. For further information on this topic, see Collins (1995).
About the inferential role of perception, see
Thagard and Shelley (1997).
For further details about visual, spatial, and
temporal abduction, see Magnani (2001). About
emotion as an abductive inference, see Peirce
(1972).