Bera et al. (2011) Guidelines For Designing Visual Ontologies to Support Knowledge Identification

Bera, Palash and Burton-Jones, Andrew and Wand, Yair

Abstract

Organizations often provide workers with knowledge management systems to help them obtain knowledge they need. A significant constraint on the effectiveness of such systems is that they assume workers know what knowledge they need (they know what they don't know) when, in fact, they often do not know what knowledge they need (they don't know what they don't know). A way to overcome this problem is to use visual ontologies to help users learn relevant concepts and relationships in the knowledge domain, enabling them to search the knowledge base in a more educated manner. However, no guidelines exist for designing such ontologies. To fill this gap, we draw on theories of philosophical ontology and cognition to propose guidelines for designing visual ontologies for knowledge identification.

We conducted three experiments to compare the effectiveness of guided ontologies, visual ontologies that followed our guidelines, to unguided ontologies, visual ontologies that violated our guidelines. We found that subjects performed considerably better with the guided ontologies, and that subjects could perceive the benefits of using guided ontologies, at least in some circumstances. On the basis of these results, we conclude that the way visual ontologies are presented makes a difference in knowledge identification and that theories of philosophical ontology and cognition can guide the construction of more effective visual representations. Furthermore, we propose that the principles we used to create the guided visual ontologies can be generalized for other cases where visual models are used to inform users about application domains.

Citation Palash Bera, Andrew Burton-Jones, Yair Wand (2011). Guidelines For Designing Visual Ontologies to Support Knowledge Identification. MIS Quarterly, vol. 35 no. 4, pp. 883–908. DOI

BibTex entry for this article:

BibTex entry for this article:

@article{bera2011guidelines,
author = {Bera, Palash and Burton-Jones, Andrew and Wand, Yair},
doi = {10.1016/j.jen.2012.01.001},
issn = {0099-1767},
journal = {MIS Quarterly},
number = {4},
pages = {883--908},
title = {{Guidelines For Designing Visual Ontologies to Support Knowledge Identification}},
volume = {35},
year = {2011}
}

Key ideas

Organizations often provide knowledge workers with knowledge management systems (KMSs). … Although knowledge resources are designed to make up for users' lack of knowledge, this very lack of knowledge may prevent users from knowing what to look for. (p. 883)

References in bera2011guidelines

  • Agarwal, R., Sinha, A. P., and Tanniru, M. 1996. “Cognitive Fit in Requirements Modeling: A Study of Object and Process Methodologies,” Journal of Management Information Systems (13:2), pp. 137-164.
  • Angeles, P. 1981. Dictionary of Philosophy, New York: Harper Perennial.
  • Ashcraft, M. H. 2002. Cognition (3rd ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall.
  • Belkin, N. J., Oddy, R. N., and Brooks, H. M. 1982. “ASK for Information Retrieval. Part 1: Background and Theory,” Journal of Documentation (38:2), pp. 61-71.
  • Bera, P., Krasnoperova, A., and Wand, Y. 2010. “Using Ontology Languages for Conceptual Modeling” Journal of Database Management (21:1), pp. 1-28.
  • Blosch, M. 2001. “Pragmatism and Organizational Knowledge Management,” Knowledge and Process Management (8:1), pp. 39-47.
  • Bodart, F., Patel, A., Sim, A., and Weber, R. 2001. “Should Optional Properties Be Used in Conceptual Modeling? A Theory and Three Empirical Tests,” Information Systems Research (12:4), pp. 383-405.
  • Bunge, M. 1977. The Treatise on Basic Philosophy: Ontology (Volume 3), New York: D. Reidel Publishing.
  • Burton-Jones, A., and Meso, P. 2006. “Conceptualizing Systems for Understanding: An Empirical Test of Decomposition Principles in Object-Oriented Analysis,” Information Systems Research, (17:1), pp. 38-60. Burton-Jones, A., Wand, Y., and Weber, R. 2009. “Guidelines for Empirical Evaluations of Conceptual Modeling Grammars,” Journal of the Association for Information Systems (10:6), pp. 495-532.
  • Burton-Jones, A., and Weber, R. 1999. “Understanding Relation- ships with Attributes in Entity-Relationship Diagrams,”in Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Information Systems, P. De and J. I. DeGross (eds.), Charlotte, NC, pp. 214-228.
  • Cahn, D. D., and Frey, L. R. 1989. “Behavioral Impressions Asso- ciated with Perceived Understanding,” Perceptual and Motor Skills (69), pp. 1299-1302.
Keywords:

Design Science, knowledge identification, knowledge management system, knowledge work, visual ontologies

Print/export