Skip to main content

Do We Know What the User Knows, and Does It Matter? The Epistemics of User Modelling

  • Conference paper
User Modeling

Part of the book series: International Centre for Mechanical Sciences ((CISM,volume 383))

Abstract

Whilst many user models can function perfectly adequately with a behavioural impression of the user, the provision of assistance in some task domains, notably design, requires a richer understanding, incorporating information about the user’s knowledge and beliefs. This raises a number of important and difficult questions: How can we know what the user knows, and how can we know that we know? We present evidence that the psychological view of human conceptual knowledge that underpins typical approaches to these questions is flawed. We argue that user knowledge can be modelled, up to a point, but that to ask whether or not we can know what the user knows is to misunderstand the question.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Brown, J. S., and Burton, R. R. (1978). Diagnostic models for procedural bugs in basic mathematical skills. Cognitive Science 2:155–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbus K., Gentner, D., and Law, K. (1995). MAC/FAC: A model of similarity based retrieval. Cognitive Science, 19:2:141–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentner, D., Ratterman, M., and Forbus, K. (1993). The roles of similarity in transfer. Cognitive Psychology 25: 524–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstone, R. L. (1994). The role of similarity in categorization. Cognition 52:125–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medin, D., and Ortony, A. (1989).What is psychological essentialism? In Vosniardou, S., and Ortony, A., eds., Similarity and Analogical Reasoning. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosch, E. (1978). Cognition and Categorisation. Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramscar, M., and Pain, H. (1996). Can a real distinction be made between cognitive theories of analogy and categorisation? Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramscar, M., Lee, J., and Pain, H. (1996). A cognitively based approach to computer integration for design systems. Design Studies 17:4:465–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Blackwell. Translated by Anscombe, G. E. M.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Wien

About this paper

Cite this paper

Ramscar, M., Pain, H., Lee, J. (1997). Do We Know What the User Knows, and Does It Matter? The Epistemics of User Modelling. In: Jameson, A., Paris, C., Tasso, C. (eds) User Modeling. International Centre for Mechanical Sciences, vol 383. Springer, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-2670-7_42

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-2670-7_42

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Vienna

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-211-82906-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-7091-2670-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics