Volgens Van Kemenade stuit certificering in het hoger onderwijs op het dilemma: verantwoorden of verbeteren? Rens onderzocht de rol van leidinggevenden in het accreditatieproces en meent dat leidinggevenden niet hoeven te kiezen tussen control en verbetering, maar dat het gaat om en/en. Een uitwisseling van argumenten.
The user’s experience with a recommender system is significantly shaped by the dynamics of user-algorithm interactions. These interactions are often evaluated using interaction qualities, such as controllability, trust, and autonomy, to gauge their impact. As part of our effort to systematically categorize these evaluations, we explored the suitability of the interaction qualities framework as proposed by Lenz, Dieffenbach and Hassenzahl. During this examination, we uncovered four challenges within the framework itself, and an additional external challenge. In studies examining the interaction between user control options and interaction qualities, interdependencies between concepts, inconsistent terminology, and the entity perspective (is it a user’s trust or a system’s trustworthiness) often hinder a systematic inventory of the findings. Additionally, our discussion underscored the crucial role of the decision context in evaluating the relation of algorithmic affordances and interaction qualities. We propose dimensions of decision contexts (such as ‘reversibility of the decision’, or ‘time pressure’). They could aid in establishing a systematic three-way relationship between context attributes, attributes of user control mechanisms, and experiential goals, and as such they warrant further research. In sum, while the interaction qualities framework serves as a foundational structure for organizing research on evaluating the impact of algorithmic affordances, challenges related to interdependencies and context-specific influences remain. These challenges necessitate further investigation and subsequent refinement and expansion of the framework.
LINK
It is argued that both continuous improvement and growth in one direction, are (sometimes partly) based on the illusion of control. It is precisely through our actions, by exerting as much control as possible over both natural and artificial processes, that we make things worse, often despite our good intentions. While the illusion of control makes us feel content with our lives, it does not contribute to a sustainable world in the long term. To believe in ones continuous improvement is to drastically overestimate ones own control, without considering the possibility of being wrong. Taking the hypothesis for granted in advance, hoping to arrive at a sustainable synthesis by chance, is like throwing stones at random to create Big Ben by chance. The casino might be more rational.
MULTIFILE
