Journal of
Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics
HOME   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   RELATED PUBLICATIONS   |   SEARCH     CONTACT US
 



ISSN: 1690-4524 (Online)


Peer Reviewed Journal via three different mandatory reviewing processes, since 2006, and, from September 2020, a fourth mandatory peer-editing has been added.

Indexed by
DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals)Benefits of supplying DOAJ with metadata:
  • DOAJ's statistics show more than 900 000 page views and 300 000 unique visitors a month to DOAJ from all over the world.
  • Many aggregators, databases, libraries, publishers and search portals collect our free metadata and include it in their products. Examples are Scopus, Serial Solutions and EBSCO.
  • DOAJ is OAI compliant and once an article is in DOAJ, it is automatically harvestable.
  • DOAJ is OpenURL compliant and once an article is in DOAJ, it is automatically linkable.
  • Over 95% of the DOAJ Publisher community said that DOAJ is important for increasing their journal's visibility.
  • DOAJ is often cited as a source of quality, open access journals in research and scholarly publishing circles.
JSCI Supplies DOAJ with Meta Data
, Academic Journals Database, and Google Scholar


Listed in
Cabell Directory of Publishing Opportunities and in Ulrich’s Periodical Directory


Published by
The International Institute of Informatics and Cybernetics


Re-Published in
Academia.edu
(A Community of about 40.000.000 Academics)


Honorary Editorial Advisory Board's Chair
William Lesso (1931-2015)

Editor-in-Chief
Nagib C. Callaos


Sponsored by
The International Institute of
Informatics and Systemics

www.iiis.org
 

Editorial Advisory Board

Quality Assurance

Editors

Journal's Reviewers
Call for Special Articles
 

Description and Aims

Submission of Articles

Areas and Subareas

Information to Contributors

Editorial Peer Review Methodology

Integrating Reviewing Processes


How Does Logical Dynamics Assist Interdisciplinary Education and Research in Addressing Cognitive Challenges?
Mengqin Ning, Jiahong Guo
(pages: 1-6)

Inter-Corrective Meta-Dialogue on Constructive Impact of Trans-disciplinary Communication in Modern Education
Vinod Kumar Verma
(pages: 7-9)

Intergenerational Learning for Older and Younger Employees: What Should Be Done and Should Not?
Gita Aulia Nurani, Ya-Hui Lee
(pages: 10-15)

On the Ontological Notion of Education
Jeremy Horne
(pages: 16-24)

Research-Based Learning in Intergenerational Dialogue and Its Relationship to Education
Sonja Ehret
(pages: 25-29)

Role-Playing in Education: An Experiential Learning Framework for Collaborative Co-design
Cristo Leon, James Lipuma, Sirimuvva Pathikonda, Rafael Arturo Llaca Reyes
(pages: 30-38)

The Emergent Role of Artificial Intelligence as Tool in Conducting Academic Research
Bilquis Ferdousi
(pages: 39-46)

The Impact of Cybernetic Relationships Between Education and Work-Based Learning
Birgit Oberer, Alptekin Erkollar
(pages: 47-51)

The Notions of Education and Research
Nagib Callaos, Jeremy Horne
(pages: 52-62)

Towards Sustainable Legal Education Reform: Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Approaches in Albania's Justice System
Adrian Leka, Brunilda Haxhiu
(pages: 63-67)

Transdisciplinary Research and the Gift Economy
Teresa Henkle Langness
(pages: 68-75)


 

Abstracts

 


ABSTRACT


Towards Multimodal Error Management:Experimental Evaluation of User Strategies in Event of Faulty Application Behavior in Automotive Environments

Gregor McGlaun, Frank Althoff, Manfred Lang, Gerhard Rigoll


In this work, we present the results of a study analyzing the reactions of subjects on simulated errors of a dedicated in-car interface for controlling infotainment and communication services. The test persons could operate the system, using different input modalities, such as natural or command speech as well as head and hand gestures, or classical tactile paradigms. In various situational contexts, we scrutinized the interaction patterns the test participants applied to overcome different operation tasks. Moreover, we evaluated individual user behavior concerning modality transitions and individual fallback strategies in case of system errors. Two different error types (Hidden System Errors and Apparent System Errors) were provoked. As a result, we found out that initially, i.e. with the system working properly, most users prefer tactile or speech interaction. In case of Hidden System Errors, mostly changes from speech to tactile interaction and vice versa occurred. Concerning Apparent System Errors, 87% of the subjects automatically interrupted or cancelled their input procedure. 73% of all test persons who continued interaction, when the reason for the faulty system behavior was gone, strictly kept the selected modality. Regarding the given input vocabulary, none of the subjects selected head or hand gesture input as the leading fallback modality.

Full Text