Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3640543.3645168acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

Annota: Peer-based AI Hints Towards Learning Qualitative Coding at Scale

Published: 05 April 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Learning qualitative analysis requires personalized feedback and in-depth discussion not possible for educators to provide in a large course, resulting in many students obtaining only a shallow exposure to qualitative user research and interpretative skills. To overcome this challenge, we introduce a learnersourcing method that builds on the Dawid-Skene expectation maximization (EM) algorithm to generate peer-based AI hints that support students in one aspect of qualitative analysis: determining what sentences are relevant to the research question. After one annotation round, class-wide annotations are used to predict relevant sentences and to generate hints prompting students to revisit missed or incorrectly annotated sentences. An in-the-wild deployment within a large course (N=122) showed that our algorithm converged to comparatively high accuracy despite noisy student labels, and after only ∼ 20 students. An analysis of student interviews found that peer-based AI hints helped improve understanding of research questions, led to more careful examination of transcript annotations, and improved understanding of when they were over-annotating or under-annotating.

References

[1]
[n. d.]. ATLAS.ti | The #1 Software for Qualitative Data Analysis. https://atlasti.com
[2]
[n. d.]. MAXQDA | All-In-One Qualitative & Mixed Methods Data Analysis Tool. https://www.maxqda.com/
[3]
[n. d.]. NVivo. https://lumivero.com/products/nvivo/
[4]
2016. FACT SHEET: President Obama Proposes New "First Job" Funding to Connect Young Americans with Jobs and Skills Training to Start Their Careers. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/02/04/fact-sheet-president-obama-proposes-new-first-job-funding-connect-young
[5]
Thomas Bailey, Katherine Hughes, and Tavis Barr. 2000. Achieving scale and quality in school-to-work internships: Findings from two employer surveys. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 22, 1 (2000), 41–64.
[6]
Lecia Barker. 2009. Student and faculty perceptions of undergraduate research experiences in computing. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) 9, 1 (2009), 1–28.
[7]
Sarah Bawabe, Laura Wilson, Tongyu Zhou, Ezra Marks, and Jeff Huang. 2021. The UX Factor: Using Comparative Peer Review to Evaluate Designs through User Preferences. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW2 (2021), 1–23.
[8]
Michael Bernstein. 2023. Teaching HCI Foundations and Frontiers. https://medium.com/@msbernst/teaching-hci-foundations-and-frontiers-76bb22616e0d
[9]
John Seely Brown, Allan Collins, and Paul Duguid. 1989. Situated cognition and the culture of learning. 1989 18, 1 (1989), 32–42.
[10]
Julia Cambre, Scott Klemmer, and Chinmay Kulkarni. 2018. Juxtapeer: Comparative peer review yields higher quality feedback and promotes deeper reflection. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13.
[11]
Kathy Charmaz. 2014. Constructing grounded theory. sage.
[12]
Nan-chen Chen, Rafal Kocielnik, Margaret Drouhard, Vanessa Peña-Araya, Jina Suh, Keting Cen, Xiangyi Zheng, Cecilia R Aragon, and V Peña-Araya. 2016. Challenges of applying machine learning to qualitative coding. In ACM SIGCHI Workshop on Human-Centered Machine Learning.
[13]
Kabdo Choi, Hyungyu Shin, Meng Xia, and Juho Kim. 2022. AlgoSolve: Supporting subgoal learning in algorithmic problem-solving with learnersourced microtasks. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–16.
[14]
Elizabeth F Churchill, Anne Bowser, and Jennifer Preece. 2016. The future of HCI education: a flexible, global, living curriculum. interactions 23, 2 (2016), 70–73.
[15]
Kevin Crowston, Xiaozhong Liu, and Eileen E Allen. 2010. Machine learning and rule-based automated coding of qualitative data. proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 47, 1 (2010), 1–2.
[16]
Mary Cummings. 2004. Automation bias in intelligent time critical decision support systems. In AIAA 1st intelligent systems technical conference. 6313.
[17]
Sayamindu Dasgupta, William Hale, Andrés Monroy-Hernández, and Benjamin Mako Hill. 2016. Remixing as a pathway to computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. 1438–1449.
[18]
Alexander Philip Dawid and Allan M Skene. 1979. Maximum likelihood estimation of observer error-rates using the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics) 28, 1 (1979), 20–28.
[19]
John Dewey. 1986. Experience and education. In The educational forum, Vol. 50. Taylor & Francis, 241–252.
[20]
Berkeley J Dietvorst, Joseph P Simmons, and Cade Massey. 2015. Algorithm aversion: people erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 144, 1 (2015), 114.
[21]
Jie Gao, Kenny Tsu Wei Choo, Junming Cao, Roy Ka-Wei Lee, and Simon Perrault. 2023. CoAIcoder: Examining the Effectiveness of AI-assisted Human-to-Human Collaboration in Qualitative Analysis. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (2023).
[22]
Simret Araya Gebreegziabher, Zheng Zhang, Xiaohang Tang, Yihao Meng, Elena L Glassman, and Toby Jia-Jun Li. 2023. Patat: Human-ai collaborative qualitative coding with explainable interactive rule synthesis. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–19.
[23]
Elena L Glassman, Aaron Lin, Carrie J Cai, and Robert C Miller. 2016. Learnersourcing personalized hints. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work & social computing. 1626–1636.
[24]
Philip J Guo, Julia M Markel, and Xiong Zhang. 2020. Learnersourcing at scale to overcome expert blind spots for introductory programming: A three-year deployment study on the python tutor website. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale. 301–304.
[25]
Björn Hartmann, Daniel MacDougall, Joel Brandt, and Scott R Klemmer. 2010. What would other programmers do: suggesting solutions to error messages. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1019–1028.
[26]
Irving L Janis. 2008. Groupthink. IEEE Engineering Management Review 36, 1 (2008), 36.
[27]
W Brad Johnson. 2002. The intentional mentor: Strategies and guidelines for the practice of mentoring.Professional psychology: Research and practice 33, 1 (2002), 88.
[28]
Andreas Kaufmann, Ann Barcomb, and Dirk Riehle. 2020. Supporting Interview Analysis with Autocoding. In HICSS. 1–10.
[29]
Juho Kim 2015. Learnersourcing: improving learning with collective learner activity. Ph. D. Dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
[30]
Juho Kim, Philip J Guo, Carrie J Cai, Shang-Wen Li, Krzysztof Z Gajos, and Robert C Miller. 2014. Data-driven interaction techniques for improving navigation of educational videos. In Proceedings of the 27th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. 563–572.
[31]
David A Kolb. 2014. Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT press.
[32]
Chinmay E Kulkarni, Michael S Bernstein, and Scott R Klemmer. 2015. PeerStudio: rapid peer feedback emphasizes revision and improves performance. In Proceedings of the second (2015) ACM conference on learning@ scale. 75–84.
[33]
David T Lee, Emily S Hamedian, Greg Wolff, and Amy Liu. 2019. Causeway: Scaling situated learning with micro-role hierarchies. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12.
[34]
Christophe Lejeune. 2011. From normal business to financial crisis... and back again. An illustration of the benefits of Cassandre for qualitative analysis. In Forum: Qualitative Sozialforschung, Vol. 12. Institut fur Klinische Sychologie and Gemeindesychologie, Germany.
[35]
Yvonna S Lincoln and Egon G Guba. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. sage.
[36]
Chi-Jung Lu and Stuart W Shulman. 2008. Rigor and flexibility in computer-based qualitative research: Introducing the Coding Analysis Toolkit. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches 2, 1 (2008), 105–117.
[37]
Megh Marathe and Kentaro Toyama. 2018. Semi-automated coding for qualitative research: A user-centered inquiry and initial prototypes. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–12.
[38]
Jean Piaget, Margaret Cook, 1952. The origins of intelligence in children. Vol. 8. International Universities Press New York.
[39]
Quizlet. 2023. Quizlet: Learning tools, flashcards, and textbook solutions. https://quizlet.com/. Accessed: 2023-09-05.
[40]
Tim Rietz and Alexander Maedche. 2021. Cody: An AI-based system to semi-automate coding for qualitative research. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–14.
[41]
Wendy Roldan, Xin Gao, Allison Marie Hishikawa, Tiffany Ku, Ziyue Li, Echo Zhang, Jon E Froehlich, and Jason Yip. 2020. Opportunities and challenges in involving users in project-based HCI education. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–15.
[42]
Johnny Saldaña. 2021. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2021), 1–440.
[43]
Michelle Salmona, Eli Lieber, and Dan Kaczynski. 2019. Qualitative and mixed methods data analysis using Dedoose: A practical approach for research across the social sciences. Sage Publications.
[44]
Scratch. 2023. Scratch - Imagine, Program, Share. https://scratch.mit.edu/. Accessed: 2023-08-13.
[45]
Rhea Sharma, Atira Nair, Ana Guo, Dustin Palea, and David T Lee. 2022. “It’s usually not worth the effort unless you get really lucky”: Barriers to Undergraduate Research Experiences from the Perspective of Computing Faculty. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research-Volume 1. 149–163.
[46]
Natasha Singer. 2019. Top Universities Join to Push Public Interest Technology. The New York Times (March 2019). https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/11/technology/universities-public-interest-technology.html
[47]
David Tinapple, Loren Olson, and John Sadauskas. 2013. CritViz: Web-based software supporting peer critique in large creative classrooms. Bulletin of the IEEE Technical Committee on Learning Technology 15, 1 (2013), 29.
[48]
Lev Semenovich Vygotsky and Michael Cole. 1978. Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.
[49]
Sarah Weir, Juho Kim, Krzysztof Z Gajos, and Robert C Miller. 2015. Learnersourcing subgoal labels for how-to videos. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work & social computing. 405–416.
[50]
Lauren Wilcox, Betsy DiSalvo, Dick Henneman, and Qiaosi Wang. 2019. Design in the HCI classroom: Setting a research agenda. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 871–883.
[51]
Joseph Jay Williams, Juho Kim, Anna Rafferty, Samuel Maldonado, Krzysztof Z Gajos, Walter S Lasecki, and Neil Heffernan. 2016. Axis: Generating explanations at scale with learnersourcing and machine learning. In Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale. 379–388.
[52]
Tongshuang Wu, Haiyi Zhu, Maya Albayrak, Alexis Axon, Amanda Bertsch, Wenxing Deng, Ziqi Ding, Bill Guo, Sireesh Gururaja, Tzu-Sheng Kuo, 2023. LLMs as Workers in Human-Computational Algorithms? Replicating Crowdsourcing Pipelines with LLMs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.10168 (2023).
[53]
Ziang Xiao, Xingdi Yuan, Q Vera Liao, Rania Abdelghani, and Pierre-Yves Oudeyer. 2023. Supporting Qualitative Analysis with Large Language Models: Combining Codebook with GPT-3 for Deductive Coding. In Companion Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. 75–78.
[54]
Jasy Liew Suet Yan, Nancy McCracken, and Kevin Crowston. 2014. Semi-automatic content analysis of qualitative data. IConference 2014 Proceedings (2014).

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
IUI '24: Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces
March 2024
955 pages
ISBN:9798400705083
DOI:10.1145/3640543
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 05 April 2024

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. AI-assisted human-to-human collaboration
  2. learnersourcing
  3. learning qualitative analysis

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

IUI '24
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 746 of 2,811 submissions, 27%

Upcoming Conference

IUI '25

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 271
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)271
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)67
Reflects downloads up to 12 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Get Access

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media