Skip to main content

User Needs in e-Government: Conducting Policy Analysis with Models-on-the-Web

  • Conference paper
People and Computers XIX — The Bigger Picture

Abstract

Design conventions are emerging in e-government models-on-the-Web but they are not based on evidence of analysts’ actual what-if analyses for purposes like policymaking. From field studies, we developed representations of policy analysts’ actual work and compared them to the assumed goals and tasks built into existing online models, inferred through goal-based requirements methods. We found a large gap exists and argue that current online models are impoverished because they ignore expertise users bring to bear on their work.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Antón, A. I. [1996], Goal-based Requirements Analysis, in C. Shekaran & J. Siddiqi (eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (ICRE’96), IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 136–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blandford, A. & Green, T. [2002], From Tasks to Conceptual Structures: Misfit Analysis, http://www.uclic.ucl.ac.uk/annb/shortosmABTG.pdf (last accessed 2005-05-26).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, L., Nixon, B. A., Yu, E. & Mylopoulos, J. [1999], Nonfunctional Requirements in Action, Vol. 5 of The Kluwer International Series in Software Engineering, Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockton, G. [2000], L’Avenir de L’Interface — The Future of the Interface, http://www.cet.sunderland.ac.uk/cs0gco/Avenir.doc (last accessed 2005-04-26).

    Google Scholar 

  • Costantini, E. A. C., Castelli, F. & L’Abate, G. [2002], Using the EPIC Model to Estimate Soil Moisture and Temperature Regimes and to Assess Desertification Risk, in A. Faz, R. Ortiz & A. R. Mermut (eds.), Sustainable Use and Management of Soils in Arid and Semiarid Regions, Vol. II, Quadema Editorial, pp.361–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cushing, J., Beard-Tisdale, K., Bergen, K., Clark, J., Henebry, G., Landis, E., Maier, D., Schnase, J. & Stevenson, R. [2003], Research Agenda for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Informatics (BDEI), Final Report to the National Science Foundation (NSF) for the Research Agenda for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Informatics. Available at http://dgrc.org/dgo2004/disc/posters/tuesposters/rp_cushing.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feltovich, P., Hoffman, R., Woods, D. & Roesler, A. [2004], Keeping It Too Simple: How the Reductive Tendency Affects Cognitive Engineering, IEEE Intelligent Systems 19(3), 90–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feltovich, P., Spiro, R. & Coulson, R. [1997], Issues of Expert Flexibility in Contexts Characterized by Complexity and Change, in P. Feltovich, K. Ford & R. Hoffman (eds.), Expertise in Context, MIT Press, pp. 125–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fildes, R., Goodwin, P. & Lawrence, M. [in press], The Design Features of Forecasting Support Systems and Their Effectiveness, Decision Support Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsi, I. & Potts, C. [2000], Studying the Evolution and Evaluation of Software Features, in N. Schneidewind, L. Briand & J. M. Voas (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM’00), IEEECSP, pp. 143–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M. [2000], Problem Frames: Analyzing and Structuring Software Development Problems, Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, E. [1988], Expertise and Decision Under Uncertainty, in M. Chi, R. Glaser & M. Farr (eds.), The Nature of Expertise, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp.209–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirel, B. & Allmendinger, L. [2004], Visualizing Complexity, Informaton Design Journal 12(2), 141–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pannell, D. [2004], Effectively Communicating Economics to Policy Makers, The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 48(3), 535–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutcliffe, A., Ryan, M., Doubleday, A. & Springett, M. [2000], Model Mismatch Analysis, Behaviour & Information Technology 19(1), 43–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zachary, W. [1988], Decision Support Systems: Designing to Extend Cognitive Limits, in M. Helander (ed.), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, North-Holland, pp.997–1030.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeitz, C. [1997], Some Concrete Advantages of Abstraction: How Experts’ Representations Facilitate Reasoning, in P. Feltovich, K. Ford & R. Hoffman (eds.), Expertise in Context, MIT Press, pp.43–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zigura, I. & Buckland, B. [1998], A Theory of Task/Technology Fit and Group Support Systems Effectiveness, MIS Quarterly 22(3), 313–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this paper

Cite this paper

Mirel, B., Maher, M., Huh, J. (2006). User Needs in e-Government: Conducting Policy Analysis with Models-on-the-Web. In: McEwan, T., Gulliksen, J., Benyon, D. (eds) People and Computers XIX — The Bigger Picture. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-249-7_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-249-7_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84628-192-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-249-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics