The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Getting around the task-artifact cycle: how to make claims and design by scenario
Open accessAbstract
We are developing an “action science” approach to human-computer interaction (HCI), seeking to better integrate activities directed at understanding with those directed at design. The approach leverages development practices of current HCI with methods and concepts to support a shift toward using broad and explicit design rationale to reify where we are in a design process, why we are there, and to guide reasoning about where we might go from there. We represent a designed artifact as the set of user scenarios supported by that artifact and more finely by causal schemas detailing the underlying psychological rationale. These schemas, called claims , unpack wherefores and whys of the scenarios. In this paper, we stand back from several empirical projects to clarify our commitments and practices.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Grice, H. P. (1975) · Speech Acts · doi:10.1163/9789004368811_003 · Cited by 23,221
Basic objects in natural categories
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(76)90013-x · Cited by 5,643
Some Conditions of Obedience and Disobedience to Authority
Milgram, S. (1965) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/001872676501800105 · Cited by 1,141
Cited by
(1993) · Cited by 9,879
Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics
Nielsen, J. (1994) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/191666.191729 · Cited by 1,439
End-User Development: An Emerging Paradigm
Lieberman, H., Paternò, F., Klann, M., & Wulf, V. (2006) · Human-Computer Interaction Series · doi:10.1007/1-4020-5386-x_1 · Cited by 561
Strong concepts: Intermediate-level knowledge in interaction design research
Höök, K., & Löwgren, J. (2012) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/2362364.2362371 · Cited by 540
Engaging older people using participatory design
Lindsay, S., Jackson, D., Schofield, G., & Olivier, P. (2012) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2207676.2208570 · Cited by 323
Metadata
- Authors
- Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B.
- Venue
- ACM Transactions on Information Systems
- Published
- 1992-04
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 181-212
- ISSN
- 1046-8188 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2868
- OpenAlex
- W1995620802
- Cited by
- 387
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 10.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Getting around the task-artifact cycle: how to make claims and design by scenario. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/146802.146834
- The paper
- Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (1992). Getting around the task-artifact cycle: how to make claims and design by scenario. ACM Transactions on Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/146802.146834
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
