María Paula González, Carlos Iván Chesñevar, Niels Pinkwart, Mauro J. Gómez Lucero


This paper discusses the role of usability as a quality key attribute for the deployment of Argument Assistant Systems, which are software tools intended to provide effective knowledge management facilities when solving problems in different contexts, helping to identify, create, represent and analyze the arguments involved as well as their interrelationships. Based on a reverse engineering process, a set of usability-oriented Design Guidelines were identified and instantiated for the Argument Assistant System domain. Besides, some usability principles are proposed and linked to every suggested guideline to evaluate its quality in use.


  1. Brena, R., Aguirre, J., Chesn˜evar, C., Ramírez, E., and Garrido, L. (2007). Knowledge and information distribution leveraged by intelligent agents. Knowl. Inf. Syst., 12(2):203-227.
  2. Carroll, J. (2000). Making Use:Scenario-Based Design of Human-Computer Interactions. MIT Press.
  3. Chesn˜evar, C., McGinnis, J., Modgil, S., Rahwan, I., Reed, C., Simari, G. R., South, M., Vreeswijk, G., and Willmott, S. (2006). Towards an argument interchange format. Knowledge Eng. Review, 21(4):293-316.
  4. Constantine, L. and Lockwood, L. (1999). Software for Use. A practical Guide to the Models and Methods of Usage-Centered Design. Addison-Wesley.
  5. Dumas, J. and Redish, J. (2000). A Practical Guide to Usability Testing. Intl. Specialized Book Service Inc.
  6. González, M., Granollers, T., Pascual, A., and Lores, J. (2008a). Testing website usability in spanish-speaking academia through heuristic evaluation and cognitive walkthroughs. Int. Journal of Universal Computer Studies, 14(9):1513-1529.
  7. González, M., Lorés, J., and Granollers, T. (2008b). Enhancing usability testing through datamining techniques: A novel approach to detecting usability problem patterns for a context of use. Information & Software Technology, 50(6):547-568.
  8. Karacapilidis, N. and Papadias, D. (2001). Computer supported argumentation and collaborative decision making: the hermes system. Inf. Syst., 26(4):259-277.
  9. Kirschner, P., Shum, S. B., and (Eds), C. C. (2003). Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-Making. Springer-Verlag.
  10. Mayhew, D. J. (1999). The Usability Engineering Lifecicle. A practioner's handbook for user interface desing. M. Kaufmann.
  11. Mun˜oz, A., Sanchez, A., and Botia, J. A. (2009). A software architecture for an argumentation-oriented multi-agent system. Advances in Intelligent Soft Computing, 55:197- 206.
  12. Okada, A., Shum, S. B., and (Eds.), T. S. (2008). Knowledge Cartography: Software Tools and Mapping Techniques. Springer: Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing Series.
  13. Rahwan, I. and Simari, G. (2009). Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer-Verlag.
  14. Reed, C. and Rowe, G. (2004). Araucaria: Software for argument analysis, diagramming and representation. Int. Journal on AI Tools, 13(4):983-.
  15. Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., and McLaren, N. (to appear 2010). Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state-of-the-art. Int. Journal CSCL, 5(1).
  16. Sidlar, C. and Rinner, C. (2007). Analyzing the usability of an argumentation map as a participatory spatial decision support tool. The Urban and Regional Information Systems Association Journal, pages 47-55.
  17. Sutcliffe, A. (2002). User-Centred Requirements Engineering. Theory and Practice. Springer-Verlag.
  18. Van den Braak, S., van Oostendorp, H., Prakken, H., and Vreeswijk, G. (2006). A critical review of argument visualization tools: Do users become better reasoners? In Grasso, F., Kibble, R., and Reed, C., editors, Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument. ECAI 06, page 6775, Riva del Garda, Italy.
  19. Van den Braak, S., Vreeswijk, G., and Prakken, H. (2007). AVERs: an argument visualization tool for representing stories about evidence. In Proc. of the 11th ICAIL Conf., pages 11-15.
  20. Verheij, B. (2003). Artificial argument assistants for defeasible argumentation. Artif. Intell., 150(1-2):291-324.
  21. Verheij, B. (2007). Argumentation support software: Boxes-and-arrows and beyond. Law, Probability & Risk, 6:187-208.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Paula González M., Iván Chesñevar C., Pinkwart N. and J. Gómez Lucero M. (2010). DEVELOPING ARGUMENT ASSISTANT SYSTEMS FROM A USABILITY VIEWPOINT . In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2010) ISBN 978-989-8425-30-0, pages 157-163. DOI: 10.5220/0003066801570163

in Bibtex Style

author={María Paula González and Carlos Iván Chesñevar and Niels Pinkwart and Mauro J. Gómez Lucero},
booktitle={Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2010)},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2010)
SN - 978-989-8425-30-0
AU - Paula González M.
AU - Iván Chesñevar C.
AU - Pinkwart N.
AU - J. Gómez Lucero M.
PY - 2010
SP - 157
EP - 163
DO - 10.5220/0003066801570163