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


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


Philosophy and Cybernetics: Questions and Issues
Thomas Marlowe, Fr. Joseph R. Laracy
(pages: 1-23)

Reconceiving Cybernetics in Light of Thomistic Realism
John T. Laracy, Fr. Joseph R. Laracy
(pages: 24-39)

Nascent Cybernetics, Humanism, and Some Scientistic Challenges
Zachary M. Mabee
(pages: 40-52)

Kant, Cybernetics, and Cybersecurity: Integration and Secure Computation
Jon K. Burmeister, Ziyuan Meng
(pages: 53-78)

Interplay Between Cybernetics and Philosophy as an Essential Condition for Learning
Maria Jakubik
(pages: 79-97)

Towards a General Theory of Change: A Cybernetic and Philosophical Understanding
Gianfranco Minati
(pages: 98-109)

Artificial Intelligence and Human Intellect
Víctor Velarde-Mayol
(pages: 110-127)

The Philosophy of Cybernetics
Jeremy Horne
(pages: 128-159)

Cybernetics and Philosophy in a Translation of Oedipus the King and Its Performance
Ekaterini Nikolarea
(pages: 160-190)

Linguistic Philosophy of Cyberspace
Rusudan Makhachashvili, Ivan Semenist
(pages: 191-207)

Systems Philosophy and Cybernetics
Nagib Callaos
(pages: 208-284)


 

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