Jasmine Tehrani
email: jasmine.hajrezatehrani@beds.ac.ukv.a.michell@henley.ac.ukyu-chun.pan@uwl.ac.uk

Vaughan Michell

Yu-Chun Pan

Norm-based Approach to Incorporate Human Factors into Clinical Pathway: Reducing Human Error and Improving Patient Safety

Keywords: Clinical Pathways, Process Modelling, Organizational Semiotics, Norm Analysis, Information System, Human Factors

Patient safety and accidental harm or iatrogenic errors are increasingly important healthcare issues resulting in high costs and mortality. The way clinical workflow and actions are communicated can impact patient safety. Although much work has been done to identify the individual human factors and recommendations are made to control and reduce human factor errors, little work has been done to provide a structured methodology to analyse and control human factor influencing patient safety outcomes. In this paper, we build on the previous work on automatic development of clinical pathways, semiotic approach to modelling norm-base clinical pathways and propose a Human Factor Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (HFMA) which offers a systematic approach to define, design and incorporation of human factors into formal design of clinical pathways. Organisational semiotics methods specifically NAM and SAM are applied to identify and analyse controls to reduce the adverse impact of human factors in healthcare settings. This is achieved through modelling and integration of human factors into clinical pathways. This will result in more rigorous control the care process ensuring completeness, consistency and patient safety by enabling the mapping of formal and informal/safety controls into clinical pathways.

Introduction

The challenge of achieving significant improvements in patient safety is one of the key tasks facing healthcare at the start of the 21st century. There is broad international agreement on the nature of the task faced and the importance of achieving improvements to quality in this area [START_REF] Milligan | Establishing a Culture for Patient Safety-The Role of Education[END_REF]. Large numbers of people continue to be successfully cared for and treated in the National Health Service, but a significant number of errors and other forms of harm occur. It is calculated that around 10% of patients admitted to NHS hospitals are subject to a patient safety incident and that up to half of these incidents could have been prevented [START_REF] Shaw | Adverse Events and Near Miss Reporting In the Nhs[END_REF]. Medical errors are also a serious and challenging issue in the United States. According to the Institute of Medicine 's (IOM's) recent report, To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System (1999), between 44,000 and 98,000 people die in hospitals each year as the result of medical errors. Human factors in the provision of health is responsible for a major part of safety problems since the care activity is handled by practitioners and their ability to process multiple pieces of contradictory information is limited. Therefore, safety in medicine is a rapidly developing field and several interdisciplinary research groups have investigated the effect of human and organisational factors on the reliability of healthcare delivery. The latest survey of published work on human factors disclosed that the estimated contribution of human error to accidents in hazardous technologies increased fourfold from the 1969 [START_REF] Hollnagel | Reliability of Cognition: Foundations of Human Reliability Analysis[END_REF]. The human factors community has developed a variety of methods which are beginning to be adopted in healthcare setting [START_REF] West | Reducing Patient Mortality in Hospitals: The Role of Human Resource Management[END_REF]. One of the main tools developed to manage the care quality in healthcare setting are Clinical pathways (CP), also known as care pathways. It is proven that their implementation reduces the variability in clinical practice and improves outcomes. Despite the substantial improvements in modelling and generation of CPs, there is very little account for human factors [START_REF] Liu | Norm Governed Agents In Cscw[END_REF]. This paper builds on previous work on clinical pathway modelling by presenting a normative approach to the analysis and integration of human factors in to clinical pathways in order to accommodate exceptions which have not been dealt with by other conventional methods [START_REF] Tehrani | Semiotics-Oriented Method For Generation Of Clinical Pathways[END_REF]. The proposed methodology provides a robust mechanism to analyse human factor failure points and to identify and model the controls in to formal process models e.g. CPs. Norm Analysis Method (NAM) is adopted to analyse patterns of behavior and decision-making models of clinicians and the condition under which the behavior will occur. This mechanism is crucial for conceptualizing and developing personalized clinical pathways which describes the conditions and temporality of human factor failure modes.

Norm Based Approach for Incorporating Human Factors into Clinical Pathways

In this research, a semiotics method, namely, norm analysis method is chosen to compliment BPMN to enable the modelling of behavior. NAM is used to capture rules, regulations and condition under which every action of an agent is legal, acceptable or prohibited. The norms define a culture or subculture. In a system of agnets, norms reflect regularities in the behaviour of members allowing co-ordination of their actions. Norms are developed through practical involvements of agents in a society and have purposes of directing, coordinating and controlling movements within society [START_REF] Milligan | Establishing A Culture For Patient Safety-The Role Of Education[END_REF]. It is proposed that extension of BPMN with norms enables the modelling of modelling a complex business processes. Every activity is made up of one or more norms. Hence it might be difficult to view the relationships between the norms, and how they interact with each other. To improve the practical ability of norms, this research extends the description of process models with norms as a reasonable mechanism to enable the modelling of business dynamics. Norms define business rules that are imposed on the particular process [START_REF] Stamper | The Chemistry Of Society: Organisational Semiotics As An Empirical Social Science[END_REF]. For example, in Table 1, Norm N1 reflects rules that must be followed during VTE assessment. Norm N2 includes both the business rules and an exception that will be triggered (caused) when pressure ulcer assessment action has been invoked. Besides handling the business rules and exceptions, the norm provides a degree of flexibility that allows the analysts to model exceptional and alternative situations where decisions are made solely based on human judgment. For example, when performing pressure ulcer risk assessment, if patient develops ulcer during his hospital stay, the nurse is advised to arrange clinical photography. However, the final decision making is solely based on the human agent's judgment. The extension is carried out by incorporating norms into the business process diagram. In the diagram, each control condition is labelled as [N#] where # is the number for identification. The labels are then elaborated in the norm specifications to indicate the condition, the actor and action to be undertaken.

Human Failure

Human rather than technical failures now represent the greatest threat to healthcare settings. Managing the human risks will never be 100% effective. Human fallibility can be moderated, but it cannot be eliminated. It is inevitable that errors will occur in healthcare, as they do in other safety critical industries, because they are an intrinsic human trait [START_REF] Osborn | Seven Steps To Patient Safety. An Overview Guide For Nhs Staff. Londres: The National Patient Safety Agency 2a Edicion[END_REF]. An acceptance of this position towards safety, can lead to the achievement of significant improvements in improving safety measures [START_REF] Vincent | Safety Measurement And Monitoring In Healthcare: A Framework To Guide Clinical Teams And Healthcare Organisations In Maintaining Safety[END_REF]. In recent years, the focus within adverse event analysis, situations in which error and other forms of harm occur, in safety critical industries have moved from a propensity for individual blame to a systems approach. In fact, accepting the fact that people are liable to make errors, system and equipment design, training and other aspects of the work environment are given priority in terms of initiating change to minimise the risk. Furthermore, achieving improvement in patient safety is not possible unless human factors are placed at the heart of improving clinical, managerial and organisational practice leading to improvements in patient safety. Of particular attention is the inner model of clinician's thinking and decision-making models adopted in challenging health provision circumstances, which centres around a complex series of interactions and team-based activities between practitioners and patients as well as numerous technological instruments and information systems that aid decision making and streamline care delivery process.

There have been several attempts to include human factors in the analysis of medical errors and patient safety issues. James [START_REF] Reason | Understanding Adverse Events: Human Factors[END_REF] analysed conditions under which human factors can contribute safety failures and proposed a generic model of accident causation [START_REF] Osborn | Seven Steps To Patient Safety. An Overview Guide For Nhs Staff. Londres: The National Patient Safety Agency 2a Edicion[END_REF]. Chang et al (2005) conducted a series of similar studies and presented an evaluation of existing patient safety terminologies and classifications and grouped the findings into five complementary root nodes: impact, type, domain, cause and prevention [START_REF] Chang | The Jcaho Patient Safety Event Taxonomy: A Standardized Terminology And Classification Schema For Near Misses And Adverse Events[END_REF]. Although various integrated models of error have been produced, few if any focus on the detailed categorisation of the wide range of specific human factors that contribute to error. However, the SHEEP model, was developed from analysis of human factor course participants to identify human factor categories and types that have a bearing on clinical actions [START_REF] Michell | Handbook Of Research On Patient Safety And Quality Care Through Health Informatics[END_REF].

Human Factors

Human factors encompass all factors that can influence people and their behavior. One simple definition is design for human use [START_REF] Chapanis | Human Factors In Systems Engineering: Wiley Series In Systems Engineering[END_REF]. Chapanis defines human factors as a body of information about human abilities, limitations and characteristics that are relevant to the design process. In a work context, human factors are the environmental, organisational and job factors, and individual characteristics that influence behavior at work. Human factors in the provision of health is responsible for a major part of safety problems since the care activity is handled by practitioners and their ability to process multiple pieces of contradictory information is limited. Therefore, safety in medicine is a rapidly developing field and several interdisciplinary research groups have investigated the effect of human and organisational factors on the reliability of healthcare delivery [START_REF] Chapanis | Human Factors In Systems Engineering: Wiley Series In Systems Engineering[END_REF].

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

We have seen how human behaviour and human factors contribute to errors and their risk. Errors come together at the confluence of the organisation, workplace and person in the process. They are typically combatted by identifying the risks of process failure in terms of both the planned process and how the execution may differ in practice. The Failure Mode and Effects Analysis method of identifying failures in products and processes has been widely used both in industry and in medicine [START_REF] Chang | The Jcaho Patient Safety Event Taxonomy: A Standardized Terminology And Classification Schema For Near Misses And Adverse Events[END_REF]. In summary it involves the identification of the ways in which a process can fail and the apportioning of the risk via the probability a failure of this kind (P), the impact of the failure (I) and the possibility of detection (D). Each of these metrics is typically measured on a scale of 1-10 and then multiplied to provide an overall risk number as high as 1000 as a ranking measure of the risk [START_REF] Michell | Handbook Of Research On Patient Safety And Quality Care Through Health Informatics[END_REF]. Typically, any factor > 7 is considered a high risk factor contributor. FMEA assumes a process model or documentation is available and that events leading to failure can be identified and that remedial risk reduction actions are also identifiable [START_REF] Reason | Understanding Adverse Events: Human Factors[END_REF].

Human Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (HFMEA)

Most FMEA analysis covers human and technology error, but rarely classifies human factors. In this paper, an extension of FMEA is proposed for clinical risks management by identifying a set of human factor potential failure modes hence the proposed methodology is called Human Factors Modes and Effects Analysis (HFMEA). Due to the nature of human error, there are innumerable ways in which human factors can impact a process making it extremely difficult to identify all the potential human factors driven failures and risk protection measures. However, using HFMEA three initial levels of risk are identifiable:

 High: 7+ the patient may die, requiring emergency intervention  Medium: score 4-6 the patient is impacted resulting in additional significant intervention  Low 1-3: the patient is inconvenienced resulting in minor changes in intervention to arrive at the original intervention goals to reduce the potential human factors failures to a manageable set to analyse we consider only the high-risk patient related activities.

Fig. 1. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

A high-risk patient activity is considered as an activity where one mistake could lead to a massive adverse impact (I> 7) on the patient if a key action was mistaken. i.e. '1 step to disaster'. For example, miscalculating the quantity of a lethal drug to give an overdose, removing the wrong organ. Patient high risk activities also have low detection rates or few steps in which they are detected as a result of few or poor control norms i.e. D > 7. But how is P >7 identified. For example, anesthetists and nurses routinely administer lethal drugs with very few failures and hence P ≪1 or 2. This is often because the routine nature of the task is just that and there is no significant change in routine leading to unexpected actions or a reduction in perception, evaluative or cognitive capability. As Reason asserts it is often events and unfamiliar or unprepared for situations that give rise to safety errors [START_REF] Reason | Understanding Adverse Events: Human Factors[END_REF]. The key to how P, the probability of a patient safety risk occurring, might suddenly increase is to identify the conditions under which P will drastically increase due to the removal of 'normal' safety measures as a result of a change in the situation or human behavior. This requires identification of the human factor failure points and the controls employed in the formal processtypically a codified clinical pathway. If we can define these high-risk points for each elective clinical process, we can then define the human factor behaviors that could lead to the catastrophic result and design countermeasures to them. An excellent example is the risk of cabin pressure due to external cabin doors not being correctly locked resulting in the now universal safety control countermeasure of ensuring each cabin crew member that checks a door check their opposite number's doors are safely locked or unlocked.

Controls

Errors can be reduced via the use of controls at the individual, process and organisational level. Sadiq et. Al (2000), suggest the need to ensure a systematic approach to business objectives and control objectives in process design. Although Sadiq's focus was compliance controls, it applies equally well to error controls. Our research suggests there is rarely a systemic approach in clinical pathway design and specifically less to error control design. What is needed is explicit analysis and modelling of the process and defined and reasoned control objectives against a defined clinical risk and set of internal controls to reduce the risk. What often happens is that for clinical processes controls in the form of checklists etc. are often added after errors occur and a root cause analysis occurs as a system of reminders to prevent [31].

Predictive Controls

The use of FMEA or other methods can produce a set of 'predictive error control points' where predictive controls are defined as controls able to be set up for a known process ahead of time to catch predicted failures. Many procedures are designed around predictive controls with checkpoints. Predictive controls require a good knowledge of the actual activities and behaviors and their variations, actions and states of the stakeholders and known failure modes. This enables the identification of control objectives and needed controls at appropriate risk points. Predictive controls can be modelled as control norms in the human to human interactions and human to information system interactions and hence can only really be applied well to elective surgery in reliable conditions [START_REF] Tehrani | Semiotics-Oriented Method For Generation Of Clinical Pathways[END_REF]. The use of FMEA or other methods can produce a set of 'predictive error control points' where predictive controls are defined as controls able to be set up for a known process ahead of time to catch predicted failures. Many procedures are designed around predictive controls with checkpoints. Predictive controls require a good knowledge of the actual activities and behaviors and their variations, actions and states of the stakeholders and known failure modes. This enables the identification of control objectives and needed controls at appropriate risk points. Some of the predictive controls are: Process controls: decision points and loops, human monitoring points, Machine monitoring points and memory cues, action sequence rule/knowledge cues. Predictive controls can be modelled as control norms in the human to human interactions and human to information system interactions and hence can only really be applied well to elective surgery in reliable conditions.

Personal Controls

We define a second set of controls as personal controls. We define personal controls as informal control rules or heuristics -i.e. behavioral norms used by the individual to ensure the correct outcome of actions. Personal controls are informal as they are tacit and not formally codified by the organisation. Personal controls depend on the individual's character and self-discipline for their introduction and are typically the result of experience and concern about the outcome of an activity. They are part of the individual's set of behavioral norms [START_REF] Stamper | The Chemistry Of Society: Organisational Semiotics As An Empirical Social Science[END_REF]. For example, one interviewee on a patient safety survey always verbally repeated drug volume and strength information and asked for a second check whenever they knew themselves to be tired and hence the possibility of a perception or epistemic error was reduced. However, the enactment of her 'personal patient safety control norm' depends on her discipline and awareness, or 'strength of character', also subject to human factor failings such as stress. Hence the need for personal controls .at stress points or points of high risk needs to be highlighted within clinical pathways.

Culturally Driven Controls

A third set of controls is culturally driven controls resulting from national, organisational, professional, or team driven learnt and repeated behaviors. These relate to cultural norms. As Reason asserts organisational methods, actions and traditional working practices can create a communal safety culture. The existence of cultural norm beliefs and accepted behaviours creates discomfort and dissonance if the cultural behaviour or belief is violated. However, it can be difficult to measure or define a safety culture and the 'norms' of safety behaviour. Repeated training, examples and practice and consistent control behaviour can develop cultural controls. Cultural controls can be developed through human factors training and repeated application of good practices and reflection.

Risk Alleviation Norms to Improve Patient Safety Outcomes

As discussed earlier in this chapter, generally clinical pathways refer to medical guidelines. However, a single pathway may refer to guidelines on several topics in a well specified context. CP is a management tool based on evidence-based practice for a precise group of patients with a foreseeable clinical course, in which the different tasks by the professionals involved in the patient care process are defined and sequenced either by hour (ED), day (acute care) or visit (homecare). Outcomes are tied to specific interventions. Clinical pathways (integrated care pathways) can be seen as an application of process management thinking to the improvement of patient healthcare. An aim is to recentre the focus on the patient's overall journey, rather than the contribution of each specialty or caring function independently. Instead, all are emphasised to be working together, in the same way as a cross-functional team.

In the healthcare domain, the clinical pathways can be seen as the norms developed through the practical medical experiences of healthcare professionals, since they have functions of directing, coordinating and controlling actions in the healthcare process. These norms will provide guidance for medical care staff staffs to determine whether certain medical behaviours at any given time. For clinical pathway design, these norms are analysed, captured and integrated in to the formal organisational process e.g. clinical pathways serving as a basis for designing norm-base clinical pathways that improves patient safety outcomes by addressing formal/informal human factors that influence patient safety outcomes. We use the notion of norms to analyse and formally structure informal/human factors that influence patient safety outcomes. These norms are called risk alleviation norms, which then integrated into clinical pathways design using the normative approach to incorporate human factors in clinical pathways. In the following sections, the methodology for analysing and structuring of human factors affecting patient safety outcome is described in detail. The HFMEA method, described in previous section, is used as an essential part of this mythology to enable the identification of high risk points within the pathway. Subsequently, after identification of high risk points for each elective clinical process, we can then define the human factors behaviours that could lead to the catastrophic result and design countermeasures to them.

Extension of Clinical Pathways with Risk Alleviating Norms

Norm analysis method is applied to the analysis and formalisation of human factors.

Human factors or factors of human behaviour are a key adverse influence on how clinicians behave, think, make judgements and perceive the world. Although much work has been done to identify the individual human factors and recommendations regarding behaviours to control and reduce human factors errors, little work has been done to provide a structured approach to analyse and develop the human factor behaviour.

Hence in this research, a normative approach to regulate and control the effects of human factors on patient safety by modelling and embedding them within clinical pathways as the formal work process models is proposed. The stages involved in this methodology are described in figure below. As it can be seen in figure 1, using HFMEA the high-risk points with the formal process map are identified and each high risk point is further organised into high, medium and low risk patient activity. For high risk points within the process map, risk alleviating norms are used to and integrated into the formal process map to reduce the impact of failure on patient. Using risk alleviating norms, controls are introduced and formally integrated into the clinical pathway design.

Conclusion

This paper presented a background to the current application of clinical pathways in hospitals and presented a case for the need to consider human factors if significant improvement in patient safety outcomes are intended. It is argued that integration of human factors in clinical pathways design will have a significant role in improving patient safety. In this research, we have built on the previous work on modelling the dynamic behavior of business organisations by presenting a methodology for extending business process modelling notation with norms to enable the modelling the dynamics of business processes and to accommodate exceptions which have not been dealt with by other conventional methods [23][24]. Norm analysis is adopted as the method for modelling the dynamics of patterns of behaviour which are defined as shared a set of 'norms' which govern how members of the society behave, think, and make judgment [START_REF] West | Reducing Patient Mortality In Hospitals: The Role Of Human Resource Management[END_REF]. The proposed methodology addresses social and informal/safety factors, which conspire together to influence the outcome of patient safety. To this end, a semiotics-oriented method that adopts organisational semiotics methods, in particular, SAM and NAM are proposed. Semantic analysis method is applied to explicitly represent the semantics of the concepts, their relationships and patterns of behaviour, which offers a basis for analysing human/Informal factors in healthcare setting. Moreover, an extension of FMEA approach is proposed that enables incorporation of human factors failure modes and effects analysis into formal description of clinical pathways (HFMEA). This is the main contribution of this paper which provides a comprehensive platform for analysis and formal strutting of human factors in forms of failure modes and their incorporation into clinical pathways.

Table 1 .

 1 Example of norms in a clinical pathway.

	Norm No.	Definition
		Whenever <the patient is assessed for venous thromboembo-
	Norm N1	lism>	If <there is bleeding risk >
		Then <doctors> is <permitted> to <prescribe prophylaxis>
		Whenever <performing pressure ulcer risk assessment>
		If <Pressure Ulcer is classified as extensive destruction >
	Norm N2	Then <nurse> is <obliged> to <place patient on a Bi-Wave
		mattress>
		Whenever <performing pressure ulcer risk assessment>
			If <patient develops a pressure ulcer during this hospital
	Norm N3	stay>
		Then <nurse> is <permitted> to <arrange clinical photography>


José Valderlei Da Silva

Roberto Pereira
email: 2rpereira@inf.ufpr.br

Elaine C S Hayashi
email: hayashi@ic.unicamp.br

M Cecília
email: 1cecilia@ic.unicamp.br

C Baranauskas

Design Practices and the Sawd Tool: Towards the Opendesign Concept

Keywords: Organisational Semiotics, Socially Aware Design, Human-Computer Interaction, IoT

The main idea behind the Open Source model of software development is to promote open collaboration in a decentralized process of coding. Varied endeavors have taken place in order to encourage, support and maintain the Open Source initiative, always focusing on the programming part of software development. Little to none has been said regarding decentralized, open collaboration in the system design process as a whole. Aiming at understanding what an OpenDesign initiative for information systems design would be, this article further explores the SAwD tool in a case study that considers the context of designing IoT solutions for airports. Organisational Semiotics and the Socially Aware Design constitute the theoretical basis of this work.

Introduction

The development of information systems pushed by its technological aspects is unfortunately a rather common practice. As the demand for computational systems grows, it becomes clearer that hardware and software may cause varied problems if developers skip phases. Early design phases as problem clarification and identification of interested parties can be vital for the success of a system. The lack of awareness in such phases of system development may imply profound social consequences, affecting society in many levels (economic, ethical, political, etc.). These problems can be avoided by not neglecting the social context of design.

The creation of systems that make sense to the target community of stakeholders demands the systemic view of socio technical approaches. These are approaches that recognize that the technical solution is an embedded part of a much more complex social system, from which behavior patterns, beliefs and values may rise.

Usually, software and hardware developers focus their work only on the technical aspects of development, often because they are not aware of design techniques that support this required broader view. Other developers do know about design techniques, but they lack specific knowledge or they cannot get hold of informants that can contribute by adding to the creation of a bigger picture. When it comes to the variety of participants exploring and discussing the social context of a technical solution, the more the merrier. This process, however, must be well organized and documented following methods that can support collaborative work.

Open collaboration is supported in the software development context of the Open Source communities. In this process, developers create their products by developing, using and/or modifying freely shared source codes. This decentralized process of software development offers benefits as optimized and enhanced quality, since many different improvements can be added to the original code, suggested by many different points of view.

While open source is a common practice in the development of system's code, it is much less common to find such practices in the system design process. This concept is being developed by the OpenDesign Project [START_REF] Baranauskas | OpenDesign: técnicas e artefatos para o design socialmente consciente de sistemas computacionais[END_REF]. As part of the OpenDesign Project, this article explores earlier phases of design process as a preliminary work towards the characterization of the 'Open Design' concept. As part of this investigation, we have conducted two workshops in order to idealize IoT solutions for airports. The first workshop took place during the ICISO'16 [START_REF] Baranauskas | Socially Aware Organisations and Technologies[END_REF] conference, which was held in University of Campinas, in the city of Campinas, in São Paulo, Brazil, in 2016. The second workshop was conducted as a masterclass during the IHC'17 symposium [START_REF] Gasparini | IHC 2017 Emoção e Movimento -Proceedings of the 16th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems[END_REF], in Joinville -Santa Catarina, Brazil, in 2017. Both workshops had the Socially Aware Design [START_REF] Baranauskas | Social awareness in HCI[END_REF] (more on Section 2) as theoretical and methodological basis. Both workshops had the same goal: identify problems faced by people at airports with the objective of proposing conceptual solutions for an IoT system. The first workshop was focused mainly on problem clarification and we observed how artefacts could be used to promote discussions. The second workshop started with the same discussion on problem understanding and it went further, resulting in concepts for technological solutions.

Both workshops were conducted with participants working together in person; only afterwards were the ideas transcribed to the online tool SAwD 1 (the Socially Aware Design [START_REF] Silva | SAwD -Socially Aware Design: An Organizational Semiotics-Based CASE Tool to Support Early Design Activities[END_REF]). SAwD is a CASE tool 2 that supports cooperative work in early design activities. More specifically, SAwD supports the problem clarification and the proposal of computational solutions based on activities from Organisational Semiotics and Participatory Design.

These workshops and SAwD served as basis for a preliminary discussion that, along and throughout the 2 years of the OpenDesign Project, shall inform and direct the following questions: What characteristics compose the OpenDesign concept? and How can platforms support the OpenDesign to be developed?

The airport setting presents an interesting case context, especially when considering socio-technical approaches for design processes. An airport gathers people from different cultures who often do not share a common language for communication, but share interests (e.g. traveling) and difficulties (e.g. lost items).

1 www.nied.unicamp.br/dsc 2 Computer-aided software engineering (CASE) tool is a tool used in the design and/or development of applications. This article is organized as follows: Section 2 presents our theoretical, methodological and technical references; Section 3 describes the workshops; Section 4 informs the results from the workshops; Section 5 discusses the findings and Section 6 concludes.

2

Organisational Semiotics, Socially Aware Computing and the SAwD tool

The preliminary practices to explore methodologies and tools that support OpenDesign consider that Organizational Semiotics [START_REF] Stamper | A Semiotic Theory of Information and Information Systems[END_REF] and the Socially Aware Design [START_REF] Baranauskas | Social awareness in HCI[END_REF] should be the basis for the evolution of the Open Design concept. Some of the artifacts already produced based on these theories are collaborative and participatory, involving stakeholders as co-designers. This section describes the theoretical and methodological background that guided our practices. They are the same ones that will be used as fundamental material for OpenDesing concepts and practices. Organisational Semiotics is a branch of semiotics that "is based on the fundamental observation that all organised behavior is affected by people's communication and interpretation of signs, both individually and in groups" p. 24 [START_REF] Liu | Organisational Semiotics for Business Informatics[END_REF]. Organisational Semiotics is positioned under the philosophical stance of the radical subjectivism [START_REF] Stamper | A Semiotic Theory of Information and Information Systems[END_REF] [START_REF] Liu | Organisational Semiotics for Business Informatics[END_REF]. In this paradigm reality is understood as a subjective and social product, constructed by agents' behaviors, which implies that "there is no knowledge without a knower" and "there is no knowing without action". Subjectivity and responsibility play important roles in this stance [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems and Engineering[END_REF].

Designers are responsible for the impacts that a technological artefact brings to the community of users even when they are not aware of the reach of the consequences derived from its use. For that reason, it is vital to consider wider, holistic views in the design process. The Socially Aware Computing [START_REF] Baranauskas | Social awareness in HCI[END_REF] calls for methods and artefacts to support the design that is aware of the social reaches of a technological solution. Not only technical aspects should be considered in the design process, but also informal and formal ones. Informal, formal and technical are the layers of the Semiotic Onion [START_REF] Stamper | Understanding the roles of signs and norms in organisations: a semiotic approach to information systems design[END_REF], one of the artefacts from Organisational Semiotics used in the Socially Aware Computing. A computational system (technical information system) is part of the formal part of an organisation, which in turn, is part of the whole organisation, including the informal part of it. The Semiotic Onion offers a structure that helps making explicit the system of beliefs, intentions, values and culture of the organisation, which are often neglected.

Other artefacts and techniques that can be used in initial stages of a design process are described in PAM -Problem Articulation Method [START_REF] Stamper | Understanding the roles of signs and norms in organisations: a semiotic approach to information systems design[END_REF] [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems and Engineering[END_REF]. PAM is part of MEASURE -Method for Eliciting Analysing and Specifying Users Requirements [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems and Engineering[END_REF] [START_REF] Stamper | Understanding the roles of signs and norms in organisations: a semiotic approach to information systems design[END_REF]. Among the techniques that compose PAM are the 'Stakeholder identification Diagram' and the 'Valuation framing'. As the name indicates, Stakeholders Identification Diagram (SID) helps in the process of identifying interested and relevant parties. The Valuation framing helps to reveal stakeholders' perspectives on ten different aspects of culture [START_REF] Liu | Organisational Semiotics for Business Informatics[END_REF]. Similarly, to the Valuation framing, the Evaluation Framing [START_REF] Bonacin | A Semiotic Approach for Flexible e-Government Service Oriented Systems[END_REF] (EF) also puts into evidence stakeholders' perspectives, but in this technique problems are anticipated and ideas for solutions are generated. Another artifact is the Semiotic framework or the Semiotic Ladder (SL). SL provides a tool to help seeing information (signs) from different perspectives.

SID, EF and SL have been applied within Semio-participatory practices [START_REF] Baranauskas | Social awareness in HCI[END_REF] in varied contexts in order to clarify the problem amongst stakeholders. SAwD was developed [START_REF] Silva | SAwD -Socially Aware Design: An Organizational Semiotics-Based CASE Tool to Support Early Design Activities[END_REF] in the endeavor of allowing remote participation of interested parties in an open and collaborative environment. For that, the artefacts were transferred and adapted to a digital format in an online usage. With SAwD participants are able to contribute in their own time and schedule, without the need to travel distances for physical encounters.

The Evolution of the Airport Scenario: A Case Study

As mentioned before, two workshops were held and in both of them, the scenario of an airport was used as the motif for the creation of an IoT system. Airports host an entire world in itself. They are equipped with many signals, installations and facilities to support arrivals and departures of people and objects from domestic and international flights. Airports must offer the entire infrastructure to accommodate passengers and their families and belongings, aircrafts, air companies' staff and other employees from the airport, etc. In order to provide a comfortable experience for passengers, airports offer terminals with a wide range of services and facilities as restrooms, stores, playgrounds, VIP lounges, emergency services, places for worship, museums, restaurants, coffee places, etc. International airports have to control, in addition, immigration, customs and passport control. People from all over the world can be found in airports. This means that, in a same physical environment, there are people from different cultures, who follow varied values and social rules. The differences go on: varied languages (spoken and signed), age, gender, sexual orientation, height and body size, travel experience, disabilities, abilities, etc. These people may interact among each other, with airport staff, and also they may interact with objects, as conveyor belts or baggage carousels, information panels and displays, gates, escalators, elevators, etc. These interactions allow passengers to reach common goals, for example, they may claim their luggage, find boarding gates, restrooms, etc. In the same way as people interact with 'things' in the airport, also airport things could interact with passengers and staff. Things could also interact with other things, being proactive in helping themselves, other people and employees, automatizing services like transportation of people and luggage, cleaning, security, etc. The first workshop, proposed as a half-day activity, explored the use of SID and EF. Both artefacts were used with the objective of promoting discussions for problem understanding. In regards to EF, participants were asked to converge the discussions to rather specific problems and their corresponding solutions and ideas. Problems and solutions should concern each stakeholder previously identified with SID.

The second workshop was a whole-day activity and had different participants. Moreover, in addition to SID and EF, other artifacts were used: SL and other participatory design techniques. The result was the proposal of concepts for IoT solutions for the airport scenario. For both workshops, the artifacts were printed as posters into which participants could place post-it's filled with their ideas and contributions. The two workshops are described as follows: Section 3.1 presents the first workshop, and Section 3.2, the second. The results are presented in section 4.

Problem Clarification

Twenty participants took part in the first workshop. Participants were from different cultures and countries (Brazil, China, Chile and others). The activity started with a discussion about the Socially Aware Design followed by an explanation on the design problem: the airport scenario. First participants brainstormed about the feelings (both positive and negative ones) related to trips,considering airports as the setting. This first moment helped directing the group towards a common problem. Once the scope was clear, participants were asked to consider the 'things' around an airport and the 'things' people carry on their trips. This should lead the discussions towards the definition of solutions for internet of things that could help passengers and other people related to the airport scenario.

Participants were invited to explore the IoT concept as a network in which objects exchange messages. It was highlighted that the things related to the airport scenario should provide support for people involved or affected during the actions of travelling. Therefore, the IoT should be thought in a more analytical manner: as the Internet of Human Things (IoHT). Most things are objects created by people to satisfy human needs. Some of these things are composed by other systems, from which people want information (e.g., information about the weather). When designing an IoT system, the concern is to embed technology in objects in order to exchange information and investigate events that occur in that environment. For this reason, the Human should be the center of attention when creating an IoT environment. In this sense, Internet of Things (IoT) becomes an Internet of Human Things (IoHT).

From Problem Clarification to Concept Proposal

In the second workshop twenty-four participants joined the discussions. They were all from Brazil, but from different regions. Like in the first workshop, the group was organized in two subgroups. Each group had their own set of posters. The difference from the first workshop is that this time discussions did not end at problem clarification, as the second workshop lasted all day. The groups went further, brainstorming concept ideas and preliminary interface elements for the envisioned system. At the end, each group presented their solutions regarding the IoT systems for the airport scenario.

After filling SID and EF, participatory design techniques were used to elicit ideas for the solution to be proposed. The techniques were: BrainWriting [START_REF] Boy | The Group Elicitation Method for Participatory Design and Usability Testing[END_REF] and BrainDraw [START_REF] Muller | Participatory Practices in the Software Lifecycle[END_REF]. In the BrainWriting technique, a group sits in a circle and each member of the group starts writing their idea. A few seconds later, an alarm rings to inform that they should stop writing and pass the paper to the person next to them. This person will then read the content of the paper and either agree or disagree with it and then continue the idea by adding their own contribution until the alarm rings again. This goes on around the circle until the person receives back the paper he had started. The BrainDraw works in a similar way, but this time instead of writing, participants are supposed to draw user interface elements of the prospective system. The results from BrainWriting (main concepts) provide ideas for Brain Draw. Each group also had a flipchart in which they wrote notes on their ideas or used it to explain their thoughts. At the end of the activities, each group presented their results to the other.

Results

The first workshop provided important basis for the conduction of the second one. Having the same objective and scenario, the two workshops explored the use of varied artifacts from OS and participatory design practices. The first workshop explored SID and EF; while the second, besides SID and EF, also explored SL as well as concept ideas for applications. SID, EF and SL from both workshops were latter transcribed into the SAwD tool. The complete transcriptions are available in [START_REF] Hayashi | Socially Aware Design in action -Practices and results[END_REF].

The first workshop resulted in the identification of stakeholders and related problems and solutions. One of the SIDs shows a general concern with safety: smoke detectors, earthquake alarms and security cameras were some of the ideas for the source information layer of SID. The other SID layers from the first workshop had many contributions directed to pets: pet's cage and accessories (contribution layer), health insurance for pets (source layer) and animal welfare department (community) are some of the results. Fig. 1 illustrates a moment from the first workshop. The second workshop also resulted in the identification of stakeholders and possible problems and solutions. Moreover, it went further and continued with the discussion and proposition of concept ideas for IoT solutions. One of the solutions was based on the situation of a person traveling for the first time. The other, explored the problem of finding a connection at an unknown airport. For the first situation, participants considered how insecure and apprehensive passengers would be and idealized that this person would benefit from help for completing varied activities in the airport, like confirming flight schedule, checking in, dropping luggage and other boarding procedures. The proposal included a mobile application that would identify the person as he or she arrives at the airport. The group did not clearly define how the identification process would technically occur; options like retina scan, mobile phone and cards were discussed. He or she would then be guided to the places needed, which would be previously marked around the place. The application would use resources already available at airports and it should promote a stress-free travel experience for first-time passengers.

For the second situation, the proposal consisted in a personal assistant that should guide passengers during flight connections. Other orientations would also be provided: disaster procedures, indoor map, gate finding, time schedules, time organization, transfer to nearby airports, food services, etc. Such assistant would be composed of: mobile application, RFID tags, billboards, avatars and sensors (e.g. placed in plane's chairs). Interactions could take place via audio, text, images, sensors, signals, animations and/or vibrations. The application could be tailored for each user with multiple language resources.

Discussion Towards Open Design

Designers should be aware of the impacts that the insertion of a technological solution might bring about to a community of users [START_REF] Baranauskas | Social awareness in HCI[END_REF]. With that in mind, when considering the expansion of the Open Source concept to Design processes, we argue that it is necessary that tools and platforms be developed in order to support the entire cycle, including early phases of the design process.

In order to start the investigation on the Open Design concept, we have used the SAwD tool to simulate the workshop activities in an online manner, including online versions of artifacts from Organizational Semiotics. For this exercise, the scenario of an airport was chosen. As mentioned before, airports present many interesting opportunities. It houses people with varied languages, cultures and values in a same place, bringing them close as they share similar objectives. Designing for such varied audience can be challenging, especially when accounting for a Socially Aware Design.

By observing the conduction of the two workshops that took place without digital technology, we were able to better understand the main characteristics that a platform or tool should have in order to make an online and collaborative Open Design Project a feasible experience. The transcription of the results from the artifacts from the workshops (EF, SID and Semiotic Framning) into the SAwD tool served as basis for a preliminary investigation and evaluation of SAwD as a potential platform for this purpose.

Concerning SID, the comparison between the poster filled during in-person activity and the SAwD tool filled afterwards (Fig. 2) indicates that the activity could be conducted online with the support of the tool. The SAwD supported the same input type in a collaborative way. During the workshop, each participant wrote their contribution in a post-it and stuck it on the SID poster. Some of them discussed the ideas before writing the post-it. In a similar way, participants would be able to fill SID with their contributions in SAwD. The online tool also supports discussions via the chat feature with one important advantage: the online chat can be retrieved later if needed. Even if one records the discussions in in-person activities, retrieving specific information would be easier in SAwD. Differences were only found when handling the EF. The main difference observed was that the SAwD tool supports the interaction exactly as the artifact was intended for: it directly relates stakeholders to possible problems and ideas for solutions. When using the EF in person with post-it's, participants were able to insert problems at random without relating them to stakeholders. This is not possible in the present version of the SAwD tool. This difference between the original physical artefact and its online adaptation has positive and negative consequences. While SAwD does not reflect the interaction that happens in person, it forces the specified use of the artifact, making the activity more productive in terms of both effectiveness and efficiency.

Another important advantage of the SAwD tool is that it is easier to manipulate for recording and later analysis. When the workshops were over, the posters had to be rolled up and carried with care so that the post-it's would not be lost during transportation. Moreover, in order to read the results, one would need to open the entire poster and find a place to hang it. When dealing with an increased number of workshops, storing all the resulting posters becomes a troublesome task. Also the costs are higher in the in-person activity as it is necessary to have the posters with the artifacts printed; buy post-it's and pens; plus the additional costs of a physical installation (rent, facilities like restrooms and cleaning, etc.). This characteristic results in the main contribution of the SAwD tool in its value for an OpenDesign project. Since the artifacts in SAwD are easy to store and use, they are therefore easy to share. Other projects that are intended for similar scenarios can use the same results from a previous activity. The filled artifacts may serve as a starting point for different design projects. They may be used as they are or they may inspire other creations. Just like in Open Source projects, the SAwD tool will make it possible to leave the contributions for the Open Design community to use them as pleased or needed.

By analyzing the results from both workshops, which had the same central theme (airports), we can observe that some results were the same in both workshops. For example, as SID results both had passenger, attendant, etc.; and as EF results, time for check in and for landing, concerns with luggage, etc. In this sense, we can hypothesize that, if participants from the second workshop had had the chance to access the artifacts that resulted from the first workshop, they could have benefited from that knowledge and could have started with a preliminary understanding from the point of view of a different group. This would be possible with the SAwD tool.

From all of these advantages that were mentioned, in summary, one may affirm that the adaptations that were made so far to use the artifacts from Organizational Semiotics and Socially Aware Design as online tools were successful. The SAwD tool, as it is today, already provides support for all of the activities that usually takes place in faceto-face encounters. Moreover, it supports the concept of Open Design, as it allows sharing, coping, and editing the already existent design processes. However, more investigation is needed in order to enhance the SAwD tool even further. Tracking the decisions and changes that are made during the discussions could be a differential for the tool, as any contribution or change could be recovered. In addition, one of the challenges that is part of our future work is to include the role of a mediator. As it occurs in the face-to-face workshops, participants can profit from a mediator to inform and guide the discussions.

Only SF and EF were mentioned in this article; however, SAwD also supports dynamic online collaborative work with the Semiotic Onion [START_REF] Stamper | A Semiotic Theory of Information and Information Systems[END_REF][9] [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems and Engineering[END_REF] and Semiotic Ladder [START_REF] Stamper | A Semiotic Theory of Information and Information Systems[END_REF][8] [START_REF] Liu | Organisational Semiotics for Business Informatics[END_REF]; VIF [START_REF] Pereira | Values and cultural aspects in design: artifacts for making them explicit in design activities[END_REF]; CARF [START_REF] Pereira | Values and cultural aspects in design: artifacts for making them explicit in design activities[END_REF], Value Pie [START_REF] Pereira | Value pie: a culturally informed conceptual scheme for understanding values in design[END_REF] and others.

Conclusion

The OpenDesing philosophy presupposes an open production in which what is produced belongs to everyone and not only to the creators of it. This means that a design solution can be extended or reapplied by others, whenever proponents agree to create an OpenDesign. The shared solution assumes that anyone can join or leave the team at any time. Each person can instantiate a design solution or part of it for a reuse of what has already been produced. This article described two workshops that took place as in-person activities at a conference in 2016 and a symposium in 2017, to investigate the use of Organizational Semiotics and the Socially Aware Design artifacts to support ideas of Open Design. The analysis of the results and the comparison of the same activities using the online and collaborative tool SAwD indicate that SAwD has the potential of supporting the OpenDesign concept. This preliminary investigation has also indicated possibilities for the enhancement of the SAwD tool. Next steps include further development and evaluation of SAwD, as well as deeper investigation on the OpenDesign concept.

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1. Group discussion during the first workshop: SID (left) and EF (right).

Fig. 2 .

 2 Fig. 2. From left to right: Poster of Stakeholders Identification Diagram being filled during the first workshop; the same artifact on the SAwD tool.

Acknowledgments. We would like to thank our colleagues from InterHad for insightful discussions. We also thank the financial support of CNPq (306272/2017-2); CAPES (1644511); and process grants # (#2015/24300-9) and (#2015/16528-0) from São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP).


Enyun Li
email: e.li@pgr.reading.ac.uk

Yinshan Tang
email: y.tang@henley.ac.uk

The Role of Language in Human Information Interaction: A Social Semiotic View

Keywords: Human Information Interaction, Social Semiotics, Language, Human Judgement

Human information interaction is a dynamic and complex process and is affected by various factors including social and cognitive factors. This study provides a new approach to study human information interaction from a social semiotic perspective and views human information interaction as a social semiotic process. Language, as a most important information carrier, is viewed as a social semiotic system and plays a key role in human information interaction. It not only carries and stores information, but also construes information. This study analyzes the role of language in human information interaction by exploring human judgment in native language and foreign language, which implies that language affects human judgement and thinking that conducts human information activities. The effect depends on the natural logic which limits the meaning-making process of language. Language, to an extent, affects the meaning creation at information interface through which human interact with information content and process information.

Introduction

With the development of information digitalization, various aspects of information interaction are dramatically affected and changed, which greatly affects the design and management of information systems. Human information interaction (HII), as a part of information interaction, refers to the relationship between human actors and information content. HII is increasingly attracting scholars' interest to study all aspects of the way and process that people interact with information, aiming to create better information systems.

Most studies of HII focus on human information behavior and mainly do the analysis from psychological, cognitive and social perspectives or multiapproach views. It is still at the forming stage and needs deep study of all aspects of HII in that HII is a complex and dynamic process that integrate various elements and factors to produce information and carry out information activities. Dzandu & Tang propose a framework of HII from a semiotic perspective and divide HII into three levels-syntactic interaction, semantic interaction and pragmatic interaction, viewing semantic interaction as the center of HII which happens at an interface between human actors and information content known as human information interface [START_REF] Dzandu | Beneath a learning management system -Understanding the human information interaction in information systems[END_REF]. Dzandu also holds a viewpoint that people might have different initial trust judgement in native language and foreign language [START_REF] Dzandu | initial trust judgement in native language and foreign language[END_REF]. This implies that languages might affect human information activities and might affect HII through which information activities are carried out, which requires further empirical explorations. This paper attempts to analyze the role of language in HII by further studying human judgement in native language and foreign language. The study is from a social semiotic perspective which analyzes all meanings in social dimensions and views language as a social semiotic system [START_REF] Halliday | Construing Experience Through Meaning: A Language-based Approach to Cognition[END_REF], which will provide a new approach to HII.

Studies and Development of Human Information Interaction

HII is an emerging area and refers to the interaction between human actors and information content. With the development of modern technology and information digitalization, researchers are increasingly addressing HII and study all aspects of the way how people produce and perceive information and carry out information activities, aiming to create better information systems. HII is a complicated process involving various aspects of human communication and attracts researchers to explore all the complexity and study the affecting factors from many areas such as philosophy, psychology, sociology, linguistics and information theory. Studies addressing HII are flourishing and fruitful in many fields, e.g. human computer interaction (HCI), computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW), human factors and library and information science (LIS) [START_REF] Fidel | Human information interaction: an ecological approach to information behavior[END_REF]. HCI focuses on the study of human computer interface to develop models and theories of interaction aiming to improve HII. CSCW addresses HII when it studies information activities such as information sharing and collaborative information retrieval in the context of collaborative and cooperative work. Human factors studies address HII when they are concerned of aspects of tools used that will affect humans to get information.

In LIS, one of its subject-human information behavior (HIB) pays more attention to HII, which centers on the study of human behavior of processing information in different contexts and focuses on human interaction between people and material objects in a certain environment [START_REF] Fidel | Human information interaction: an ecological approach to information behavior[END_REF].

Approaches to these studies especially of HIB which more emphasizes on HII are mainly from perspectives of psychology, social sciences or multi-approaches. The psychological approach focuses on the cognitive factors affecting information interaction within or without context. One important theory is the information-processing model of cognition which describes that thinking is limited by the linear information structure and limited processing resources [START_REF] Marchionini | Human-Information interaction research and development[END_REF]. Another one is the mental models which evoke researches to study HIB by focusing on human thinking conducting information behavior, simulating presumed cognitive functions and observing various information behaviors in certain environment [START_REF] Marchionini | Human-Information interaction research and development[END_REF]. The psychological approach addresses cognitive processes and emphasizes individual psychological variables in HII, which helps researchers propose many useful models for information behavior such as Talor's model of prenegotiation decisions, Krikelas's model of information seeking and Dervin's sense-making model and Belkin's ASK model [START_REF] Fidel | Human information interaction: an ecological approach to information behavior[END_REF]. The psychological approach emphasizing cognitive stages and processes and ignores physical environment and cultural backgrounds which are important factors that affect information behavior. Therefore, some researchers devote to studying the effect of social factors on information behavior. These studies addressing social context and employ various social theories to develop information framework, such as diffusion theory, gratification theory, social network theory, social capital theory and sociolinguistic theory. They also analyze the effect of communities on information interaction like gender, age and social classes in a group [START_REF] Fidel | A Multidimensional Approach to the Study of Human Information Interaction: A Case Study of Collaborative Information Retrieval[END_REF]. Fidel proposes a framework of cognitive work analysis (CWA) of HII employing ecological approach [START_REF] Fidel | Human information interaction: an ecological approach to information behavior[END_REF]. This approach emphasizes the effect of context and addresses cognitive factors as well and analyzes human actors' information interaction with its environment. The framework is effective in analyzing information behavior within a particular community, especially the analysis of collaborative information retrieval (CIR).

Until now, the studies addressing HII focus on the process and relevant factors affecting HIB, which greatly contributes to the development of information retrieval, human-computer interaction and digital libraries. HII is a complex and dynamic process, and the study of it is still at the forming stage and needs to explore all its complexity.

3

Language and HII

A Social Semiotic View of HII

First, it is necessary to discuss the definition of information. Scholars from different arears give different definitions with different emphasis of information. Shannon & Weaver define that information is the reduction of uncertainty addressing the function or purpose of information in information transmission [START_REF] Shannon | The Mathematical Theory of Communication[END_REF]. Davis and Ohlson define information as processed data "that is meaningful to the recipient and is of real or perceived value in current or prospective actions or decisions" [START_REF] Hill | The Impact of Information on Society: An examination of its nature, value and usage[END_REF]. Fidel gives a similar definition viewing information as a thing that has meaning and is useful for decision making [START_REF] Fidel | Human information interaction: an ecological approach to information behavior[END_REF]. Dzandu & Tang's study on HII emphasizes that human actors interact with information by making meanings within a certain environment from a semiotic view [START_REF] Dzandu | Beneath a learning management system -Understanding the human information interaction in information systems[END_REF]. Thus, meaning is the main concern of information and information is construed on the base of meaning processed with content within a certain environment. HII is in nature human actors' meaning-making process with information content. The central meaning-making process takes place at a semantic interface known as human information interface through which information and meaning are transformed. All the interaction takes place within a certain social environment and is affected by various factors including social and cultural backgrounds, situational background and personal backgrounds. The information content is represented by information carriers such as words, images, sounds, colors, etc. All the information carriers are of social meaning potential from social semiotic perspective, which are called as social semiotic resources/systems. HII is human's interaction with social semiotic resources and making meanings within a certain environment. Thus, HII is in nature a social semiotic process between human actors and social semiotic resources/information content. The central concern of human information interface through which information is produced and information activities are carried out is the meaning creation (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. A social semiotic view of HII

A Trial of People's Judgment in Native Language and Foreign Language

Various factors affect the meaning creation at human information interface, e.g., social environment, situational context, individual's differences. Language is a most significant information carrier although not the only one and important in storing and transmitting information. Language is viewed as a social semiotic resource and plays a key role in constituting social structures [START_REF] Halliday | Language as social semiotic[END_REF]. It is not only an information carrier but also an element of social and cultural environment. Thus, it is very significant in HII and communication. Dzandu describes that people might have different initial trust judgement in native language and foreign language [START_REF] Dzandu | initial trust judgement in native language and foreign language[END_REF]. Keysar and his team also carry out series of experiments on risk judgements among people whose native language was English and foreign language was Japanese. The experiments imply that people tend to make less risky judgment in foreign language. They attribute the results to people's different reasoning systems in different languages from psychological perspective. Dr Keysar wrote: "A foreign language provides a distancing mechanism that moves people from the immediate intuitive system to a more deliberate mode of thinking" [START_REF] Keysar | The Foreign-Language Effect: Thinking in a Foreign Tongue Reduces Decision Biases[END_REF]. These experiments show that human judgement might be affected by different languages. The To further test whether people have different judgements in different languages, a trial was designed with enlarged types of judgements, questions and languages. A questionnaire was used in the trial and languages are Chinese (native language) and English (foreign language). The questionnaire contained five questions about people's judgement in a certain situation including initial trust judgment, moral judgement. The original materials were in Chinese and the English version was equivalent translation. Each question was followed by likelihood scales ranging from 1 to 5 (1=very highly likely to do, 5=not very likely to do).

In the trial, 60 people (19 males, 41 females) participated in the experiment. Their age ranged from 20 to 40 (<20rs=6, 20ys-30ys=49, 30rs-39rs=5). All participants' native language should be Chinese, and foreign language should be English. Among the participants, 30 people took part in Chinese questionnaire while the other 30 people participated in English equivalent questionnaire. Two participants were excluded from the analysis, either because the participant's foreign language was not English or the participant did not do the questionnaire at all. 52 participants were Chinese university students living in China and the other 8 participants were Chinese people living or working in UK. The participants' level of English proficiency was not tested. Questionnaires were sent to participants randomly. Participants were asked to give their judgement on the events by giving a likelihood scale and a brief explanation.

4

Results and Discussion

In the trial, the collected data was divided into two groups according to languages and was analyzed by descriptive analysis and non-parameter analysis with SPSS. According to the significance test (p value) between the two language groups which was analyzed by non-parameter analysis, except question 5 (p=0.10), the results showed that the p value of other questions was less than 0.05, which demonstrated that people's judgement in native language and foreign language were significantly different.

Although the p value of question 5 was 0.10, the mean values of likelihood ratings (M value) between Chinese group and English group were different (M=3'45 and M=3.9 respectively). The mean likelihood ratings of questions between each group were illustrated in Figure 2, which showed people made different judgment on the events between the two language groups. The mean values of foreign language groups (English) were higher than that of native language groups (Chinese). Question 1,2 and 5 were about initial trust judgement. Question 3 and question 4 were about moral judgement. According to the mean values of each language group, people might tend to make more negative decisions on initial trust and moral events in a foreign language. In the trial, the question about initial trust (question 2) is more significantly different than other questions in the language groups (p=0.00), which implies that people's initial trust judgment might be more easily affected by native language and foreign language. This is consistent with the result of Dzandu's experiment. However, the results still need further experiments to test it because either the present trial or Dzandu's experiment is still limited in supporting the results. The samples are too small and the participants' backgrounds are too complicated. More variables need to be further controlled, e.g., age ranges, job backgrounds and foreign language proficiency, which would affect human judgement. Fig. 2. Mean likelihood ratings for the groups of items by language. Native language: Chinese; Foreign language: English.

The result is consistent with Halliday's viewpoint that people have different emphasis on meanings when perceiving the same events in different languages. Language, as a social semiotic system, embodies the relations between language, meaning and functions within society, just as what Halliday describes "language is as it is because of the functions it has evolved to serve in people's lives" [START_REF] Halliday | Language as social semiotic[END_REF]. The functions of language are realized by the semantic system of language, which is stratified into strata consisting of phonology/morphology, lexicogrammar and semantics. The central meaning-making resource of language takes place in its lexicogrammar and semantics which are called as content plane of language. The semantic layer is the interface where experience and information are "transformed into meaning" and the lexicogrammar layer conducts "the way this transformation takes place" [START_REF] Halliday | Construing Experience Through Meaning: A Language-based Approach to Cognition[END_REF]. Different languages are different social semiotic systems and differ in their meanings, not only differing in basic units such as words, sounds and meanings but also differing in the way they are combined to make meanings. This determines the meaning-making resources and affects "what the members of the community attend to" perceive the world around them [START_REF] Halliday | Language as social semiotic[END_REF]. Even people who can speak two languages have "the same perception of events", but "they pay attention to different characteristics of them and so build up a rather different framework for the systematization of experience" [START_REF] Halliday | Language as social semiotic[END_REF]. For example, in the trial of question 3, the participants had the same perception that the situation was a kind of dilemma, either in Chinese or in English. However, participants' responses to the situation in native language 0 0.5 Chinese English and foreign language were different. Native language and foreign language as two different social semiotic systems constituting their own social meanings have different meaning-making resources and would affect people's judgement of the world.

The study also extends Whorf hypothesis that language affects its native speaker's thinking [START_REF] Whorf | Language, mind, and reality[END_REF]. The result of the trial implicates that human thinking is not only affected by native language but also affected by foreign language. Languages affect human thinking and the meaning-making process. Thinking is the way human mind works which conducts all human activities. In most situation, human think with language. In the process that human learn or acquire a language, the system of each language forms a meaning framework which could affect human thinking. HII refers to the relationship between human actors and information content and is in nature human's meaning-making process with information carriers. The meaning-making process takes place at an information interface through which meaning is created and information is processed, which is conducted by human thinking. meanings and performing information activities (Fig. 3). Among these factors, language is a most significant one. It not only carries and transmit information, but also construes information by affecting human information interface and thus affects human information activities, as what showed in the trial that native language and foreign language affect human judgement and decision making in the same situation. Language, as a social semiotic system, affects human thinking on the basis of its semantic system which is stratified into phonology/phonetics (expression), lexicogrammar (wording), semantics (meaning) and context [START_REF] Halliday | Construing Experience Through Meaning: A Language-based Approach to Cognition[END_REF]. The strata of language work together to realize meaning logically, which is mainly realized on the meaning base-the three dimensions of meaning: ideational, interpersonal and textual meaning and each is realized by its grammatical system within a context. Halliday describes "Language is powered by grammatical energy" [START_REF] Halliday | On Grammar[END_REF]. The "grammatical energy" to generate meaning mainly exist in lexicogrammar and semantics between which the realizational relationship is natural. The realization of meaning is based on the natural relationship or natural logic, which affects human thinking and meaning and creation. Thus, the effect of language on human thinking lies in the natural logic. The logic of language in nature exists in the various systems of language which influence human in choosing language items to realize meaning. The natural logic is the framework or scaffolding of meaning.

The study explores human judgment in native language and foreign language and analyzes the role of language in HII, emphasizing the central meaning-resources of language and their realization of meaning. It is meaningful for the study and development of information systems of which user, system, content are three important elements. At each level including user-system management, system-content management and usercontent management, various factors affect user's information activities, among which human factors are a most important and complicated one. The study of the role of language in HII is a deep study of human elements affecting information activities through information systems. This will be helpful for the design and management of information systems, especially for communities of multilingual backgrounds which would influence human information activities. Analyzing and digitalizing the differences in languages and their effect on information activities will be greatly important for information systems management and services to reduce language barriers. For example, the appraisal systems of different languages have similar items, however, may have different positive effect and negative effect on human thinking and judgement.

This will also promote the study of natural language understanding which is a most difficult topic in artificial intelligence (AI). The study implies that human judgement and thinking is different in native language and foreign language, which is resulted from their different social semiotic systems which is of natural logic. To help a machine understand and produce natural language is to help a machine have natural language logic based on the semantic system of language in that natural logic of language lies in the systems of language. Digitalizing and analyzing the central meaning-making resources or semantic systems of different languages and the way of combination to make meanings which would affect human thinking will be a way to help machines think grammatically and act grammatically. This is also meaningful for foreign language teaching and learning in which language logic is an important topic.

The study of human judgment in native language and foreign language also extends previous related studies which are focused on human psychological process of language process. This study explores the influence of foreign language on human judgement from social semiotic perspective and emphasizes the logic of language which conducts the meaning-making re-sources of language to realize meaning that affects human judgement.

Conclusion

The study provides a new approach to HII by analyzing the role of language in HII from a social semiotic perspective. HII is a dynamic and complex process and is affected by various factors including social and cognitive factors. Previous studies addressing HII analyze these factors mainly from cognitive perspective or social and cultural perspective. The social semiotic study of HII view information as a subclass of meaning and HII as a social semiotic process in which human actors interact with information content and make meanings within a certain social environment. The central meaning-making process takes place through information interface between human actors and information content where information is transformed and interpreted based on the meaning base within a certain environment. Language is not only an important information carrier, but also plays a key role in construing information on the base of its semiotic system. The study analyzes the role of language by exploring human judgment in native language and foreign language, which implies that human judgment and thinking is affected by languages. Language construes meaning with its semantic systems conducted by natural logic, which affects human's meaning creation and affects human thinking, thus affecting human information interface through which meaning is created and information is transformed and interpreted.

  limited in supporting the results. There are too many factors affecting people's judgment and more empirical explorations are required.

Fig. 3 .

 3 Fig. 3. Language in human information interaction