Hennoste, Tiit

Kuusk, Piret

Rumm, Andra

English

ADA University of Tartu

Research shows three main causes for map related problems in Estonian emergency calls.• The call-taker’s lack of map-reading ability. This is most evident in ex 2, where the call-taker does not fi nd the most common route form one town to another. The importance of map-reading has also been ac-knowledged earlier (Vries, Geduld 2015). In addition to geographical knowledge, better utilization of the emergency service’s map applica-tion would also have alleviated the interactional problem in ex 1.• Call-taker’s lack of local knowledge, which has previously been not-ed as a major contributor for location problems in emergency calls  (Nor-mark, Randall 2005; Nattrass et al.  2017). This is most evident in ex 1, where the call-taker expresses verbally that they do not have the neces-sary information because they are not local. The lack of local knowledge is more covert in other excerpts where the call-taker does not possess the same information. • The human ability to process information, which is an inevitable source of interactional problems. Every situation that involves a per-son has some human error that ultimately cannot be prevented, for in-stance problems with hearing, ability to remember or note information, e.g. ex 3.Why Don’t Good Tools Bring Good Outcomes?Map Related Problems in Estonian Emergency CallsPiret Kuusk, Tiit Hennoste, Andra RummUniversity of TartuIntroduction and aimDetermining the exact location of an incident is one of the most import-ant aspects of an emergency call. Previous studies have shown that over 41% of all responses given by the callers concerning location turn out to be problematic (Kuusk 2020). A signifi cant part of locational problems is related to the map in use.Map related problems have previously been noted in studies concerning developing countries where the map application used by the emergency services does not always correspond to the real circumstances (Nattrass et al. 2017). However, the map application used by the Estonian Emergency Services is detailed and accurate. We shall look at the interactional problems that map applications cause in Estonian emergency calls. The aim is to determine what causes map re-lated location problems.We argue that the map application can cause problems despite its ap-parent quality and the amount of its additional details. Most cases of map related problems stem from the call-taker’s inability to fi nd the correct lo-cation on the map. The data come from the Corpus of Spoken Estonian of the University of Tartu. The used method is conversation analysis (see Liddicoat 2007).(1) Caller’s (C) and call-taker’s (CT) preferred landmarks01 C:  need=on=need eem (0.8) jäävad=sia haigla poole=peale.   these are these umm they are here on the hospital side 02   (0.7) 03 CT:  no mina=i=tea kus=se aigla on te räägite Tallinnaga sel[lepärast ma=ta]hangi   well I don’t know where the hospital is you’re talking to Tallinn, that’s why I 04   aadressi üles leida.  want to fi nd the address.05 C:                        [* aa:::: *]                            oooohh06   (1.1) 07 CT:  et kumb se [sis võib olla.]    so which one could it be 08 C:           [mis- mis=on] see koolima[ja::: {--}] ((kõrvale))             what- what is the school ((unintelligible)) ((asking a bystander))09 CT:            [kas=seal: selle Piiri] koolimaja juures              is there a bus stop near the Piiri10   on=õ bussipeatus.  schoolhouse11    (1.4) 12 C:  ee jah on kü[ll.]   um yes there is13 CT:              [on] bussipeatus.                  there is a bus stop.14   (0.5) 15 C:  ja [sin=on] kaks staadionit on [`uus ja on vanem]   and there are two stadiums, a new and an old one 16 CT:      [{--}]         [{seal=on see se]al=on}       ((unintelligible))       there is this there is 17   (0.5) 18 CT:  se=on ai:gla se=i=ole koolimaja   it is a hospital it’s not a schoolhouse (2) Offi  cial and unoffi  cial locators in a call about a fallen tree 01 C:  tere:: (.) lihtsalt annan teada=et puu on üle maante Vändra Viljandi::  hello, I’m just letting you know that there is a tree on the road from Vändra 02   kolmekümne kahe::: (0.3) kolmekümne teisel kilomeetril.   to Viljandi on the thirty second kilometre.   ((Lines about determining the type of road removed))03   (0.5)04 CT:  mm * mhmh * .hhh et se=on=sis=ääääää > Pärnu Rakvere Sõmeru maante. <  uhuh, so it is the Pärnu Rakvere Sõmeru highway then05   (1.4)06 C:  võib küll olla jah,  might be so, yesMap Related Problems in Estonian Emergency CallsMap 1. Place of the incident in exerpt 1 (Land Board)(3) Call-taker does not catch necessary information01 C:  Haljala vallamaja ette /--/ ((juhtum kusututatud))  in front of the Haljala parish municipality building ((incident redacted))02   (1.2) ((typing sounds))03 CT:  mm:: nhhhhhh ja mis aadress seal=on.  umm and what’s the address there 04   (0.7) 05 C:  ää:: Võsu::: Mere::: Mere:=mingi tänav (.) ma=i=tea Mere kuus äkki, oli=vä  Võsu borough Mere something street I don’t know 6 Mere street maybe, was it06   (1.3) ((typing sounds))07 C:  Oo kõrts=jaa Seitsmes Taevas on=sin lähedal.  Oo bar and nightclub Seitsmes Taevas are near here.08   (0.5) 09 CT:  mmhm ja mis- mis=seal lähedal on  mmhm and what- what’s located near there?Contactpiret.kuusk.1@ut.eetiit.hennoste@ut.eeandra.rumm@ut.eeReferences TranscriptionKuusk, Piret 2020. Vastustest tekkivad suhtlusprobleemid Eesti hädaabikõnedes. Tartu: University of Tartu. Master’s thesis.Liddicoat, Anthony 2007. An introduction to conversation analysis. London; New York, NY: Continuum.Land Board. Estonian Land Board Geoportal’s Map Application. Web https://xgis.maaamet.ee/xgis2/page/app/maainfo (viewed on June 14th 2021).Nattrass, Rhona, Watermeyer, Jennifer, Robson, Catherine, Penn, Claire 2017. Local expertise and landmarks in place reformulations during emergency medical calls. – Journal of Pragmatics, 120, pg 73–87.Normark, Maria, Randall, Dave 2005. Local Expertise at an Emergency Call Centre. – ECSCW 2005. Ed Hans Gellersen, Kjeld Schmidt, Michel Beaudouin-Lafon, Wendy Mackay. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, pg 347–366.Vries, Shaheem de, Geduld, Heike 2015. Geography should be taught at medical school. – South African Medical Journal, 105, no 10, pg 816.(.)   micropause (0.7)  timed pause[ ]   speech overlaps{ }   unclear section(( ))   transcriber’s comment Underlining stress=   latching of words:   stretched sound* *    quieter voice > <   quickened paceResults and discussionMap 2. Place of the incident in exerpt 2 (Land Board)In an incident near two schools the call-taker is not able to fi nd the correct location without the exact ad-dress. The caller uses the hospital as a landmark (l 1) but the call-taker dismisses it by saying they do not know where the hospital is because they themselves are not a local (l 3–4). Subsequently, the call-taker asks about bus stops that could be near the incident scene (l 9–10), indicating what landmarks are pre-ferred by them. Later it can be seen that the call-tak-ers indeed have hospitals marked on their maps, therefore they could be used in the location process (l 18). See map 1. The caller gives an exact location by saying what road they are on and the kilometre of the incident (l 1). The latter is the Emergency Services’ preferred way of locating a site on the roads. Proff ered road name is not offi  cial but indicates a main route from one town to an-other. The call-taker therefore con-cludes the offi  cial name themselves (l 4) but does not identify the correct road. The call-taker may have got-ten too focused on the fi rst part of the location given – Vändra – and searched for “big roads” (not shown in excerpt) around it without consid-ering the latter part of the location given. See map 2. European UnionEuropean Regional Development FundInvestingin your future123123First schoolSecond schoolHospitalBus StopRoad of incidentCT’s conclusionThe caller requests help, saying the incident occurred in front of a parish municipality building (l 1). The call-taker does not consider this an adequate location and asks for an address (l 3), to which the caller responds fi rst with an approximate address, then with a detailed but uncer-tain one (l 5). Not getting a response from the call-tak-er, the caller expands on the location by naming some near-by establishments (l 7). Despite the caller giving an address, the call-taker responds to the latter part of the information by asking about the near-by locations (l 9). There might be multiple reasons behind the decision of the call-taker’s turn. First, the caller’s uncertain knowl-edge could make them untrustworthy regarding this information. Second, as the call-taker was heard typ-ing after the offi  cial address was presented, they might have not heard or paid attention to it. 

Why Don’t Good Tools Bring Good Outcomes? Map Related Problems in Estonian Emergency Calls

https://dspace.ut.ee/bitstream/handle/10062/87819/kuusk_ipra_poster_1.pdf?sequence=6&isAllowed=y

Why Don’t Good Tools Bring Good Outcomes? Map Related Problems in Estonian Emergency Calls

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ADA University of Tartu