Klein, G., Moon, B., & Hoffman, R. R. (2006). Making Sense of Sensemaking 1: Alternative Perspectives. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21(4), 70–73

Gary Klein et al review the literature on Sensemaking from the perspective of Human-computer interaction (in particular human-centered computing). They point out that the term has become quite diffuse, and it’s not at all clear that the solutions people gesture will actually help with the actual problem as people encounter it.

They offer a useful definition:

Sensemaking is a motivated, continuous effort to understand connections (which can be among people, places, and events) in order to anticipate their trajectories and act effectively.

Under this definition, it’s far from clear that solutions like “data fusion” and “automatic hypothesis inference” will help.

They suggest many functions of sensemaking which resonate with me:

• It satisfies a need or ==drive to comprehend==.
• It helps us ==test and improve the plausibility of our explanations and explain apparent anomalies==. Whether an explanation makes sense depends on the person who’s doing the sensemaking. The property of “being an explanation” isn’t a property of statements but an interaction of people, situations, and knowledge.
• It’s often a retrospective analysis of events. It ==clarifies the past== but doesn’t make it transparent (that is, completely understood).
• It ==anticipates the future==. This makes action possible, though uncertain. It helps us muster resources, anticipate difficulties, notice problems, and realize concerns.
• It isn’t the choice of an explanation but a ==process of deliberating over alternative plausible explanations==.
• It guides the exploration of information.
• It’s ==often a social activity== that promotes the achievement of common ground. It isn’t just an individual activity.

Sensemaking is a {motivated, continuous effort} to {understand connections} in order to {anticipate their trajectories and act effectively}.