HumanComputer Interaction Stuart Card Senior Research Fellow at Xerox PARC Bachelors in Physics PhD in Psychology Psychology Artificial Intelligence Computer Science Thomas Moran Engineer at IBM ID: 326204
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "The Psychology of" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
The Psychology of
Human-Computer InteractionSlide2
Stuart Card
Senior Research Fellow
at Xerox PARC
Bachelors in Physics
Ph.D. in PsychologyPsychologyArtificial IntelligenceComputer Science
Thomas MoranEngineer at IBM Almaden Research Center and manager at Xerox PARCFounding Editor ofHuman-Computer Interaction journal
Allen NewellResearcher at RAND and at Carnegie MellonComputer ScienceCognitive PsychologyTuring Award in 1975 for his work in AI and “the psychology of human cognition”Passed away in 1992
Q:
What do HCI and AI have to do with
eachother
?Slide3
Human Processor Model
“The Human Processor Model draws an analogy between the processing and storage areas of a computer, with the perceptual, motor, cognitive and memory areas of the computer user.”
Q:
Is this all there is to how we think and interact with the world?Slide4
GOMS
G
oalsOperatorsMethodsSelection rulesSlide5
GOMS
Goals What a user has to accomplish.
Operators Action performed in service of a goal. Methods Sequences of operators and subgoals that accomplish a goal.
Selection rules Choices between multiple methods that accomplish the same goal.Slide6
GOMS Variants
Keystroke-Level Model (KLM)CMN-GOMSNGOMSLCPM-GOMSSlide7
Keystroke-Level Model (KLM)
KLM is the simplest GOMS technique, and uses methods in sequence form composed of keystroke-level operators.
Useful for most common single-user tasks, but impractical for representing high-level tasks.Slide8
CogTool
CogTool is an open-source tool for KLM analysis developed at Carnegie Mellon.
http://cogtool.hcii.cs.cmu.edu/Slide9
CogTool
Comparing two designsSlide10
CMN-GOMS
CMN-GOMS is the first GOMS model by Card, Moran, and Newell, and uses a goal hierarchy of methods in program form
. Predicts operator sequence and execution time, and focuses attention on the methods used to accomplish goals.Slide11
Natural GOMS Language (NGOMSL)
NGOMSL attempts to provide a natural, well-defined, high-level syntax for GOMS, and represents methods in terms of the cognitive complexity theory (CCT)
. Predicts learning time as well as execution time, and can represent the user’s memory usage.Slide12
Q:
Do these theoretical mental
models really contribute to practical design issues, or are they a distraction? Where is the real “science” in HCI? Can since and design coexists?
~ nada
“ The current GOMS models are quite effective because they capture procedural speed and complexity. But other aspects of human performance with an interface are not addressed by the simple cognitive architectures underlying the current GOMS variants. ”
BONNIE E. JOHN AND DAVID E. KIERAS. 1996. THE GOMS FAMILY OF USER INTERFACE ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES: COMPARISON AND CONTRAST. ACM TRANS. COMPUT.-HUM. INTERACT. 3, 4 (DECEMBER 1996), 320-351.Slide13
Keystroke-Level Model for
Advanced Mobile Phone Interaction
Paul HolleisResearch Group Embedded Interaction University of Munich Friederike
OttoHeinrich HußmannMedia Informatics Group University of Munich Albrecht Schmidt
Fraunhofer IAIS, Sankt AugustinB-IT, University of BonnSlide14
Introduction
Goal: Extend KLM by identifying basic interaction elements for mobile phones and give performance estimates derived from user tests.
KLM is a precise predictor of expert user performance when comparing designs.Q:
Why do we care so much about the expert user? Should we?Slide15
Operators
Original Operators:Keystroke (K)
Pointing (P)Drawing (D(nD,lD))Homing (H)Mental Act (M)Response Time (R(t))
New Operators:Macro Attention Shift (
SMacro)Micro Attention Shift (SMicro)Distraction (X)Action (A(t))Gesture (G)Finger Movement (F)
Initial Act (I)Slide16
User Study
7 studies9-19 participants per study
50% students41% women Slide17
Evaluation
Conducted two scenarios for validation: KLM predicted 122 and
174 seconds. Actual result of 117 and 170 seconds.
Q: Can GOMS models, like KLM, be applied to any interface?
Q: Do you think the models that exist today can still be used for interactions on the future mobile devices?~
Aditi KulkarniSlide18
Conclusion
“ We
presented models of two different implementations of a real world scenario that also indicate that well grounded design decisions can be reached purely based on
the model predictions. ”