Split Menus: Effectively Using Selection Frequency to Organize Menus

ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI)

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 1994, Pages 27-51

  Sears, Andrew ^a   Shneiderman, Ben ^b  

^a DEPAUL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Human Computer Interaction; menus; selection frequency; split menus; user interface

Indexed keywords

EID: 0343269137     PISSN: 10730516     EISSN: 15577325     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/174630.174632     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. APPLE COMPUTER INC. 1987. Human Interface Guidelines: The Apple Desktop Interface. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.
2. BROWN, C. M. 1988. Human-Computer Interface Design Guidelines. Ablex, Norwood, N.J.
3. CARD, S. K. 1982. User perceptual mechanisms in the search of computer command menus. In Human Factors in Computer Systems Proceedings. ACM, New York, 190-196.
4. CALLAHAN, J., HOPKINS, D., WEISER, M., AND SHNEIDERMAN, B. 1988. An empirical comparison of pie versus linear menus. In Proceedings of Human Factors in Computing Systems ′88. ACM, New York, 95-100.
5. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE. 1991. Military Standard-Human engineering design criteria for military systems, equipment and facilities. MIL-STD-1472D, Dept. of Defense, Washington, D.C.
6. FISHER, D., YUNGKURTH, E., AND MOSS, S. 1990. Optimal menu hierarchy design: Syntax and semantics. Hum. Fact. 32, 6, 665-683.
7. GREENBERG, S. AND WITTEN, I. H. 1985. Adaptive personalized interfaces: A question of viability. Behav. Inf. Tech. 4, 1, 31-45.
8. GREENBERG, S. 1988. Tool use, reuse, and organization in command-driven interfaces. Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. of Computer Science, The Univ. of Calgary, Alberta, Calgary, 28-33.
9. LANDAUER, T. K. AND NACHBAR, D. W. 1985. Selection from alphabetic and numeric menu trees using a touch screen: Breadth, depth, and width. In Proceedings of Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 73-78.
10. LEE, E. AND MACGREGOR, J. 1985. Minimizing user search time in menu retrieval systems. Hum. Fact. 27, 2, 157-162.
11. MITCHELL, J. AND SHNEIDERMAN, B. 1989. Dynamic versus static menus: An exploratory comparison. SIGCHI Bull. 20, 4, 33-37.
12. NORMAN, K. 1991. The Psychology of Menu Selection. Ablex, Norwood, N.J.
13. OPEN SOFTWARE FOUNDATION. 1990. OSF/Motif Style Guide. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
14. PAAP, K. R. AND ROSKE-HOFSTRAND, R. J. 1988. Design of menus. In Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, 205-235.
15. PAAP, K. R. AND ROSKE-HOFSTRAND, R. J. 1986. The optimal number of menu options per panel. Hum. Fact. 28, 4, 377-385.
16. RUBINSTEIN, R. AND HERSH, H. 1986. The Human Factor: Designing Computer Systems for People. Digital Press, Burlington, Mass.
17. SEARS, A. 1993a. Layout appropriateness: Guiding user interface design with simple task descriptions. Ph.D. dissertation, Computer Science Dept., The Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Md.
18. SEARS, A. 1993b. Layout appropriateness: A metric for evaluating user inferface widget layout. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 19, 7, 707-719.
19. SHNEIDERMAN, B. 1992. Designing the User Interface. 2nd ed. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.
20. SMITH, S. L. AND MOSIER, J. N. 1986. Guidelines for designing user interface software. Rep. 7 MTR-10090, Mitre Corporation, Bedford, Mass.
21. SOMBERG, B. L. 1987. A comparison of rule-based and positionally constant arrangements of computer menu items. In Proceedings of CHI and GI ′87. ACM, New York, 255-260.
22. SUN MICROSYSTEMS, INC. 1990. OPEN LOOK Graphical User Interface Application Style Guidelines. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.
23. THORNDIKE, E. L. AND LORGE, I. 1944. The Teachers' Word Book of 30,000 Words. Columbia University Press, New York.
24. WALKER, N. AND SMELCER, J. 1990. A comparison of selection times from walking and pull-down menus. In Proceedings of Human Factors in Computing Systems ′90. ACM, New York, 221-225.