Human-centered design meets cognitive load theory: Designing interfaces that help people think

Proceedings of the 14th Annual ACM International Conference on Multimedia, MM 2006

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 871-880

  Oviatt, Sharon ^a,b  

^a Natural Interaction Systems   (United States)

^b OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cognitive load; Educational interfaces; Human centered design; Mobile interfaces; Multimodal interfaces; Pen based interfaces; Performance metrics; Robustness; Spoken language interfaces; Tangible interfaces; Usability

Indexed keywords

EDUCATIONAL INTERFACES; HUMAN-CENTERED DESIGN; MOBILE INTERFACES; PEN-BASED INTERFACES; PERFORMANCE METRICS; SPOKEN LANGUAGE INTERFACES; TANGIBLE INTERFACES;

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SYSTEMS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT; ROBUSTNESS (CONTROL SYSTEMS);

USER INTERFACES;

EID: 34547140648     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1180639.1180831     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (37)

1. Abowd, G. Classroom 2000: An experiment with the instrumentation of a living educational environment. IBM Systems Journal, 1999.38(4): 508-530.
2. Alibali, M., Kita, S., and Young, A. Gesture and the process of speech production: We think, therefore we gesture. Language and Cognitive Processing, 2000.15: 593-613.
3. Anderson, R., Hoyer, C, Wolfman, S., and Anderson, R. A study of digital ink in lecture presentation. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'04). 2004. Vienna, Austria: ACM/SIGCHI: 567-574.
4. Anoto technology, http://www.anoto.com (2006).
5. Baddeley, A. Working memory. 1986, New York: Oxford University Press.
6. Baddeley, A. Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Neuroscience, 2003. 4: 829-839.
7. Camp, G., Paas, F., Rikers, R., and van Merrienboer, J. Dynamic problem selection in air traffic control training: A comparison between performance, mental effort and mental efficiency. Computers in Human Behavior, 2001.17: 575-595.
8. Cohen, P.R. and McGee, D.R. Tangible multimodal interfaces for safety critical applications. Communications of the ACM, 2004. 47(1): 41-46.
9. Farmer, E. and Brownson, A. Review of workload measurement, analysis and interpretation methods physiological measures, performance-based measures, and self-assessment measures. CARE-Integra-TRS-130-02-WP2, 2003.
10. Friedman, T. The age of interruption. New York Times. July 5, 2006.
11. Goldin-Meadow, S., Nusbaum, H., Kelly, S.J., and Wagner, S. Explaining math: Gesturing lightens the load. Psychological Science, 2001. 12(6): 516-522.
12. Ho, C and Spence, C Assessing the effectiveness of various auditory cues in capturing a driver's visual attention Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 2005.11: 157-174.
13. John, M., Kobus, D., and Morrison, J. Augmented cognition technical integration experiment (TIE). Technical Report 1905, December 2003, DARPA.
14. Leapfrog, http://www.leapfrog.com (2006).
15. Liao, C., Guimbretiere, F., and Hinckley, K. Papiercraft: A system of interactive paper. In Proceedings of the Conference on User Interface Software and Technology (VISTOS). 2005. New York, NY: ACM/SIGCHI: 241-244.
16. Mayer, R.E. and Moreno, R. A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1998. 90(2): 312-320.
17. Mousavi, S.Y., Low, R., and Sweller, J. Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1995. 87(2): 319-334.
18. th International Conference on User Modeling (UM'2001). 2001: Springer: 24-33.
19. Oulasvirta, A., Tamminen, S., Roto, V., and Kuorelahti, J. Interaction in 4-second bursts: The fragmented nature of attentional resources in mobile HCI. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'05). 2005. New York, NY: ACM Press: 919-928.
20. Oviatt, S.L. Predicting spoken disfluencies during humancomputer interaction. Computer Speech and Language, 1995. 9:19-35.
21. Oviatt, S.L. User-centered design of spoken language and multimodal interfaces. IEEE Multimedia, 1996. 3(4): 26-35.
22. Oviatt, S.L. Multimodal interactive maps: Designing for human performance. Human Computer Interaction, 1997. 12(1-2): 93-129.
23. Oviatt, S.L. Mutual disambiguation of recognition errors in a multimodal architecture. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'99). 1999. Pittsburgh, PA: ACM Press: 576-583.
24. Oviatt, S.L. Toward multimodal support for interpreted telephone dialogues. Structure of multimodal dialogue, M. Taylor, F. Neel, and D. Bouwhuis, Editors, 2000. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, Netherlands. 85-107.
25. Oviatt, S.L. Breaking the robustness barrier: Recent progress on the design of robust multimodal systems, Advances in computers, M. Zelkowitz, Editor, 2002. Academic Press: 305-341.
26. Oviatt, S.L., Arthur, A.M., and Cohen, J. Quiet interfaces that help students think. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '06). 2006. New York, NY: ACM Press: in press.
27. Oviatt, S.L., Brock, Y., Cohen, J., and Arthur, A.M. Expressive pen-based interfaces for active learners, in submission.
28. th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI'04). 2004. Pennsylvania, PA. ACM Press: 129-136.
29. th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI'03). 2003. Vancouver, B.C.: ACM Press: 265-272.
30. Oviatt, S.L., Darves, C., and Coulston, R. Toward adaptive conversational interfaces: Modeling speech convergence with animated personas. Transactions on Human Computer Interaction (TOCHI), 2004. 11(3): 300-328.
31. Paas, F., Tuovinen, L, Tabbers, H., and Van Gerven, P. Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 2003. 38(1): 63-71.
32. Pea, R. and Maldonado, H. Wild for learning: Interacting through new computing devices anytime, anywhere., The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, R.K. Sawyer, Editor, 2005. Cambridge University Press, New York: 427-443.
33. Sweller, J. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 1988. 12: 257-285.
34. Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P., and Sweller, P. When two sensory modes are better than one. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1997. 3(3): 257-287.
35. van Merrienboer, J. and Sweller, J. Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 2005. 17(2): 147-177.
36. Wickens, C Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomie Science, 2002.3(2): 159-177.
37. Wickens, C., Sandry, D., and Vidulich, M. Compatibility and resource competition between modalities of input, central processing, and output. Human Factors, 1983. 25(2): 227-248.