Metaphors of human thinking for usability inspection and design

ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2008, Pages

  Frøkjær, Erik ^a   Hornbæk, Kasper ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Cognitive walkthrough; Heuristic evaluation; Metaphors of human thinking; Think aloud testing; Usability evaluation; Usability inspection

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE WALKTHROUGH; HEURISTIC EVALUATION; USABILITY EVALUATION; USABILITY INSPECTION;

COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; PROBLEM SOLVING; PSYCHOLOGY COMPUTING; USER INTERFACES;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

EID: 38749113354     PISSN: 10730516     EISSN: 15577325     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/1314683.1314688     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. ANDRE, T. S., HARTSON, H. R., BELZ, S. M., AND MCCREARY, F. A. 2001. The user action framework: A reliable foundation for usability engineering support tools. Int. J. Human-Comput. Stud. 54, 1, 107-136.
2. BASTIEN, C. AND SCAPIN, D. 1995. Evaluating a user interface with ergonomic criteria. Int. J. Human-Comput. Stud. 7, 2, 105-121.
3. BEYER, H. AND HOLTZBLATT K. 1998. Contextual Design. Morgan-Kaufman, San Francisco, CA.
4. COCKTON, G., LAVERY, D., AND WOOLRYCH, A. 2003. Inspection-based evaluations. In The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook. J. A. Jacko, and A. Sears, Eds. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1118-1138.
5. COHEN, J. 1992. A power primer. Psych. Bull. 112, 1, 155-159.
6. CONNELL, I., BLANDFORD, A., AND GREEN, T. 2004. CASSM and cognitive walkthrough: Usability issues with ticket vending machines. Behav. Inf. Tech. 23, 5, 307-320.
7. DYBKJÆR, H. AND DYBKJÆR, L. 2002. Experiences from a Danish spoken dialogue system. In 2nd Danish Human-Computer Interaction Research Symposium, E. Frøkjær and K. Hornbæk Eds. DIKU tech. rep. 02/19, 15-19.
8. ERICKSON, T. D. 1990. Working with interface metaphors. In The Art of Human Computer Interface Design. B. Laurel, Eds. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 65-73.
9. FLEISS, J. L. 1981. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. Wiley, New York.
10. FRØKJÆR, E. AND HORNBÆK, K. 2002. Metaphors of human thinking in HCI: Habit, stream of thought, awareness, utterance, and knowing. In Proceedings of HF2002/OzCHI 2002 (Melbourne, Australia, Nov. 25-27).
11. FU, L. AND SALVENDY, G. 2002. Effectiveness of user-testing and heuristic evaluation as a function of performance classification. Behav. Inf. Tech. 21, 2, 137-143.
12. GARDNER, H. 1982. Art, Mind and Brain: A Cognitive Approach to Creativity. Basic Books, New York.
13. GRAY, W. D. AND SALZMAN, M. C. 1998. Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods. Human-Comput. Interact. 13, 3, 203-261.
14. GREEN, T. R. G. AND PETRE, M. 1996. Usability analysis of visual programming environments: a 'cognitive dimensions' framework. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 7, 131-174.
15. HARTSON, H. R., ANDRE, T. S., AND WILLIGES, R. C. 2001. Criteria for evaluating usability evaluation methods. Int. J. Human-Comput. Interact. 13, 4, 373-410.
16. HELMS JØRGENSEN A. 1990. Thinking-aloud in user interface design: A method promoting cognitive ergonomics. Ergonomics 33, 4, 501-507.
17. HERTZUM, M. AND JACOBSEN, N. E. 2001. The evaluator effect: A chilling fact about usability evaluation methods. Internat. J. Human-Comput. Interact. 13, 421-443.
18. HORNBY, K. AND FRØKJÆR, E. 2002. Evaluating user interfaces with metaphors of human thinking. In Proceedings of 7th ERCIM Workshop "User Interfaces for All, " (ERCIM Workshop on User Interfaces for All), Chantilly, France, Oct. 24-25). N. Carbonell and C. Stephanidis, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2615, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 486-507.
19. HORNBÆK, K. AND FRØKJÆR, E. 2004a. Usability inspection by metaphors of human thinking compared to heuristic evaluation. Int. J. Human-Comput. Interact. 17, 3, 357-374.
20. HORNBÆK, K. AND FRØKJÆR, E. 2004b. Two psychology-based usability inspection techniques studied in a diary experiment. In Proceedings of the Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (Nordichi 2004), 2-12.
21. HORNBÆK, K. AND FRØKJÆR, E. 2005. Comparing usability problems and redesign proposals as input to practical systems development. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2005). ACM, New York, 391-400.
22. HORNBÆK, K. AND FRØKJÆR, E. 2006. What kind of usability-problem description are useful for developers? In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES), 2523-2527.
23. JAMES, W. 1890. Principles of Psychology. Henry Holt & Co.
24. JEFFRIES, R., MILLER, J., WHARTON, C., AND UYEDA, K. 1991. User interface evaluation in the real world: A comparison of four techniques. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing. ACM, New York, pp. 119-124.
25. JOHN, P. W. M. 1971. Statistical Design and Analysis of Experiments. Macmillan, New York.
26. JOHN, B. E. AND PACKER, H. 1995. Learning and using the cognitive walkthrough method: a case study approach. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'95) (Denver, CO, May 7-11). ACM, New York, 429-436.
27. JOHN B. AND MARKS, S. 1997. Tracking the effectiveness of usability evaluation methods. Behav. Inf. Tech. 16, 4/5, 188-202.
28. JOHNSON, J., ROBERTS, T., VERPLANK, W., SMITH, D., IRBY, C., BEAR, M., AND MACKEY, K. 1989. The Xerox star: A retrospective. IEEE Comput. 22, 9, 11-29.
29. KARAT, C.-M., CAMPBELL, R., AND FIEGEL, T. 1992. Comparison of empirical testing and walkthrough methods in usability interface evaluation. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, pp. 397-404.
30. KOGAN, N. 1983. Stylistic variation in childhood and adolescence: Creativity, metaphor, and cognitive styles. In Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol. 3. Cognitive Development, J. H. Flavell and E. M. Markman, Eds. Wiley, New York, 630-705.
31. LANDAUER, T. 1995. The Trouble with Computer. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
32. LAW, E. 2006. Evaluating the downstream utility of user tests and examining the developer effect: A case study. Int. J. Human-Comput. Interact. 21, 2, 147-172.
33. LEWIS, C., POLSON, P., WHARTON, C., AND RIEMAN, J. 1990. Testing a walkthrough methodology for theory-based design of walk-up-and-use interfaces. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 1990) (Seattle, WA, Apr. 1-5). ACM, New York, 235-242.
34. MADSEN, K. H. 1994. A guide to metaphorical design. Commun. ACM 37, 12, 57-62.
35. MANKOFF, J., DEY, A. K., HSIEH, G., KIENTZ, J., AMES, M., AND LEDERER, S. 2003. Heuristic evaluation of ambient displays. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2003). ACM, New York, 169-176.
36. MOLICH, R. 1994. Brugervenlige edb-systemer (in Danish). Teknisk Forlag.
37. MOLICH, R. 2003. User Testing, Discount User Testing, www.dialogdesign.dk
38. NAUR, P. 1988. Human knowing, language, and discrete structures. In Computing: A Human Activity. ACM Press/Addison Wesley, New York, 518-535.
39. NAUR, P. 1995. Knowing and the Mystique of Logic and Rules. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
40. NAUR, P. 2000. CHI and human thinking. In Proceedings of the 1st Nordic Conference on Computer-Human Interaction (NordiCHI 2000) (Stockholm, Sweden Oct. 23-25). ACM, New York.
41. NAUR, P. 2007. Computing versus human thinking. Commun. ACM 50, 1, 85-94.
42. NIELSEN, J. 1993. Usability Engineering. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
43. NIELSEN, J. AND MACK, R. L. 1994. Usability Inspection Methods. Wiley, New York.
44. NIELSEN, J. AND MOLICH, R. 1990. Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'90) (Seattle, WA, Apr. 1-5). ACM, New York, 249-256.
45. NIELSEN, J., MOLICH, R., SNYDER, C., AND FARRELL, S. 2001. E-commerce User Experience. Nielsen Norman Group, Fremont, CA.
46. NORMAN, D. A. 1986. Cognitive engineering. In User Centered System Design. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. 31-61.
47. PINELLE, D., GUTWIN, C., AND GREENBERG, S. 2003. Task analysis for groupware usability evaluation: Modeling shared-workspace tasks with the mechanics of collaboration. ACM Trans. Computer-Hum. Interact. 10, 4, 281-311.
48. PREECE, J., ROGERS, Y. AND SHARP, H. 2002. Interaction Design. Wiley, New York.
49. RASKIN, J. 2000. The Humane Interface: New Directions for Designing Interactive Systems. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
50. ROSENBAUM, S., ROHN, J. A., AND HUMBURG, J. 2000. A toolkit for strategic usability: Results from workshops, panels, and surveys. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2000). ACM, New York, 337-344.
51. SEARS, A. AND HESS, D. 1998. The effect of task description detail on evaluator performance with cognitive walkthroughs. In Conference Summary on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'98). ACM, New York, 259-260.
52. SFARD, A. 1998. On two metaphors for learning and on the dangers of choosing just one. Educat. Research. 27, 2, 4-13.
53. SHNEIDERMAN, B. AND PLAISANT, C. 2005. Designing the User Interface. 4th Edition. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
54. SMITH, S. L. AND MOSIER, J. N. 1986. Guidelines for designing user interface software. Mitre Tech. Rep. ESD-TR-86-278.
55. SPENCER, R. 2000. The streamlined cognitive walkthrough method, working around social constraints encountered in a software development company. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'2000) (The Hague, Netherlands). ACM, New York, 353-359.
56. WHARTON, C., RIEMAN, J., LEWIS, C., AND POLSON, P. 1994. The cognitive walkthrough method: A practitioner's guide. In Usability Inspection Methods, J. Nielsen and R. L. Mack, Eds. Wiley, New York, 105-140.
57. WIXON, D. 2003. Evaluating usability methods: Why the current literature fails the practitioner. Interactions 10, 4, 29-34.