Adaptively shortened pull down menus: Location knowledge and selection efficiency

Behaviour and Information Technology

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 439-444

  Fischer, Sebastian ^a   Schwan, Stephan ^a  

^a KNOWLEDGE MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Experiment; Human computer interaction; Menus; User interface

Indexed keywords

EXPERIMENTS; USER INTERFACES;

CONTROLLED EXPERIMENT; ERROR RATE; MENU SELECTION; MENUS; MICROSOFT; SELECTION TIME; SPEED UP;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

EID: 51749096114     PISSN: 0144929X     EISSN: 13623001     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01449290701497095     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. Findlater, L. and McGrenere, J., 2004. A comparison of static, adaptive and adaptable menus. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, ACM, 89-96.
2. Fitts, P., 1954. The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 381-391.
3. Francik, E.P. and Kane, R.M., 1987. Optimizing visual search and cursor movements in pull-down menus. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA, Human Factors Society, 722-726.
4. Hornof, A.J. and Kieras, D.E., 1999. Cognitive modeling demonstrates how people use anticipated location knowledge of menu items. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 99 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, ACM, 410-417.
5. Mitchell, J. and Shneiderman, B., 1989. Dynamic versus static menus: an exploratory comparison. SIGCHI Bulletin, 20, 33-37.
6. Sears, A. and Shneiderman, B., 1994. Split menus: effectively using selection frequency to organize menus. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 1, 27-51.
7. Selvidge, P., 2002. To adapt, or not to adapt? Usability News, 4.1. Jan. 2002. Available online at: www.usabilitynews. org (accessed 28 June 2007).