A formal approach supporting the comparative predictive assessment of the interruption-tolerance of interactive systems

EICS'09 - Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 211-220

  Palanque, Philippe ^a   Winckler, Marco ^a   Ladry, Jean François ^a   Ter Beek, Maurice H ^b   Faconti, Giorgio ^b   Massink, Mieke ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PAUL SABATIER   (France)

^b ISTI CNR   (Italy)

Author keywords

Formal description techniques; Human computer interaction; Interruptions; Model based approaches; Performance evaluation

Indexed keywords

COMPARE AND ANALYZE; DESKTOP ENVIRONMENT; DISRUPTIVE EFFECTS; FORMAL APPROACH; FORMAL DESCRIPTION TECHNIQUES; FORMAL MODELING; INTERACTION TECHNIQUES; INTERACTIVE SYSTEM; MODEL BASED APPROACH; MULTITASKING ENVIRONMENTS; PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS; PERFORMANCE EVALUATION; PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROCESS ALGEBRA; PRISM MODEL CHECKER; STOCHASTIC PROCESS; SYSTEM STATE; TASK PERFORMANCE; THREE COMPONENT; USER ACTIVITY;

COMPUTER SYSTEMS; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; MODEL CHECKING; PETRI NETS; RANDOM PROCESSES;

MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

EID: 77949361419     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1570433.1570473     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (36)

1. Accot J. and Zhai S. (1997). Beyond Fitts' law: models for trajectory-based HCI tasks. Proc. of ACM CHI 97, 295-302
2. Curzon, P., Ruksenas, R. & Blandford, A. (2007) An approach to formal verification of human-computer interaction. Formal Aspects of Computing. 513-550.
3. Bailey, B.P. Konstan & J.A. Carlis, J.V. (2000). Measuring the effects of interruptions on task performance in the user interface. IEEE Int. Conf. on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 2000. Vol. 2, 757-762.
4. Barnard, P.J. and Teasdale, J.D. (1991). Interacting cognitive subsystems: A systemic approach to cognitive-affective interaction and change. Cognition and Emotion, 5, 1-39.
5. ter Beek M., Faconti G., Massink M., Palanque P. & Winckler M. Resilience of interaction techniques to interrupts - A formal model-based approach. In proc. of INTERACT 2009, LNCS, Springer, 456-472.
6. Bourgeois, F., Guiard, Y., & Beaudouin-Lafon, M. (2002). Multi-scale pointing: Facilitating pan-zoom coordination. ACM SIGCHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI 2002, 758-759. ACM Press.
7. Cades D. M., Trafton J. G., Boehm-Davis D. A. & Monk C. A. (2007) Does the difficulty of an interruption affect our ability to resume? Proc. of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES'07), 234-238
8. Chisholm, C.D., Collison, E. K., Nelson, D. R., & Cordell, W. H. (2000). Emergency department workplace interruptions: Are emergency physicians "interrupt-driven" and "multitasking"? Academic Emergency Medicine, 7, 1239-1243.
9. Card, S.K.; T.P. Thomas & A. Newell (1983), written at London, The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, ISBN 0898592437.
10. Li, S., Blandford, A., Cairns, P. & Young, R. M. (2008). The Effect of Interruptions on Post-Completion and Other Procedural Errors: An Account Based on the Activation-Based Goal Memory Model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 14.4. 314-328.
11. Czerwinski, M., Horvitz, E., & Wilhite, S. (2004). A diary study of task switching and interruptions. In Proc. of the ACM SIGCHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI '04. ACM Press, 175-182.
12. Diaper, D., Stanton, N. A. (eds.) (2004). The Handbook of Task Analysis for Human-Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2004. 650 pages.
13. Diez M., Boehm-Davis D. A. & Holt R. W. (2002) Model-based predictions of interrupted checklists, in: Proc. of the 46th M. of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 250-254.
14. M.H. ter Beek, G.P. Faconti, M. Massink, P. Palanque and M. Winckler (2009), Resilience of Interaction Techniques to Interrupts: A Formal Model-based Approach - Full Version. Technical Report 2009-TR-001, ISTI-CNR.
15. Fitts, Paul M. (1954): The Information Capacity of the Human Motor System in Controlling the Amplitude of Movement. In Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47 pp. 381-391.
16. Gillie T. & Broadbent D. (1989). What makes interruptions disruptive? A study of length, similarity and complexity, Psychological Research, 50 (4), 243-250.
17. Hopp, P. J, Smith, C. A. P., Clegg, B. A. & Heggestad, E.D. (2005). Interruption Management: Use of Attention-Directing Tactile Cues. Human Factors, Vol. 47, No.1, pp.1-11.
18. Horvitz, E. & Apacible, J. (2003). Learning and reasoning about interruption. In Proc. of 5th Int. Conf. on Multimodal interfaces. ICMI '03. ACM Press, 20-27.
19. Iqbal, S. T. & Horvitz, E. (2007). Disruption and Recovery of Computing Tasks: Field Study, Analysis, and Directions. In Proc. of ACM CHI 2007, ACM Press, 677-688.
20. Iqbal, S. T. and Bailey, B. P. 2008. Effects of intelligent notification management on users and their tasks. In Proc. of ACM CHI '08. ACM Press, 93-102.
21. Jambon F. (1996) Formal modelling of task interruptions. In Proc. of ACM SIGCHI conf. CHI'96, Conference Companion. ACM Press, 45-46.
22. McCrickard D. S. & Chewar C. M. (2003) Attuning notification design to user goals and attention costs, Communications of ACM, 46 (3), 67-72.
23. McFarlane D. C. (1999) Coordinating the interruption of people in human-computer interaction. Proceedings of INTERACT' 99, Amsterdam: IOS Press, 295-303.
24. Monk, C., Boehm-Davis, D., & Trafton, J. G. (2004). Recovering from interruptions: Implications for driver distraction research. Human Factors, 46, 650-663.
25. Morris, D., Brush, A. B., and Meyers, B. R. (2008). Super-Break: using interactivity to enhance ergonomic typing breaks. In Proc. ACM SIGCHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI '08. ACM, Press, 1817-1826.
26. National Transportation Safety Board. (1988). Aircraft accident report: Northwest Airlines, Inc., McDonnell Douglas DC-9-82, N312RC, Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, Romulus, Michigan, August 16, 1987 (NTSB/AAR-88/05).Washington, DC.
27. Navarre, D., Palanque, P. & Basnyat, S., (2008) Usability Service Continuation through Reconfiguration of Input and Output Devices in Safety Critical Interactive Systems. The 27th Int. Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability and Security (Safecomp 2008), Springer LNCS 5219, pp. 373-386.
28. O'Conaill B. & Frohlich D. (1995) Timespace in the workplace: Dealing with interruptions, in: Human Factors in Comp. Systems: CHI'95 Companion, ACM Press, 262-263
29. Oulasvirta, A. and Saariluoma, P. (2006). Surviving task interruptions: Investigating the implications of long-term working memory theory. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 64, 10, 941-961.
30. Peterson J. (1981), Petri Net Theory and the Modeling of Systems, Prentice Hall.
31. Palanque P. & Bastide R. (1995). Verification of an Interactive Software by analysis of its formal specification. Proc. of the IFIP TC 13 Interact'95, p. 191-197.
32. Palanque, P., Bastide, R. (1997). Synergistic modeling of tasks, system and users using formal specification techniques. Interacting With Computers, Academic Press, 9, 12, 129-153
33. Paterno, F., Mancini, C. & Meniconi, S. (1997). Concur-TaskTrees: A Diagrammatic Notation for Specifying Task Models. In: Proc. of Interact'97. Chapman & Hall, 362-369.
34. Speier C., Vessey I. & Valacich J. S. (2003) The effects of interruptions, task complexity, and information presentation on computer-supported decision-making performance, Decision Sciences, 34 (4), 771-797.
35. Trafton, J. G., & Monk, C. A. (2007). Task Interruptions. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 3, 111-126.
36. West, R. L., Nagy, G. (2007) Using GOMS for Modeling Routine Tasks Within Complex Sociotechnical Systems: Connecting Macrocognitive Models to Microcognition. Journal of Cog. Eng. and Decision Making, Vol. 1, n° 2, pp. 186-211