Procedural and declarative information in software manuals: Effects on information use, task performance and knowledge

Utrecht Studies in Language and Communication

Volumn 7, Issue , 1997, Pages 1-232

  Ummelen, Nicole ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85170235754     PISSN: 09277706     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (59)

1. Alexander, P.A., Schallert, D.L., & Hare, V.C. (1991). Coming to tenns: How researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge. Review of EducationalResearch, 61, 315-343.
2. Anderson, J.R. (1983). The architecture ofcognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3. Bayman, P., & Mayer, R.E. (1984). Instructional manipulation of users' mental models for electronic calculators. International journal of man-machine studies. 20, 189-199.
4. Brockmann, R.J. (1990). Writing better computer user documentation: from paper to hypertext (Version 2.0). New York: Wiley & Sons.
5. Carroll, J.M. (1990a). The Nurnberg Funnel: Designing minimalist instruction for practical computer skill. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6. Carroll, J.M. (1990b). An overview of minimalist instruction. Proceedings of the 23rdHawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS-23), 210-219. Washington: IEEE.
7. Carroll, J.M., Mack, R.L., Lewis, C.H., Grischowsky, N.L., & Robertson, S.R. (1988). Exploring exploring a word processor. InS. Doheny-Farina (Ed), Effective documentation: What we have learned from research (pp. 73-102). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. Carroll, J.M., & Vander Meij, H. (1996). Ten misconceptions about minimalism. IEEE transactions on professional communication, 39, 72-87.
9. Carroll, J.M., Smith-Kerker, P.L., Ford, J.R., & Mazur-Rimetz, S.A. (1987-1988). The Minimal Manual. Human ComputerInteraction, 3, 123-153.
10. Carroll, J.M., Smith-Kerker, P.L., Ford, J.R., & Mazur, S.A.(l986). The Minimal Manual. (IBM Research report 11637). San Jose: IBM Research Division.
11. Charney, D., Reder, L.M., & Wells, G. (1988). Studies of elaboration in instructional text. In S. Doheny-Farina (Ed), Effective documentation: What we have learned from research (pp. 47-72). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Charney, D.H., & Reder, L.M. (1987). Initial skill learning: an analysis of how elaborations can facilitate the three components. In P. Morris (Ed.), Modelling cognition (pp. 135-165). New York: Wiley & Sons.
13. Churchill, E.F. (1992). The formation of mental models: Are 'device instructions' the source? In G.C. van der Veer, M.J. Tauber, S. Bagnara, & M. Antalovits (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction: Tasks and organization - Proceedings ofthe 6th European conference on Cognitive Ergonomics (ECCE 6), 3-16. Roma: CUD
14. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (Revised Ed.). New York: Academic Press.
15. Dixon, P. (1987). Actions and procedural directions. In R.S. Tomlin (Ed.), Coherence and grounding in discourse (pp. 69-89). Amsterdam: John
16. Donin, J., Bracewell, R.J., Frederiksen, C.H., & Dillinger, M. (1992). Students' strategies for writing instructions: Organizing conceptual information in text. Written Communication, 9, 209-236.
17. Duffy, T.M., Mehlenbacher, B., & Palmer, J. (1989). The evaluation of online help systems: A conceptual model. In E. Barrett (Ed.), The society oftext: Hypertext, hypermedia. and the social construction of information (pp. 362-387). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Ericsson. K.A. (1988). Concurrent verbal reports on text comprehension: A review. Text, 8, 295-325.
19. Foss, D.J., Smith-Kerker, P.L., & Rosson, M.B. (1987). On comprehending a computer manual: analysis of variables affecting performance. International Journal ofMan-Machine Studies. 26, 277-300.
20. Guthrie, J.T., Bannett, S., & Weber, S. (1991). Processing procedural documents: A cognitive model for following instructions. Educational Psychology Review. 3, 249-265.
21. Hartley, J. (1980). Space and structure in instructional text. In J. Hartley (Ed.), The psychology ofwritten communication. London: Kogan page.
22. Hartley, J. (1994). Designing instructional text (Third edition). London: Kopan Page.
23. Hoeken, H., Mom, M., & Maes, F. (1994). Translating hierarchical instructions into linear text: Depth-first versus breadth-first approaches. In M. Steehouder, C. Jansen, P. van der Poort, & R. Verheijen (Eds.), The quality of technical documentation (pp. 99-113). Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi
24. Hom, R.E. (1982). Structured writing and text design. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), The technology of text: Principles for structuring, designing and displaying text (pp. 341-367). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
25. Hom, R.E. (1985). Results with structured writing using the Information Mapping Writing service standards. In T.M. Duffy, & R. Waller (Eds.), Designing usable texts (pp. 179-211). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
26. Jacobson, R. (1995). Microsoft Excel/Visual Basic step by step. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.
27. Jansen, C.J.M., & Steehouder, M.F. (1989). Taalverkeersproblemen tussen overheid en burger. Een onderzoek naar verbeteringsmogelijkheden voor voorlichtingsteksten en formulieren [Communication problems between government and citizens]. The Hague: SDU.
28. Just, M.A. & Carpenter, P.A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye-fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329-354.
29. Kern, R.P. (1985). Modelling users and their use of technical manuals. In T.M. Duffy & R. Waller (Eds.), Designing usable texts (pp. 341-371). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
30. Kieras, D.E., & Bovair, S. (1984). The role of a mental model in learning to operate a device. Cognitive Science, 8, 255-273.
31. Knowles, C. (1988). Can Cognitive Complexity Theory (CCT) produce an adequate measure of system usability? In Jones, D.M., & Winder, R. (Eds.), Proceedings of the fourth conference of the British Computer Society, 291-307.
32. Lazonder, A.W., & Vander Meij, H. (1993). The minimal manual: Is less really more? Internationaljournal ofman-machine studies, 39, 729-752.
33. Mack, R.L., Lewis, C. H., & Carroll, J.M. (1983). Learning to use word processors: Problems and prospects. ACM Transactions on office information systems, 1, 254-271.
34. Mire!, B. (1991). Critical review of experimental research on the usability of hard copy documentation. IEEE transactions on professional communication, 34, 109-122.
35. Nielsen, J. (1995). Multimedia and hypertext: The Internet and beyond. Boston, MA: AP Professional.
36. Norman, D.A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner, & A.L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA
37. Nystrand, M. (1986). The structure of written communication. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
38. Ramey, J. (1988). How people use computer documentation: Implications for book design. InS. Doheny-Farina (Ed.), Effective documentation: What we have learnedfrom research (pp. 143-157). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39. Reder, L.M., Charney, D.H., & Morgan, K.I. (1986). The role of elaborations in learning a skill from instructional text. Memory & Cognition, 14, 64-78.
40. Redish, J.C. (1988). Reading to learn to do. Technical Writing Teacher, 15, 223-233.
41. Sasse, M.A. (1991). How to t(r)ap users' mental models. In Tauber, M.J., & Ackermann, D. (Eds.), Mental models and human-computer interaction 2. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
42. Schriver, K.A. (1984). Revising computer documentation for comprehension: ten exercises in protocol-aided revision. Technical Report, 14, Pittsburgh, PA: Communications Design Center.
43. Schumacher, G.M., & Waller, R. (1985). Testing design alternatives: a comparison of procedures. In T.M. Duffy, & R. Waller (Eds.), Designing usable texts (pp. 341-371). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
44. Shneiderman, B. (1987). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
45. Smith, E.E., & L. Goodman (1984). Understanding written instructions: the role of an explanatory schema. Cognition andInstruction, I, 359-396.
46. Steehouder, M.F. (1994). The quality of access: Helping users find information in documentation. In Steehouder, M., Jansen, C., van der Poort, P., & Verheijen, R. (Eds.), The quality oftechnical documentation (pp. 131-144). Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi.
47. Sticht, T. (1977). Comprehending reading at work. In M.A. Just, & P.A. Carpenter (Eds.), Cognitive processes in comprehension (pp. 221-246). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
48. Sticht, T. (1985). Understanding readers and their uses of texts. In T.M. DuffY, & R. Waller (Eds.), Designing usable texts (pp. 315-339). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
49. Ummelen, N. (1994). Procedural and declarative information: a closer examination of the distinction. In Steehouder, M., Jansen, C., van der Poort, P., & Verheijen, R. (Eds.), The quality oftechnical documentation (pp. 115-131). Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi.
50. Van der Meij, H., & Carroll, J.M. (1995). Principles and heuristics for designing minimalist instruction. Technical Communication, 2, 243-262.
51. Virtanen, T. (1992). Issues of text typology: Narrative- a basic type of text? Text, 12, 293-310.
52. Werlich, E. (1979). Typologie der Texte [Typology of texts]. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer.
53. Wright, P. (1988). Issues ofcontent and presentation in document design. In M. Helander (Ed.), Handbook ofhuman-computer interaction (pp. 629-652). North-Holland: Elsevier Science.
54. Wright, P. (1989). The need for theories ofNOT reading: some psychological aspects of the human-computer interface. In H. Bouma (Ed.), Working models ofhuman perception (pp. 319-340). London: Academic Press.
55. Wright, P., Creighton, P., & Threlfall, S.M. (1982). Some factors determining when instructions will be read. Ergonomics, 25, 225-237.
56. Wright, P., & Lickorish, A. (1990). An empirical comparison of two navigation systems for two hypertexts. In R. McAleese, & C. Green (Eds.), Hypertext: State ofthe art (pp. 84-93). Oxford: Intellect Limited.
57. Wright, P., & Wilcox, P. (1978). Following instructions: an exploratory trisection of imperatives. In W.J.M. Levelt, & Flores d'Arcais (Eds.), Studies in the perception of language (pp. 129-153). New York: Wiley and Sons.
58. Young, R.M. (1981). The machine inside the machine: users' models ofpocket calculators. InternationalJournal ofMan-Machine Studies, 15, 51-85.
59. Young, R.M. (1983). Surrogates and mappings: two kinds of conceptual models for interactive devices. In D. Gentner, & A.L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA