User learning is of critical importance in evaluating interface usability (and in turn interface quality). The focus of this research in on interface learnability, where a stochastic model represents the learning process required for successful completion of human-computer interaction tasks. The parameter used to quantify learning is a learning rate. Of interest here is the validation of learning rate as a measure of interface quality. Learning rate was validated against two traditional measures of interface quality: task completion time, and error frequency. SuperCard, a Macintosh project utility, provided an empirical learning environment in which 32 participants learned 16 fundamental SuperCard tasks. Results of correlation analyses suggested the usefulness of learning rate as an indicator of interface quality. Our learning rate analysis identified four tasks presenting learning difficulties. (Analysis of task completion times identified two of these four tasks, and error frequency analysis identified one). Learning rate data captured all of the information available from the two traditional interface quality measures and identified two tasks disregarded by them. Incorporating learning rates in the interface evaluation process precludes time-intensive video tape analysis typically required by more traditional interface quality measures.
The purpose of this study was to use a human error model to evaluate a commercially available Macintosh-based graphics application based upon the frequencies and types of mistakes occurring during users' performance of designated tasks. The occurrence of high frequencies of knowledge-based and rule-based mistakes during the learning of an interface element would indicate that the element requires evaluation and possible redesign. This study involved five participants, all of whom were students at Texas A&M University. The participants were experienced Macintosh users with no experience using Macintosh graphics software. The graphics environment of interest was MacDraw II® 1.0 Version 2 (Schutten, Goldsmith, Kaptanoglu, and Spiegel, 1988). Ten drawings created with the program were used to examine participants' cognitive levels and types of errors made throughout the process of familiarizing themselves with this program. The first drawing was created to exemplify simple figures created with the graphics tools in the program to illustrate shading. The second through tenth drawings incorporated these figures in several arrangements. All drawings incorporated eight tools (or tasks), and each tool was used only once in each drawing. The results indicated significant differences in frequencies of error types, frequencies of errors between tasks and frequencies of errors between trials. There were also interactions between trial and error, and task and error.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.