A Comparison of Broad Versus Deep Auditory Menu Structures

Commarford, Patrick M.; Lewis, James R.; Smither, Janan A.; Gentzler, Marc D.

doi:10.1518/001872008x250665

Cited by 19 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Tradeoffs between breadth and depth have been extensively examined through numerous empirical studies, generally leading to the conclusion that broad/shallow structures have better task performance times and error rates, and user satisfaction than narrow/deep structures (Landauer and Nachbar, 1985;Miller, 1981;Snowberry et al, 1983;Kiger, 1984;Macgregor et al, 1986;Papp and Roske-Hofstrand, 1986;Wallace et al, 1987;Jacko and Salvendy, 1996;Larson and Czerwinski, 1998;Zaphiris et al, 2003;Commaford et al, 2008).…”

Section: Hierarchical Menusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A recent examination of the impact of working memory and menu structure on menu selection time for IVR interfaces (Commaford et al, 2008) presents a model of auditory menu selection that requires retention of only two items in working memory at any given time: a ''best of" item that represents the strongest candidate seen at a given point in time, and a candidate that will be compared against the current best item. If a candidate is deemed to be more suitable than the current best, it will become the new best item.…”

Section: Hierarchical Menusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2010.02.003 an unpleasant choice between designs that might substantially improve the interface design for one group of users (in this case, blind users) while simultaneously degrading the experience for a large percentage of users (sighted users). If, however, the increased cognitive challenge associated with narrow, deep structures is more of a factor for blind users than the delays associated with serial item presentation -as it appears to be for sighted users of auditory menus (Commaford et al, 2008) -the design problem is much simpler. In this scenario, the moderately broad, shallow menus that work well for sighted users might also be preferable for blind users.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Revisiting breadth vs. depth in menu structures for blind users of screen readers

Hochheiser

Lazar

2010

Interacting with Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tNumerous studies have investigated task performance times for selection from hierarchical menus, with structures containing many choices at each of a few levels (broad, shallow structures) generally outperforming structures containing fewer choices at each of many levels (narrow, deep structures). To see if these results applied to blind users who rely on screen reader software for computer access, we replicated an earlier published study, using 19 blind screen-reader users. Consistent with earlier studies, broader, shallow hierarchies outperformed narrow, deep hierarchies. Task performance times and hypertext lostness measures were correlated. Although further work will be needed to understand specific determinants of task performance rates, these results support the use of broad, shallow menus for blind as well as sighted users.

show abstract

Section: Hierarchical Menusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hierarchical Menusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Revisiting breadth vs. depth in menu structures for blind users of screen readers

Hochheiser

Lazar

2010

Interacting with Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Commarford et al (2008) showed that if users do not have to remember all options, but only need to select the appropriate choice from a list, users with short working memory spans profit from longer lists of options. When the number of options was shortened, users with shorter spans actually performed worse than their counterparts with longer spans.…”

Section: Confounder 2: Task Demandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Apart from (Commarford et al, 2008), we are not aware of any formal experimental study that assesses the impact of systematically varying the number of options on the usability of a SDS for users with low WMS. Neither are we aware of any such studies that look at the effect of varying confirmation strategies on the usability of SDS for this particular user group.…”

Section: Aims and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing working memory load in spoken dialogue systems

Wolters

Georgila

Moore

et al. 2009

Interacting with Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tWe evaluated two strategies for alleviating working memory load for users of voice interfaces: presenting fewer options per turn and providing confirmations. Forty-eight users booked appointments using nine different dialogue systems, which varied in the number of options presented and the confirmation strategy used. Participants also performed four cognitive tests and rated the usability of each dialogue system on a standardised questionnaire. When systems presented more options per turn and avoided explicit confirmation subdialogues, both older and younger users booked appointments more quickly without compromising task success. Users with lower information processing speed were less likely to remember all relevant aspects of the appointment. Working memory span did not affect appointment recall. Older users were slightly less satisfied with the dialogue systems than younger users. We conclude that the number of options is less important than an accurate assessment of the actual cognitive demands of the task at hand.

show abstract

Global Usability

Douglas¹,

Liu²

2011

Human-Computer Interaction Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For other titles published in this series, go to http://www.springer.com/series/6033 Human-Computer Interaction is a multidisciplinary field focused on human aspects of the development of computer technology. As computer-based technology becomes increasingly pervasive -not just in developed countries, but worldwide -the need to take a humancentered approach in the design and development of this technology becomes ever more important. For roughly 30 years now, researchers and practitioners in computational and behavioral sciences have worked to identify theory and practice that influences the direction of these technologies, and this diverse work makes up the field of human-computer interaction. Broadly speaking it includes the study of what technology might be able to do for people and how people might interact with the technology. In this series we present work which advances the science and technology of developing systems which are both effective and satisfying for people in a wide variety of contexts. The human-computer interaction series will focus on theoretical perspectives (such as formal approaches drawn from a variety of behavioral sciences), practical approaches (such as the techniques for effectively integrating user needs in system development), and social issues (such as the determinants of utility, usability and acceptability).

show abstract

A Comparison of Broad Versus Deep Auditory Menu Structures

Abstract: This experiment has important practical implications for all systems with auditory menus (particularly IVRs) because it provides empirical evidence refuting a widely promoted design practice.

Cited by 19 publications

References 33 publications

Revisiting breadth vs. depth in menu structures for blind users of screen readers

Revisiting breadth vs. depth in menu structures for blind users of screen readers

Reducing working memory load in spoken dialogue systems

Global Usability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About