Task analysis and systems analysis for software development

Diaper, Dan; Addison, Mark

doi:10.1016/0953-5438(92)90016-9

Cited by 28 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Johnson (1992) provides an example of TAKD for a computer-assisted jewellery design system which includes the generic objects Setting, Orientation and Jewel choice. Although I have an intuitive understanding of what these things are, no precise definition is offered and, I suspect, confusions may well arise Diaper and Addison (1991) claim that TAKD is suitable for arriving at the conceptual level through the 'generification' technique, and this may be true. However, the need for the analyst to be 'insightful and creative' (Diaper, 1989b, p.136) and the admission that 'It is difficult to produce a heuristic, or even advice, for how to do this vital stage' (p. 137) suggests that TAKD does not provide sufficient support for this activity.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The TDH, since it is a hierarchy (whether a 'true hierarchy' (Diaper, 1989b) or used in its weak sense (Diaper and Addison, 1991)) can only represent explicitly one side of a relationship or it must include unnecessary duplication in its descriptions.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the criticisms levelled at the data-centred approach in Diaper and Addison (1991) is that it is 'computer-centric' by which they mean 'more suited to modelling computer systems than people' (p. 128). In making this claim, they fail to distinguish between infological data models which are concerned with establishing a user-orientated model of the system and datalogical models which are concerned with representing the computer view (Sundgren, 1979;Benyon, 1990).…”

Section: Data Models Humans and Computersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result TA (if used on its own) would produce poor system designs because it fails to achieve sufficient device independence (Benyon, 1991). In their commentary on this paper, Addison (Diaper and Addison, 1991) defended TA in general and TAKD (e.g. Diaper, 1989b) in particular against the criticisms and made a number of assertions about my stance regarding humans and computers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There exists an uneasy relationship between these activities both in respect of the order in which they are undertaken and the content of each. Diaper and Addison (1991) view the stages of systems development as having identifiable inputs and outputs, but this is only one perspective. Analysis suggests design solutions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Task analysis and system design: the discipline of data

Benyon¹

1992

Interacting with Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the previous issue of Interacting with Computers, I offered a critique of Task Analysis (TA) arguing that, in general, task analysis techniques had failed to appreciate the significance of the shift in emphasis -towards logical modelling of the system and away from physical modelling -which had taken place during the early 1980s in information systems. As a result TA (if used on its own) would produce poor system designs because it fails to achieve sufficient device independence (Benyon, 1991). In their commentary on this paper, Addison (Diaper and Addison, 1991) defended TA in general and TAKD (e.g. Diaper, 1989b) in particular against the criticisms and made a number of assertions about my stance regarding humans and computers.In this reply, I intend to clarify firstly what I mean by a data-centred view, secondly what I mean by device independence and finally why the datacentred view is a vital part of systems development. In doing this I hope to deal with many of the specific points raised by Diaper and Addison.Underlying this discussion is a view of how system designers should undertake their designs and a theoretical, or philosophical basis of human-computer interaction (HCI) provided by the data-centred view. Whilst both of these are important subjects, there is neither the space nor the time to give adequate coverage here. However, I am sure that both the theory and the practice of HCI will benefit from this continuing debate on the preferred role of task analysis in system design.My original concern about TA stemmed from the claim made by its advocates that 'task analysis is potentially the most powerful method in HCI...for producing requirements specifications' (Diaper 1989a, preface). I believe this view is unsatisfactory because TA does not focus sufficiently on the data in the system. This paper is aimed at explicating this position.The central part of this paper is an exposition of data models as conceptual models which capture both a human and a computer view of systems. This discussion is necessary in order to understand the notion of device independence which is presented in the following section. Before turning to the details of data, it is important to obtain a perspective on system development. SYSTEM DEVELOPMENTThere are many characterizations of how systems are developed and how systems should be developed. The model used in (Benyon 1991) was chosen to emphasize the importance of conceptual modelling and task allocation rather than to prescribe a system development method. Many methods advocate a task allocation phase (such as Avison and Wood-

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data Models Humans and Computersmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations