Number of co-authors:26
Number of publications with 3 favourite co-authors:James R. Rhyne:5John Karat:2Maroun Touma:2
Catherine G. Wolf's 3 most productive colleagues in number of publications:Ben Shneiderman:225John M. Carroll:209Bonnie E. John:64
If you do good work for good clients, it will lead to other good work for other good clients. If you do bad work for bad clients, it will lead to other bad work for other bad clients
-- Michael Bierut
Marc Hassenzahl explains the fascinating concept of User Experience and Experience Design. Commentaries by Don Norman, Eric Reiss, Mark Blythe, and Whitney Hess
User Experience and Experience Design !
Our Latest Books
Kumar and Herger 2013: Gamification at Work: Designing Engaging Business Software...
by Janaki Mythily Kumar and Mario Herger
Whitworth and Ahmad 2013: The Social Design of Technical Systems: Building technologies for communities...
by Brian Whitworth and Adnan Ahmad
Soegaard and Dam 2013: The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Ed....
by Mads Soegaard and Rikke Friis Dam
Catherine G. Wolf
Has also published under the name of:
"Cathy Wolf" and "C. Wolf"
Publications by Catherine G. Wolf (bibliography)
Patil, S., Alpert, S. R., Karat, John and Wolf, Catherine G. (2005): "THAT's What I Was Looking for": Comparing User-Rated Relevance with Search Engine Rankings. In: Proceedings of IFIP INTERACT05: Human-Computer Interaction 2005. pp. 117-129.
We present a lightweight tool to compare the relevance ranking provided by a search engine to the relevance as actually judged by the user performing the query. Using the tool, we conducted a user study with two different versions of the search engine for a large corporate web site with more than 1.8 million pages, and with the popular search engine GoogleTM. Our tool provides an inexpensive and efficient way to do this comparison, and can be easily extended to any search engine that provides an API. Relevance feedback from actual users can be used to assess precision and recall of a search engine's retrieval algorithms and, perhaps more importantly, to tune its relevance ranking algorithms to better match user needs. We found the tool to be quite effective at comparing different versions of the same search engine, and for benchmarking by comparing against a standard.
© All rights reserved Patil et al. and/or Springer Verlag
Mamykina, Lena and Wolf, Catherine G. (2000): Evolution of Contact Point: A Case Study of a Help Desk and its Users. In: Kellogg, Wendy A. and Whittaker, Steve (eds.) Proceedings of the 2000 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work 2000, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States. pp. 41-48.
This paper describes the evolution of a concept, Contact Point, the research process through which it evolved, and the work context and practices which drove its evolution. Contact Point is a web-based application that helps a business manage its relationships with its customers. It can also be used within a business as a means for managing the relationship between parts of the business. In this paper we describe a study of the applicability of Contact Point to the technical services organization and field personnel of a medical device manufacturer. We found that there were opportunities to potentially reduce call volume through Contact Point. We discovered, however, that the technical service representatives sometimes filled roles other than providing information in their telephone conversations with field personnel. These functions included reassuring callers that the callers' answers to questions were correct, providing a rationale for information, and redirecting calls to other departments. The ability to share a document and collaborate in real time was viewed as very valuable. We also discovered that the field personnel need information from a variety of other people in order to do their jobs. These observations were used to enhance the next iteration of Contact Point and to develop strategies for the introduction of Contact Point to users.
© All rights reserved Mamykina and Wolf and/or ACM Press
Wolf, Catherine G. and Zadrozny, Wlodek (1998): Evolution of the Conversation Machine: A Case Study of Bringing Advanced Technology to the Marketplace. In: Karat, Clare-Marie, Lund, Arnold, Coutaz, JoŽlle and Karat, John (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 98 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 18-23, 1998, Los Angeles, California. pp. 488-495.
This paper describes the evolution of the Conversation Machine, a conversational speech system which allows users to carry out common banking transactions over the telephone using a conversational-style interface. The discussion is organized according to three phases of the project -- the demonstration, laboratory, and customer phases. The different phases of the project had different goals and brought different design issues to the forefront. In particular, the realities of working with a customer partner have affected the design of the user interface and functionality of the system in ways not anticipated at earlier stages of the project.
© All rights reserved Wolf and Zadrozny and/or ACM Press
Kobayashi, Makoto, Shinozaki, Masahide, Sakairi, Takashi, Touma, Maroun, Daijavad, Shahrokh and Wolf, Catherine G. (1998): Collaborative Customer Services Using Synchronous Web Browser Sharing. In: Poltrock, Steven and Grudin, Jonathan (eds.) Proceedings of the 1998 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work November 14 - 18, 1998, Seattle, Washington, United States. pp. 99-108.
In this paper, we describe our experiences in designing two applications for synchronous web browser sharing in the context of Web-based collaborative customer service. Real-world business requirements were the key factors that dictated the design and architecture of these collaborative applications and as such, constitute the foundations for the paper.
© All rights reserved Kobayashi et al. and/or ACM Press
Zhang, Qiping, Wolf, Catherine G., Daijavad, Shahrokh and Touma, Maroun (1998): Talking to Customers on the Web: A Comparison of Three Voice Alternatives. In: Poltrock, Steven and Grudin, Jonathan (eds.) Proceedings of the 1998 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work November 14 - 18, 1998, Seattle, Washington, United States. pp. 109-117.
This paper describes an empirical study that compared three alternatives for voice communication in conjunction with Web page collaboration for customer service. Two of the technologies used a single phone line for both voice and data transmission. These technologies were internet telephony and Simultaneous Voice and Data (SVD), a protocol which allows the voice to be routed over the public telephone network, rather than the internet. The study found that SVD was superior to internet telephony in terms of a number of behavioral and subjective measures of conversational interaction. The study also found that task time using internet telephony was 45% greater than with SVD, making the former a costly alternative in terms of human time.
© All rights reserved Zhang et al. and/or ACM Press
Wolf, Catherine G. and Karat, John (1997): Capturing What is Needed in Multi-User System Design: Observations from the Design of Three Healthcare Systems. In: Proceedings of DIS97: Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, & Techniques 1997. pp. 405-415.
The design of large-scale collaborative multi-user systems requires both a detailed understanding of the work of many individuals and an understanding of how the individual pieces fit together in the larger organizational context. In order to manage the complexity of the design task, designers develop and use various representations of work practices which selectively include some details, but omit others. This paper presents some heuristics based on our experience in the design of three healthcare systems that can help designers in determining what information needs to be included in representations for the design of multi-user systems. We present eight questions which can be used to capture important work practice information. We include a retrospective analysis of several design examples and suggest how the use of these questions can be integrated into design practice.
© All rights reserved Wolf and Karat and/or ACM Press
Wolf, Catherine G., Rhyne, James R. and Briggs, Laura K. (1992): Communication and Information Retrieval with a Pen-Based Meeting Support Tool. In: Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work November 01 - 04, 1992, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. pp. 322-329.
We-Met (Window Environment-Meeting Enhancement Tools) is a prototype pen-based tool designed to support both the communication and information retrieval needs of small group meetings. The first part of this paper describes We-Met and the rationale for its design, the second discusses findings from an empirical study of the use of We-Met for group communication, and the third discusses findings from a study of the search and retrieval of information from non-computer based meetings conducted to provide insight into how to facilitate these activities in We-Met. The paper identifies potential communication process gains due to the pen-based interface style, opportunities for the facilitation of information retrieval in a pen-based tool, and functionality/interface challenges in the design of a tool to support small group meetings.
© All rights reserved Wolf et al. and/or ACM Press
Rhyne, James R. and Wolf, Catherine G. (1992): Tools for Supporting the Collaborative Process. In: Mackinlay, Jock D. and Green, Mark (eds.) Proceedings of the 5th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology November 15 - 18, 1992, Monteray, California, United States. pp. 161-170.
Collaborative software has been divided into two temporal categories: synchronous and asynchronous. We argue that this binary distinction is unnecessary and harmful, and present a model for collaboration processes (i.e. the temporal record of the actions of the group members) which includes both synchronous and asynchronous software as submodels. We outline an object-oriented toolkit which implements the model, and present an application of its use in a pen-based conferencing tool.
© All rights reserved Rhyne and Wolf and/or ACM Press
Wolf, Catherine G. (1992): A Comparative Study of Gestural, Keyboard, and Mouse Interfaces. In Behaviour and Information Technology, 11 (1) pp. 13-23.
This paper presents results from three experiments which compared gestural, keyboard, and mouse/keyboard interfaces to a spreadsheet program. This is the first quantitative comparison of these types of interfaces known to the author. The gestural interface employed gestures (hand-drawn marks such as carets or brackets) for commands, and handwriting as input techniques. In one configuration, the input/output hardware consisted of a transparent digitizing tablet mounted on top of an LCD which allowed the user to interact with the program by writing on the tablet with a stylus. The experiments found that participants were faster with the gestural interface than with the keyboard or mouse/keyboard interface. In addition, subjects tended to prefer the gestural interface over the keyboard interface. Inexperienced mouse users also tended to prefer the gestural interface over the mouse/keyboard interface, although experienced mouse users preferred the mouse. The main difficulties with the gestural interface had to do with poor display legibility and problems with the stylus. The benefits of the gestural interface are explained in terms of the fewer number of steps required to carry out an operation, the greater ease of remembering gestural commands, and the ability to focus on a single surface for input and output.
© All rights reserved Wolf and/or Taylor and Francis
Wolf, Catherine G., Rhyne, James R., Zorman, Lorna A. and Ossher, Harold (1991): WE-MET (Window Environment-Meeting Enhancement Tools). In: Robertson, Scott P., Olson, Gary M. and Olson, Judith S. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 91 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 28 - June 5, 1991, New Orleans, Louisiana. pp. 441-442.
Wolf, Catherine G. (1991): The Design of Recognition-Based User Interfaces. In: Robertson, Scott P., Olson, Gary M. and Olson, Judith S. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 91 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 28 - June 5, 1991, New Orleans, Louisiana. p. 487.
Wolf, Catherine G., Glasser, Andria R. and Fujisaki, Tetsu (1991): An Evaluation of Recognition Accuracy for Discrete and Run-On Writing. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting 1991. pp. 359-363.
In an effort to reach markets in which a keyboard/mouse interface is difficult or inconvenient to use, manufacturers are now beginning to introduce light-weight portable computers which recognize hand-printed characters. The recognition accuracy that these new computers are able to achieve will be a critical factor in determining their acceptance by users. There are, however, few published studies of handwriting recognition accuracy and the variables which affect accuracy. The purpose of this study was to assess recognition accuracy as a function of a number of factors which might vary in the real-world use of handwriting recognition systems. These factors included style of writing, amount of training, interval of disuse, and alphabet. The findings suggested that recognition accuracy reached a steady-state level with a relatively small amount of training and remained at that level for as long as a month (the longest interval tested in this study). For an 82-character alphabet, character recognition accuracy was 92.7% for discrete writing and 87.6% for run-on writing. Accuracy with alphabets restricted to digits or uppercase only was quite high, with mean recognition rates ranging from 95% to
© All rights reserved Wolf et al. and/or Human Factors Society
Wolf, Catherine G. (1990): Understanding Handwriting Recognition from the User's Perspective. In: D., Woods, and E., Roth, (eds.) Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 34th Annual Meeting 1990, Santa Monica, USA. pp. 249-253.
As an input technique, handwriting recognition offers benefits in ease of use, but poses special problems for the user when a recognition error occurs. When a recognition error occurs, the user is often surprised since the misrecognized character often looks acceptable to him/her. In contrast, when a typing error occurs with a keyboard interface, the user immediately understands what has happened. The purpose of this study was: 1. to gain insight into what people think when a recognition error occurs, and 2. to discover whether a simple monochrome display of a user's handwriting prototypes would provide information which could be used to improve recognition accuracy. Such a display might serve as a point of reference for understanding and avoiding recognition errors. The results of the study suggested that a display of handwriting prototypes can be used by people to improve recognition accuracy. The study also found that in a large percentage of instances, people do not have any insight into the cause of a recognition error. Some possible causes for this predicament and some possible remedies are discussed in the paper.
© All rights reserved Wolf and/or Human Factors Society
Wolf, Catherine G., Carroll, John M., Landauer, Thomas K., John, Bonnie E. and Whiteside, John (1989): The Role of Laboratory Experiments in HCI: Help, Hindrance, or Ho-Hum?. In: Bice, Ken and Lewis, Clayton H. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 89 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 30 - June 4, 1989, Austin, Texas. pp. 265-268.
Wolf, Catherine G., Rhyne, James R. and Ellozy, Hamed A. (1989): The Paper-Like Interface. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 1989. pp. 494-501.
A group at the IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center has been exploring a Paper-Like Interface which couples the convenience of pen and paper with the power of a computer. This paper describes the paper-like interface and the demonstration applications we have built in order to investigate the benefits and liabilities of this interface style. The findings from formal and informal studies of the use of the prototype system are reported.
© All rights reserved Wolf et al. and/or Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Wolf, Catherine G. (1988): A Comparative Study of Gestural and Keyboard Interfaces. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd Annual Meeting 1988. pp. 273-277.
This paper presents results from two experiments which compared gestural and keyboard interfaces to a spreadsheet program. This is the first quantitative comparison of these two types of interfaces known to the author. The gestural interface employed gestures (hand-drawn marks such as carets or brackets) for commands, and handwriting as input techniques. In one configuration, the input/output hardware consisted of a transparent digitizing tablet mounted on top of an LCD which allowed the user to interact with the program by writing on the tablet with a stylus. The experiments found that participants were faster with the gestural interface. Specifically, subjects performed the operations in about 72% of the time taken with the keyboard. In addition, there was a preference for the gestural interface over the keyboard interface. These findings are explained in terms of the fewer number of movements required to carry out an operation with the gestural interface, the greater ease of remembering gestural commands, and the benefits of performing operations directly on objects of interest.
© All rights reserved Wolf and/or Human Factors Society
Wolf, Catherine G. and Morrel-Samuels, Palmer (1987): The Use of Hand-Drawn Gestures for Text Editing. In International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 27 (1) pp. 91-102.
This paper reports results from a paper and pencil study of the use of hand-drawn gestures for simple editing tasks. The use of gesture is of particular interest in an interface which allows the user to write directly on the surface of a display with a stylus. The results of the study provided encouragement for the development of gesture-driven user interfaces. There was very good intra-subject consistency in the spatial form of gestures used for an editing operation, and also, good agreement across subjects in the form selected for a particular operation. Subjects' reactions to the use of gesture indicated that gesture commands were perceived as easy to use and remember. Specific implications for the design gestural interfaces are discussed.
© All rights reserved Wolf and Morrel-Samuels and/or Academic Press
Selker, Ted, Wolf, Catherine G. and Koved, Larry (1987): A Framework for Comparing Systems with Visual Interfaces. In: Bullinger, Hans-Jorg and Shackel, Brian (eds.) INTERACT 87 - 2nd IFIP International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction September 1-4, 1987, Stuttgart, Germany. pp. 683-688.
A computer program presents its capabilities and domain of application through a user interface. With the advent of inexpensive graphics hardware, systems with visual user interfaces are proliferating. New interface technologies offer opportunities for improving the usability of programs. It is important to understand how to employ these new techniques in the design of better user interfaces. A review and comparison of visual interfaces prompted the need for a vocabulary and systematic framework to describe them. This paper presents a framework developed for describing and comparing visual user interfaces. Communication between computers and humans has often been described in linguistic terms. This paper uses the term visual language to refer to the systematic use of visual presentation methods to convey meaning to a user. The framework includes a description of the interface in terms of the elements, operators and syntax of an interface language, the rationale governing the use of visual elements, the power of the language, interface characteristics such as the interaction style and input/output device dependencies, and the domain and purpose of the application. The framework has been useful in identifying important differences between visual interfaces and has provided a vocabulary for the discussion of visual language. Elements of the framework are illustrated with examples from existing systems.
© All rights reserved Selker et al. and/or North-Holland
Wolf, Catherine G. and Shneiderman, Ben (1987): Understanding Direct Manipulation Interfaces. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting 1987. p. 565.
Direct manipulation interfaces are becoming increasingly popular, yet we do not have a good understanding of what makes them successful or not. The objective of the symposium is to provide a better understanding of the class of user interfaces referred to as "direct manipulation interfaces". To accomplish this goal, the symposium brings together people who are working on the design and evaluation of direct manipulation systems and/or performing issues-oriented research on direct manipulation. The symposium will address topics such as: * What is "direct manipulation"? * Varieties of direct manipulation interfaces * How do direct manipulation interfaces differ from conventional command language interfaces? * What are direct manipulation interfaces good / not good for? * Designing a better interface: challenges for the future
© All rights reserved Wolf and Shneiderman and/or Human Factors Society
Wolf, Catherine G. and Rhyne, James R. (1987): A Taxonomic Approach to Understanding Direct Manipulation. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting 1987. pp. 576-580.
This paper presents a taxonomy for user interface techniques which is useful in understanding direct manipulation interfaces. The taxonomy is based on the way actions and objects are specified in the interface. We suggest that direct manipulation is a characteristic shared by a number of different interface techniques, rather than a single interface style. A relatively new interface method, gesture, is also described in terms of the taxonomy and some observations are made on its potential.
© All rights reserved Wolf and Rhyne and/or Human Factors Society
Show list on your website
Join our community and advance:
Changes to this page (author)24 Jul 2007: Added28 Jun 2007: Modified
26 Jun 2007: Modified
26 Jun 2007: Modified
25 Jun 2007: Modified
25 Jun 2007: Modified
25 Jun 2007: Modified
22 Jun 2007: Modified
28 Apr 2003: Added
28 Apr 2003: Added
Page maintainer: The Editorial Team