Calendar

May 27

13th Intl. Conf. on New Interfaces for Musical Expression

May 28

Graphics Interface 2013

May 29

Boston UXPA Usability and UX Conf. 2013

May 24

“ For a list of all the ways technology has failed to improve the quality of life, please press three. ”

-- Alice Kahn

Share this quote on...
Get more quotes via RSS or by joining our Usability Quote of the Day Facebook Page

Featured chapter

Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann

Read Steve's chapter !

Help us help you!

Spread the word:
Donate
Other ways to help

Chris W. Schacherer

Add description

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Rename / change spelling

Add publication

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Publications by Chris W. Schacherer (bibliography)

1992

Edit | Del

Rowe, Anna L., Cooke, Nancy J., Neville, Kelly J. and Schacherer, Chris W. (1992): Mental Models of Mental Models: A Comparison of Mental Model Measurement Techniques. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting 1992. pp. 1195-1199.

“Although use of the mental model construct has proliferated in recent research, the construct lacks a clear definition and an agreed upon method of measurement. Furthermore, the reliability and validity of the different measurement techniques in use have not been established, thereby making generalizations across studies of mental models difficult. The purpose of the current project was to assess several methods of measuring mental models in terms of their reliability/stability over time. Subjects' mental models of the automobile engine system were elicited on two occasions separated by one week, using seven different knowledge elicitation techniques. Subjects' level of experience was also measured to allow comparisons between experts and novices. The results indicate that each of the measurement techniques tended to be reliable for both experts and novices. However, reliability tended to be greater for experts than novices. Additionally, experts tended to agree with each other more than did the novices. Some evidence also indicated that the results from the similarity ratings and subsequent Pathfinder analysis converged with those from the structured interviews.”

Add publication