Dennis Wixon
Publications by Dennis Wixon (bibliography)
Rohn, Janice and Wixon, Dennis (2011): Managing user experience teams: lessons from case studies, establishing best practices. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2011 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2011. pp. 29-31.
“This workshop focuses on managing cross-disciplinary user experience teams to achieve product and corporate success. The workshop brings together a diverse group of leaders in order to create a set of case studies to illuminate challenges and success factors. Emphasis is placed on cross-disciplinary teams, corporate culture and environment, organizational structure, and international considerations. The goal of the workshop is to develop a set of contingent, specific, and applicable guidelines for managing user experience teams in a variety of circumstances based on case studies.”
© All rights reserved Rohn and Wixon and/or their publisher
Jain, Jhilmil, Lund, Arnold and Wixon, Dennis (2011): The future of natural user interfaces. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2011 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2011. pp. 211-214.
“This SIG is a forum to advance an integrated approach to multi-modal Natural User Interfaces. Up until now the research and design of NUI interfaces for various modalities (speech, touch, gesture) has proceeded independently. We propose having an integrated discussion with both academics and practitioners to stimulate the exchange of knowledge about the various modalities and how they might be fruitfully combined, and identifying key areas of future research and design that make the case for multi-modal NUIs. The goal is to not only create a vision of synthetic applications of NUI by connecting researchers but to also discuss ways to make the vision a reality.”
© All rights reserved Jain et al. and/or their publisher
Rohn, Janice, Wixon, Dennis, Nieters, Jim and Thompson, Carola (2011): Managing UX teams. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2011 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2011. pp. 815-817.
Seow, Steven C., Wixon, Dennis, Morrison, Ann and Jacucci, Giulio (2010): Natural user interfaces: the prospect and challenge of touch and gestural computing. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2010 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2010. pp. 4453-4456.
“Natural User Interfaces show great promise to define new and potentially large niches of interactive computing. The promise of Natural Computing Interfaces (touch and gesture) stems from at least two sources -- the prospect of touch and gestural computing becoming as ubiquitous as currently dominant paradigms (e.g. GUI.) and technical breakthroughs. However, this new field of research and commercial development faces significant challenges. For example the challenge of developing a common terminology and framework while fostering innovation and creativity. The workshop will begin the process of addressing some of the challenges by (1) enumerating them, (2) listing potential ways to address them. As such our aim is to foster the evolution of NUI community of researchers and practitioners.”
© All rights reserved Seow et al. and/or their publisher
Hofmeester, Kay and Wixon, Dennis (2010): Using metaphors to create a natural user interface for Microsoft surface. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2010 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2010. pp. 4629-4644.
“Creating a new model of human computer interaction is not straightforward. Only a handful of such models have been commercially successful. Those that have, such as the graphical user interface (GUI), can provide valuable lessons. When we were challenged to develop a new natural user interface design for Microsoft Surface, we drew from these lessons and from modern user research techniques. A prominent starting point resulting from this was using metaphors to develop the new user interface. We used metaphors for two reasons: To create a user interface world that was understandable and predictable for our users, and to guide the design team in creating the detailed user interface design. We continued this practice in the user research: We focused on which metaphors worked best in the studies, and learned if users understood the metaphors we were using and which metaphor they preferred. This case study describes the process we followed, and the lessons we learned from this.”
© All rights reserved Hofmeester and Wixon and/or their publisher
Rosenbaum, Stephanie, Braun, Kelly, Wixon, Dennis, Swamy, Seema, Laan, Krista Van and Wilson, Chauncey (2010): Investing in User Research: Making Strategic Choices. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 54th Annual Meeting 2010. pp. 547-550.
“This panel examines the relationship between methods and business strategy: how should an organization spend whatever budget it has for user research? Despite the many in-depth explorations of user experience research methodology, practitioners -- especially user experience managers -- still struggle with the challenge of choosing the research that will add the most value to their company's products and services. This panel will reveal how and why some of the best managers in the human-computer interaction community make these decisions.”
© All rights reserved Rosenbaum et al. and/or HFES
Seow, Steven C., Wixon, Dennis, MacKenzie, Scott, Jacucci, Giulio, Morrison, Ann and Wilson, Andy (2009): Multitouch and surface computing. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2009 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2009. pp. 4767-4770.
“Natural user interfaces (NUI) such as multitouch and surface computing are positioned as the next major evolution in computing and user interfaces. Just graphical user interfaces (GUIs) brought unprecedented interaction capabilities to their command-line predecessors, we believe multitouch and surface computing will spawn novel ways to interact with media and improve social usage patterns. Since experimentation and deployment are currently limited, the exploration of applications and interfaces in this area is still at an early stage.”
© All rights reserved Seow et al. and/or ACM Press
Kim, Jun H., Gunn, Daniel V., Schuh, Eric, Phillips, Bruce, Pagulayan, Randy J. and Wixon, Dennis (2008): Tracking real-time user experience (TRUE): a comprehensive instrumentation solution for complex systems. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2008 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems April 5-10, 2008. pp. 443-452.
“Automatic recording of user behavior within a system (instrumentation) to develop and test theories has a rich history in psychology and system design. Often, researchers analyze instrumented behavior in isolation from other data. The problem with collecting instrumented behaviors without attitudinal, demographic, and contextual data is that researchers have no way to answer the 'why' behind the 'what'. We have combined the collection and analysis of behavioral instrumentation with other HCI methods to develop a system for Tracking Real-Time User Experience (TRUE). Using two case studies as examples, we demonstrate how we have evolved instrumentation methodology and analysis to extensively improve the design of video games. It is our hope that TRUE is adopted and adapted by the broader HCI community, becoming a useful tool for gaining deep insights into user behavior and improvement of design for other complex systems.”
© All rights reserved Kim et al. and/or ACM Press
Bernhaupt, Regina, Ijsselsteijn, Wijand, Mueller, Florian, Tscheligi, Manfred and Wixon, Dennis (2008): Evaluating user experiences in games. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2008 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems April 5-10, 2008. pp. 3905-3908.
Wixon, Dennis and Pagulayan, Randy (2008): Halo 3: the theory and practice of a research-design partnership. In Interactions, 15 (1) pp. 52-55.
Wixon, Dennis (2007): Guitar Hero: the inspirational story of an "overnight" success. In Interactions, 14 (3) pp. 16-17.
Wixon, Dennis and Reyes, August de los (2007): The design of emotionally engaging products. In Interactions, 14 (5) pp. 22-23.
Wixon, Dennis (2006): Are we having fun yet?: computers as entertainment objects. In Interactions, 13 (1) pp. 46-60.
Wixon, Dennis (2006): What is a game?. In Interactions, 13 (2) pp. 37-ff.
Wixon, Dennis (2006): What works?. In Interactions, 13 (4) pp. 18-19.
Olson, Gary M. and Wixon, Dennis (2005): CHI 2006: interact, inform, inspire. In Interactions, 12 (6) pp. 12-13.
Dray, Susan M., Karat, Clare-Marie, Rosenberg, Daniel, Siegel, David A. and Wixon, Dennis (2005): Is ROI an effective approach for persuading decision-makers of the value of user-centered design?. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2005 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2005. pp. 1168-1169.
“This panel examines the utility and effectiveness of various ways of making the business case for user-centered design (UCD). Most of the discussion in our field has assumed that measuring and demonstrating ROI for usability is the key to this effort. However, experience shows that the most brilliant ROI analysis may not win the day in the real world of business. Our panelists range from people who claim that ROI is an important persuasive tool as long as the communication about ROI is happening within a healthy business relationship, to people who claim that a focus on ROI can actually be destructive. We also explore the idea that there are important business contexts where ROI simply does not fit. Through the presentations by the panelists and through discussion of a business case scenario, we explore some alternatives to ROI in making the business case for user-centered design.”
© All rights reserved Dray et al. and/or ACM Press
Wixon, Dennis (2003): Evaluating usability methods: why the current literature fails the practitioner. In Interactions, 10 (4) pp. 28-34.
Wixon, Dennis (1999): Rethinking Documentation and Interface: Reflections on Categorical Approaches. In ACM SIGDOC *Journal of Computer Documentation, 23 (4) pp. 12-14.
“In the second of two commentaries on Winograd, Dennis Wixon examines Winograd's examples again and finds that in designing both documentation and product interfaces the best goal is to match user needs in diversity as well as in grain size.”
© All rights reserved Wixon and/or ACM Press
Graefe, Thomas M. and Wixon, Dennis (1998): HCI Solutions for Managing the IT Infra-Structure. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 30 (4) p. 66.
“In a kick-off Special Interest Group (SIG) at CHI 97, participants focused on key design challenges in the domain of network and system management. At the conclusion of the CHI 97 SIG the group decided it would be helpful to continue to meet and to provide a forum for exploring solutions to these key design challenges. The CHI 98 SIG provided an opportunity for over 30 HCI practitioners and researchers in the management domain to share information about work in several key areas.”
© All rights reserved Graefe and Wixon and/or ACM Press
Graefe, Thomas M. and Wixon, Dennis (1997): HCI Design for Network and System Management: A CHI 97 Special Interest Group. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 29 (4) pp. 79-80.
Sawyer, Paul, Flanders, Alicia and Wixon, Dennis (1996): Making a Difference -- The Impact of Inspections. In: Tauber, Michael J., Bellotti, Victoria, Jeffries, Robin, Mackinlay, Jock D. and Nielsen, Jakob (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 96 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 14-18, 1996, Vancouver, Canada. pp. 376-382.
“In this methodology paper we define a metric we call impact ratio. We use this ratio to measure the effectiveness of inspections and other evaluative techniques in getting usability improvements into products. We inspected ten”
© All rights reserved Sawyer et al. and/or ACM Press
Wixon, Dennis and Ramey, Judy (1996): Field Oriented Design Techniques: Case Studies and Organizing Dimensions. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 28 (3) pp. 21-26.
Wixon, Dennis and Ramey, Judith (eds.) (1996): Field Methods Casebook for Software Design. John Wiley and Sons
Wixon, Dennis (1995): Qualitative Research Methods in Design and Development. In Interactions, 2 (4) pp. 19-26.
Wixon, Dennis (1995): "Cost Justifying Usability," edited by Randolph G. Bias and Deborah J. Mayhew. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 27 (2) pp. 94-99.
Wixon, Dennis (1993): "Principles and Guidelines in Software User Interface Design," by Deborah J. Mayhew. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 25 (2) pp. 51-53.
“The birth of the field of human computer interface design is often traced to the Gaithersburg conference 10 years ago. In the inevitable assessments of the impact of HCI after 10 years, questions have arisen about the applicability of research to product design. Deborah Mayhew's outstanding new book, Principles and Guidelines in Software User Interface Design, should dispel any doubts about the applicability of research to interface design. Mayhew distills a set of practical guidelines for designing better interfaces from a comprehensive, well-organized, and insightful review of the research literature.... In summary Mayhew has produced the best book on user interface guidelines to date. Already, my copy is filled with notes and stained with coffee.”
© All rights reserved Wixon and/or ACM Press
Wixon, Dennis, Holtzblatt, Karen and Knox, Stephen T. (1990): Contextual Design: An Emergent View of System Design. In: Carrasco, Jane and Whiteside, John (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 90 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference 1990, Seattle, Washington,USA. pp. 329-336.
“We offer an introduction to contextual design as an emergent method for building effective systems. Contextual design addresses a number of the inadequacies in previous methods by emphasizing: interview methods conducted in the context of the user's work, codesigning with the user, building an understanding of work in context, and summarizing conclusions through out the research. We contrast this design method to usability engineering and artifact examination.”
© All rights reserved Wixon et al. and/or ACM Press
Whiteside, John and Wixon, Dennis (1988): Contextualism as a World View for the Reformation of Meetings. In: Greif, Irene (ed.) Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work September 26 - 28, 1988, Portland, Oregon, United States. pp. 369-376.
“The foundations for research and action in the area of group work are examined. Four alternative "world views" are presented. One of these, contextualism, is discussed in depth. Its methodological consequences for research and implications for reform of group meetings are explored.”
© All rights reserved Whiteside and Wixon and/or ACM Press
Whiteside, John and Wixon, Dennis (1987): Discussion: Improving Human-Computer Interaction - a Quest for Cognitive Science. In: Carroll, John M. (ed.). "Interfacing Thought". MIT Press pp. 353-367
Whiteside, John and Wixon, Dennis (1987): The Dialectic of Usability Engineering. 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. 17-20.
Mosteller, William, Boies, Stephen J., Grantham, Charles E., Irby, Thomas, Rubinstein, Richard and Wixon, Dennis (1987): The politics of human factors. In: Graphics Interface 87 (CHI+GI 87) April 5-9, 1987, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. pp. 331-332.
Wixon, Dennis and Good, Michael (1987): Interface Style and Eclecticism: Moving Beyond Categorical Approaches. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting 1987. pp. 571-575.
“The weaknesses inherent in categorizing interfaces are discussed. Questions are raised about using categorical approaches in science and design. Alternative approaches are suggested with an emphasis on dimensional scope and contextual sensitivity. It is argued that interfaces should be seen in terms of their transparency and support for breakdown.”
© All rights reserved Wixon and Good and/or Human Factors Society
Wixon, Dennis and Good, Michael (1987): Interface Style and Eclecticism: Moving Beyond Categorical Approaches. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting 1987. pp. 571-575.
“The weaknesses inherent in categorizing interfaces are discussed. Questions are raised about using categorical approaches in science and design. Alternative approaches are suggested with an emphasis on dimensional scope and contextual sensitivity. It is argued that interfaces should be seen in terms of their transparency and support for breakdown.”
© All rights reserved Wixon and Good and/or Human Factors Society
Mack, Robert L., Moran, Thomas P., Olson, Judith R. and Wixon, Dennis (1985): Computer Human Factors in Computer Interface Design. In: Borman, Lorraine and Curtis, Bill (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 85 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 14-18, 1985, San Francisco, California. pp. 137-138.
“Human factors psychologist contribute in many ways to improving human-computer interaction. One contribution involves evaluating existing or prototype systems, in order to assess usability and identify problems. Another involves contributing more directly to the design of systems in the first place: that is, not only evaluating systems but bringing to bear empirical methods and theoretical considerations that help specify what are plausible designs in the first place. The goal of this panel is to discuss four case studies emphasizing this role of cognitive human factors, and identify relevant methods and theoretical considerations.”
© All rights reserved Mack et al. and/or ACM Press
Wixon, Dennis and Whiteside, John (1985): Engineering for Usability: Lessons Learned from the User Derived Interface. In: Borman, Lorraine and Curtis, Bill (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 85 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 14-18, 1985, San Francisco, California. pp. 144-147.
Whiteside, John, Jones, Sandra, Levy, Paula S. and Wixon, Dennis (1985): User Performance with Command, Menu, and Iconic Interfaces. In: Borman, Lorraine and Curtis, Bill (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 85 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 14-18, 1985, San Francisco, California. pp. 185-191.
“Performance and subjective reactions of 76 users of varying levels of computer experience were measured with 7 different interfaces representing command, menu, and iconic interface styles. The results suggest three general conclusions: * there are large usability differences between contemporary systems, * there is no necessary tradeoff between ease of use and ease of learning, * interface style is not related to performance or preference (but careful design is). Difficulties involving system feedback, input forms, help systems, and navigation aids occurred in all styles of interface: command, menu, and iconic. New interface technology did not solve old human factors problems.”
© All rights reserved Whiteside et al. and/or ACM Press
Good, Michael, Whiteside, John, Wixon, Dennis and Jones, Sandra (1984): Building a User-Derived Interface. In Communications of the ACM, 27 (10) pp. 1032-1043.
“Many human-computer interfaces are designed with the assumption that the user must adapt to the system, that users must be trained and their behavior altered to fit a given interface. The research presented here proceeds from the alternative assumption: Novice behavior is inherently sensible, and the computer system can be made to adapt to it. Specifically, a measurably easy-to-use interface was built to accommodate the actual behavior of novice users. Novices attempted an electronic mail task using a command-line interface containing no help, no menus, no documentation, and no instruction. A hidden operator intercepted commands when necessary, creating the illusion of an interactive session. The software was repeatedly revised to recognize users’ new commands; in essence, the interface was derived from user behavior. This procedure was used on 67 subjects. The first version of the software could recognize only 7 percent of all the subjects’ spontaneously generated commands; the final version could recognize 76 percent of these commands. This experience contradicts the idea that user input is irrelevant to the design of command languages. Through careful observation and analysis of user behavior, a mail interface unusable by novices evolved into one that let novices do useful work within minutes.”
© All rights reserved Good et al. and/or ACM Press
Wixon, Dennis, Whiteside, John, Good, Michael and Jones, Sandra (1983): Building a User-Defined Interface. In: Smith, Raoul N., Pew, Richard W. and Janda, Ann (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 83 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conferenc December 12-15, 1983, Boston, Massachusetts, United States. pp. 24-27.
“A measurably easy-to-use interface has been built using a novel technique. Novices attempted an electronic mail task using a command-line interface containing no help, no menu, no documentation, and no instruction. A hidden operator intercepted commands when necessary, creating the illusion of a true interactive session. The software was repeatedly revised to recognize users' new commands; in essence, the users defined the interface. This procedure was used on 67 subjects. The first version of the software could recognize only 7% of all the subjects' spontaneously generated commands; the final version could recognize 76% of those commands. This experience contradicts the idea that people are not good at designing their own command languages. Through careful observation and analysis of user behavior, a mail interface unusable by novices evolved into one that let novices do useful work within minutes.”
© All rights reserved Wixon et al. and/or ACM Press
Wixon, Dennis, Whiteside, John, Good, Michael and Jones, Sandra (1983): Building a User-Defined Interface. In: Smith, Raoul N., Pew, Richard W. and Janda, Ann (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 83 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conferenc December 12-15, 1983, Boston, Massachusetts, United States. pp. 24-27.
“A measurably easy-to-use interface has been built using a novel technique. Novices attempted an electronic mail task using a command-line interface containing no help, no menu, no documentation, and no instruction. A hidden operator intercepted commands when necessary, creating the illusion of a true interactive session. The software was repeatedly revised to recognize users' new commands; in essence, the users defined the interface. This procedure was used on 67 subjects. The first version of the software could recognize only 7% of all the subjects' spontaneously generated commands; the final version could recognize 76% of those commands. This experience contradicts the idea that people are not good at designing their own command languages. Through careful observation and analysis of user behavior, a mail interface unusable by novices evolved into one that let novices do useful work within minutes.”
© All rights reserved Wixon et al. and/or ACM Press
Whiteside, John, Archer, Norman P., Wixon, Dennis and Good, Michael (1982): How Do People Really Use Text Editors?. In: Limb, John O. (ed.) Proceedings of the SIGOA Conference on Office Information Systems 1982 June 21-23, 1982, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. pp. 29-40.
“Keystroke statistics were collected on editing systems while people performed their normal work. Knowledge workers used an experimental editor, and secretaries used a word processor. Results show a consistent picture of free use patterns in both settings. Of the total number of keystrokes, text entry accounted for approximately 1/2, cursor movement for about 1/4, deletion for about 1/8, and all other functions for the remaining 1/8. Analysis of keystroke transitions and editing states is also presented. Implications for past research, editor design, keyboard layout, and benchmark tests are discussed.”
© All rights reserved Whiteside et al. and/or ACM Press
Whiteside, John, Archer, Norman P., Wixon, Dennis and Good, Michael (1982): How Do People Really Use Text Editors?. In: Limb, John O. (ed.) Proceedings of the SIGOA Conference on Office Information Systems 1982 June 21-23, 1982, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. pp. 29-40.
“Keystroke statistics were collected on editing systems while people performed their normal work. Knowledge workers used an experimental editor, and secretaries used a word processor. Results show a consistent picture of free use patterns in both settings. Of the total number of keystrokes, text entry accounted for approximately 1/2, cursor movement for about 1/4, deletion for about 1/8, and all other functions for the remaining 1/8. Analysis of keystroke transitions and editing states is also presented. Implications for past research, editor design, keyboard layout, and benchmark tests are discussed.”
© All rights reserved Whiteside et al. and/or ACM Press
Show this list on your homepage
Knowledge wants to be free !
We have decided to give away world-class educational materials
because we believe that universal access to high quality education is key to the building
of peace, sustainable social and economic development, and intercultural dialogue.
To calculate just have much we have saved you, our wonderful readers, we compare our free encyclopedia to two
books we love:
$110: Human-Computer Interaction by Dix et al (a great textbook but without video interviews)
$116: Shneiderman's Designing the User Interface
(a great textbook but without video interviews).
As you are reading our encyclopedia on your iPad/tablet (and saving a few trees), we estimate that the price would be $90 if sold as an eBook.
With that number, we can calculate how much money we have saved our readers, based on calculating the number of readers.
How we calculate readership
Because of our online and tablet/iPad approach to publishing, we are able to precisely measure reading behaviour across hundreds of parameters in realtime: Anything from reading
speed, drop-off points in the text, reader demographics, and much more.
Based on our server logs and the Google Analytics API,
we calculate the number of readers as described in the calculation method below.
A reader is not the same as a simple pageview and a reader is not the same as a
website visitor (as described in our calculation method below).
We calculate readership for two types of readers:
- Readers that have read our whole encyclopedia, much the same way you read a printed book
- Readers that have reader an individual chapter
Calcalution method: How we define a reader
- First we use the Google Analytics API to get a report of the number of unique human visitors to a chapter/page. Google runs its business on ads and thus completely relies on the ability to distinguish between a human visitor and an automated request. If not, you could earn millions on automating clicks on Google Ads.
- We then compare that number to our Apache webserver logs, which report the much higher number of actual visits to a chapter/page (both human and automated). We calculate the difference in percent, which we call an "exaggeration factor", which we use in step 6 below.
- With a large part of the visitors excluded, we further exclude any visitor who:
- has not remained on the page for at least 3 minutes (this factor is calculated by recording visit durations of 1000 randomly selected visitors) or has not printed the page (i.e. has not visited the printerfriendly version of the chapter/page)
- has not scrolled the page (this factor is calculated by recording scroll movements on 1000 randomly selected visitors)
- We then further exclude "double readers", i.e. readers who read a portion of a chapter and then returns in,
say, a week or a month to read the rest.
Although this person's reading activity spans multiple server sessions, the person is only counted as a single reader.
We categorize a "double reader" as a visitor who:
- visits a page, or multiple pages, across multiple server sessions
- qualifies to be defined as a reader, cf step 1-3 above, in all server sessions
- uses the same originating IP address
- We then subtract 5% from the final number to counter-balance a last remaining factor, namely the situation where one reader reads a chapter on his/her tablet
using a WiFi connection (and counted as one reader) but then picks up his other tablet using a 3G dongle
(with another IP address) and re-reads some of the chapter. That will equal two readers, not one. We have no way
of calculating how many times this situation arises, but to be on the safe side we subtract 5%
from the final number.
- We then take half of the "exaggeration factor" from step 2 and substract from the final number. We do this for no rational reason. We do it only as a further measure to be certain that our number of readers is not inflated.
- To qualify as a reader who has read our whole encyclopedia - much the same way you read a printed book - that person must have qualified as a reader (cf. 1-6 above) of at least 80% of the encyclopedia chapters.
As a result, we have eliminated everything from automated requests to the more casual visitors. That leaves us with what we can safely call readers.
Changes to this page (author)
05 Jul 2011: Author was edited 05 Jul 2011: Author was edited 05 Jul 2011: Author was edited
16 Jan 2011: Author was edited
02 Nov 2010: Author was edited
02 Nov 2010: Author was edited
08 Oct 2010: Author was edited (approved by an editor)
06 Oct 2010: Author was edited (approved by an editor)
06 Oct 2010: Author was edited (approved by an editor)
06 Oct 2010: Author was edited (approved by an editor)
01 Oct 2010: Author was added to the bibliography (approved by an editor)
27 Feb 2010: Enabled abstracts to be shown on Dennis Wixon's author page.
09 Jul 2009: Author was added to the bibliography (approved by an editor)
03 Jun 2009: Author was edited
09 May 2009: Author was edited
12 May 2008: Author was edited
12 May 2008: Author was edited
12 May 2008: Author was edited
12 May 2008: Author was edited
24 Jul 2007: Author was edited
29 Jun 2007: Author was edited
29 Jun 2007: Author was edited
29 Jun 2007: Author was edited
29 Jun 2007: Author was edited
29 Jun 2007: Author was edited
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
25 Jun 2007: Author was edited
24 Jun 2007: Author was edited
24 Jun 2007: Author was edited
24 Jun 2007: Author was edited
24 Jun 2007: Author was edited
24 Jun 2007: Author was edited
28 Apr 2003: Added the author to the bibliography
Page Information
Page maintainer:
The Editorial TeamHow to cite/reference this page
URL: http://www.interaction-design.org/references/authors/dennis_wixon.html
