Calendar

May 20

CTS 2013 - The 2013 Intl. Conf. on Collaboration Techn. and Systems

May 22

Knowing (by) Designing 2013

May 27

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

May 18

“ It's really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them. ”

-- Steve Jobs, 1998

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

James Geiwitz

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 James Geiwitz (bibliography)

1991

Edit | Del

McCloskey, Brian P., Geiwitz, James and Kornell, James (1991): Empirical Comparisons of Knowledge Acquisition Techniques. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting 1991. pp. 268-272.

“The degree to which a knowledge-acquisition technique (KAT) extracts useful information from a human expert varies, in large part, as a function of the type of expert system being developed. The present study employed two KATs, ARK (a structured-interview technique) and Repertory Grid (a similarity-judgment technique), to elicit knowledge from U.S. Army helicopter pilots with expertise in mission planning. The resultant knowledge bases were compared in terms of their applicability to two tasks: attack route evaluation and attack route planning. The study revealed important qualitative and quantitative differences in the knowledge bases elicited by the two KATs. The Repertory Grid method elicited dimensions with which the efficiency of attack routes could be classified and, in general, appears to be well-suited for use in development of "convergent" expert systems intended to perform tasks involving categorization or evaluation. In contrast, ARK elicited procedural information (e.g., goals, strategies, and rules) with which route planning could be performed, and appears better suited for obtaining information to be used in the development of "divergent" expert systems designed to conduct tasks involving planning or scheduling. The results have implications for the selection of KATS and the design of knowledge-elicitation sessions, and suggest that further analyses of the knowledge-acquisition process be conducted.”

1987

Edit | Del

Harris, Douglas H. and Geiwitz, James (1987): Multi-Factor Evaluation of Tactical Planning Aids. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting 1987. pp. 218-221.

“Multiple measures of tactical-planning performance were employed to evaluate prototype computer-based planning aids. The objectives of the evaluation were to: 1) assess the extent of overall performance improvement, if any, over existing manual methods, 2) diagnose the impact of computer-aiding on each of the different components of planning performance, and 3) identify potential deficiencies and needed improvements in specific computer-based aids. The evaluation approach was based on the decomposition of planning into specific components and the measurement of each component within a specific mission context. Within a latin-square experimental design, eight tank platoon leaders first used present paper-map methods to solve tactical problems and then used a system of computer aiding to solve comparable but different problems. Seven objective performance measures assessed different components of planning performance under map and aided conditions; an objective measure of overall mission success and subjective assessments of individual planning aids were also obtained. Results provided a multi-dimensional basis for assessing the potential value of computer-based aids and for further enhancement of the planning aids. Overall, use of the prototype planning aids resulted in a significantly greater rate of mission success, 94 percent vs. 44 percent.”

Add publication