Number of co-authors:9
Number of publications with 3 favourite co-authors:Simon P. Davies:2Anthony J. Lambert:2Simon P. Liversedge:1
John M. Findlay's 3 most productive colleagues in number of publications:Simon P. Davies:25Aidan Feeney:2Anthony J. Lambert:2
The moment clients realize that revisions are not an all-you-can-eat buffet, suddenly they realize they are not hungry.
-- Lester Beall
Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann
Read Steve's chapter !
John M. Findlay
Publications by John M. Findlay (bibliography)
Feeney, Aidan, Hola, Ala K. W., Liversedge, Simon P., Findlay, John M. and Metcalf, Robert (2000): How People Extract Information from Graphs: Evidence from a Sentence-Graph Verification Paradigm. In: Anderson, Michael, Cheng, Peter C-H. and Haarslev, Volker (eds.) Diagrams 2000 - Theory and Application of Diagrams - First International Conference September 1-3, 2000, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK. pp. 149-161.
Scott, D. and Findlay, John M. (1991): Optimum Display Arrangements for Presenting Status Information. In International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 35 (3) pp. 399-407.
A study utilizing an automated human-computer interface monitoring system is described which investigated the efficacy of two methods of displaying state (insert vs type-over) information within a text-editing system. Information presented only at the cursor position resulted in faster overall performance time than when information was presented only on a status line. The results are discussed in terms of visual processing and cognitive factors.
© All rights reserved Scott and Findlay and/or Academic Press
Davies, Simon P., Lambert, Anthony J. and Findlay, John M. (1989): The Effects of the Availability of Menu Information During Command Learning in a Word Processing Application. In Behaviour and Information Technology, 8 (2) pp. 135-144.
An experiment is reported investigating the transition from relying on an external memory aid for system commands, provided by a permanently visible menu, to relying on internal memory for commands. Menu availability, and the method of command entry (keyboard vs. mouse) were manipulated during the early stages of learning the basic commands required to operate a word processing application. It was found that a group which always had the benefit of a memory aid provided by a menu performed no more efficiently than a group never provided with a menu. A group initially provided with a menu, which was then withdrawn performed significantly more slowly, and with more recourse to help facilities than the later group. When the menu was permanently visible there were no performance differences between the keyboard and mouse methods of command entry. Implications of these findings for interface design are discussed.
© All rights reserved Davies et al. and/or Taylor and Francis
Findlay, John M., Davies, Simon P., Kentridge, Robert, Lambert, Anthony J. and Kelly, Justine (1988): Optimum Display Arrangements for Presenting Visual Reminders. In: Jones, Dylan M. and Winder, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourth Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers IV August 5-9, 1988, University of Manchester, UK. pp. 453-464.
Developments in technology now allow designers to make use of a wide variety of layouts to present material at an interactive terminal. Our understanding of perceptual and cognitive processes shows that various tradeoffs will need consideration in evaluating such layouts (availability of material vs screen clutter; reliance on user memory vs use of reminders etc). We approach these through the framework of attentional switching. We shall report an experimental study which evaluates these tradeoffs in a frequently encountered text editing situation. Our editor may be set to either 'insert' or 'overtype' mode. This information can be displayed with varying prominence in a peripheral window on the screen, displayed as a change of cursor, or omitted from the screen display. We have monitored user interaction at a keystroke level during text editing sessions and show that the different forms of presentation of reminder information can result in substantial differences in performance.
© All rights reserved Findlay et al. and/or Cambridge University Press
Show this list on your homepage
Join the technology elite and advance:
Changes to this page (author)15 Feb 2010: Modified01 Jun 2009: Added
28 Apr 2003: Added
Page maintainer: The Editorial Team