Publication statistics

Pub. period:1982-1990
Pub. count:17
Number of co-authors:16



Co-authors

Number of publications with 3 favourite co-authors:

Dennis Wixon:10
Michael Good:7
Sandra Jones:4

 

 

Productive colleagues

John Whiteside's 3 most productive colleagues in number of publications:

John M. Carroll:209
Bonnie E. John:64
Peter G. Polson:46
 
 
 

Upcoming Courses

go to course
User Experience: The Beginner's Guide
Starts the day after tomorrow !
go to course
User-Centred Design - Module 2
92% booked. Starts in 3 days
 
 

Featured chapter

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

 
 
The Social Design of Technical Systems: Building technologies for communities. 2nd Edition
by Brian Whitworth and Adnan Ahmad
start reading
 
 
 
 
Gamification at Work: Designing Engaging Business Software
by Janaki Mythily Kumar and Mario Herger
start reading
 
 
 
 
The Social Design of Technical Systems: Building technologies for communities
by Brian Whitworth and Adnan Ahmad
start reading
 
 
 
 
The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Ed.
by Mads Soegaard and Rikke Friis Dam
start reading
 
 

John Whiteside

Has also published under the name of:
"J. Whiteside"

 

Publications by John Whiteside (bibliography)

 what's this?
1990
 
Edit | Del

Carrasco, Jane and Whiteside, John (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 90 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference 1990, Seattle, Washington,USA.

1989
 
Edit | Del

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.

1988
 
Edit | Del

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

 
Edit | Del

Whiteside, John, Bennett, John and Holtzblatt, Karen (1988): Usability Engineering: Our Experience and Evolution. In: Helander, Martin and Landauer, Thomas K. (eds.). "Handbook of Human Computer Interaction". North Holland

 Cited in the following chapter:

Contextual Design: [/encyclopedia/contextual_design.html]


 
 Cited in the following chapter:

Contextual Design: [/encyclopedia/contextual_design.html]


 
 
Edit | Del

Whiteside, John, Bennett, John and Holtzblatt, Karen (1988): Usability Engineering: Our experience and Evolution. In: Helander, Martin and Prabhu, Prasad V. (eds.). "Handbook of human-computer interactio". pp. 791-817

1987
 
Edit | Del

Whiteside, John and Wixon, Dennis (1987): Discussion: Improving Human-Computer Interaction - a Quest for Cognitive Science. In: Carroll, John M. (ed.). "Interfacing Thought". Cambridge: MIT Presspp. 353-367

 
Edit | Del

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.

 
Edit | Del

Campbell, Robert L., Polson, Peter G. and Whiteside, John (1987): Psychology and design: Contrasting approaches. In: Graphics Interface 87 (CHI+GI 87) April 5-9, 1987, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. pp. 89-91.

1986
 
Edit | Del

Good, Michael, Spine, Thomas M., Whiteside, John and George, Peter (1986): User-Derived Impact Analysis as a Tool for Usability Engineering. In: Mantei, Marilyn and Orbeton, Peter (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 86 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 13-17, 1986, Boston, Massachusetts. pp. 241-246.

A unified approach to improved usability can be identified in the works of Gilb (1981, 1984), Shackel (1984), Bennett (1984), Carroll and Rosson (1985), and Butler (1985). We term this approach "usability engineering," and seek to contribute to it by showing, via a product development case study, how user-derived estimates of the impact of design activities on engineering goals may be made.

© All rights reserved Good et al. and/or ACM Press

 
Edit | Del

Good, Michael, Spine, Thomas M., Whiteside, John and George, Peter (1986): User-Derived Impact Analysis as a Tool for Usability Engineering. In: Mantei, Marilyn and Orbeton, Peter (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 86 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 13-17, 1986, Boston, Massachusetts. pp. 241-246. Available online

A unified approach to improved usability can be identified in the works of Gilb (1981, 1984), Shackel (1984), Bennett (1984), Carroll and Rosson (1985), and Butler (1985). We term this approach "usability engineering," and seek to contribute to it by showing, via a product development case study, how user-derived estimates of the impact of design activities on engineering goals may be made.

© All rights reserved Good et al. and/or ACM Press

1985
 
Edit | Del

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.

 
Edit | Del

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

1984
 
Edit | Del

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. Available online

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

1983
 
Edit | Del

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

 
Edit | Del

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. Available online

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

1982
 
Edit | Del

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

 
Edit | Del

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. Available online

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

 
Add publication
Show list on your website
 
 

Join our community and advance:

Your
Skills

Your
Network

Your
Career

 
Join our community!
 
 
 

Page Information

Page maintainer: The Editorial Team
URL: http://www.interaction-design.org/references/authors/john_whiteside.html