Julie A. Jacko
Has also published under the name of:
"Julie Jacko", "J. A. Jacko", "J. Jacko", and "J. Jacko"
About the author:
No description available of Julie A. Jacko...
Publications by Julie A. Jacko (bibliography)
» 2009 «
Jacko, Julie A. (2009): Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Human-Computer Interaction. Interacting in Various Application Domains. Berlin, Heidelberg,
View info on Amazon.com or .co.uk 
» 2008 «
Edwards, Paula J., Moloney, Kevin P., Jacko, Julie A. and Sainfort, Francois (2008): Evaluating usability of a commercial electronic health record: A case study. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 20 (10) pp. 718-728
“Electronic health records (EHR) are increasingly being implemented by care providers in order to streamline processes and improve quality of care. Due to EHRs' complexity, the usability of these systems is crucial to ensure safety and to enable clinicians (users) to focus on their patients rather than the technology. This case study presents experiences from the implementation of a commercial EHR in a large pediatric hospital system. This case discusses how a predictive evaluation method, Heuristic Walkthrough, was used to evaluate and improve the usability of the EHR system. Outcomes from the evaluation resulted in immediate changes in the system configuration and training materials, which helped to avoid usability problems at rollout, as well as change requests to the vendor to improve overall system usability in the long term. Design trade-offs and lessons learned for future EHR implementations and other healthcare applications are discussed.”
Copyrights may apply
Law, Chris, Yi, Ji, Choi, Young and Jacko, Julie A. (2008): A systematic examination of universal design resources: part 1, heuristic evaluation. In Universal Access in the Information Society, 7 (1) pp. 31-54
“This paper presents the evaluation of eight published Universal Design Resources (UDRs) to measure how effectively they support typical design processes and design psychology. New heuristics and principles to evaluate the UDRs from the point of view of designers who were universal design novices were created. Established methodologies for heuristic evaluation were used with the new heuristics. The evaluators found numerous problems in seven of the eight UDRs, providing evidence in support of the hypothesis that the content UDRs does not facilitate the design process and is not commensurate with what is known about typical design psychology.”
Copyrights may apply
Law, Chris, Yi, Ji, Choi, Young and Jacko, Julie A. (2008): A systematic examination of universal design resources: part 2, analysis of the development process. In Universal Access in the Information Society, 7 (1) pp. 55-77
“In this paper, the development process of four Universal Design Resources (UDRs) was analyzed. The results of a heuristic evaluation (HE) of UDRs (Part 1) were used in this (Part 2) study to create an online survey. Thirty-one individuals involved in the creation of the four UDRs responded, 15 of whom were also interviewed. For three resources, the hypothesis was confirmed that meeting the needs of end-users was assumed to be satisfied without systematically addressing them. Additional findings also revealed a common lack of a clearly defined "central idea" among many of the committee members of two US-based ICT accessibility/UD guidelines.”
Copyrights may apply
» 2007 «
Sears, Andrew and Jacko, Julie A. (2007): The Human Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies and Emerging Applications. CRC Press
View info on Amazon.com or .co.uk
Sears, Andrew and Jacko, Julie A. (2007): The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies and Emerging Applications (2nd Edition). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Alonso, Miguel, Barreto, Armando, Jacko, Julie A. and Adjouadi, Malek (2007): Evaluation of onscreen precompensation algorithms for computer users with visual aberrations. In: Ninth Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies 2007. pp. 219-220. Available online
“In this paper, we present statistical results from testing our precompensation algorithms with 20 human subjects. A factorial experiment was designed and tested to evaluate the significance that the method, icon size, and subject group have on the ability of users to identify icons. These results reinforce software and "artificial eye" test findings indicating that the methods used for precompensation provide a significant increase in retinal image quality for users that have visual aberrations present in the optical systems of their eyes. Significant interactions were also found that reveal circumstances under which the method may perform best.”
Copyrights may apply
Lin, Min, Goldman, Rich, Price, Kathleen J., Sears, Andrew and Jacko, Julie A. (2007): How do people tap when walking? An empirical investigation of nomadic data entry. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65 (9) pp. 759-769
“When mobile devices are used on the move, a user's limited visual resources are split between interacting with the mobile devices and maintaining awareness of the surrounding environment. In this study, we examined stylus-based tapping operations on a PDA under three mobility situations: seated, walking on a treadmill, and walking through an obstacle course. The results revealed that Fitts' Law continues to be effective even under the most challenging obstacle course condition. While target selection times did not differ between the various mobility conditions, overall task completion times, error rates, and several measures of workload differed significantly. Diminished performance under the obstacle course condition was attributed to increased demands on attention associated with navigating through the obstacle course. Results showed that the participants in the obstacle course condition were able to tap on a 6.4 mm-diameter target with 90% accuracy, but they reduced their walking speed by 36% and perceived an increased workload. Extending earlier research, we found that treadmill-based conditions were able to generate representative data for task selection times, but accuracy differed significantly from the more realistic obstacle course condition.”
Copyrights may apply
Barnard, Leon, Yi, Ji Soo, Jacko, Julie A. and Sears, Andrew (2007): Capturing the effects of context on human performance in mobile computing systems. In Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 11 (2) pp. 81-96
Jacko, Julie A. (ed.) HCI International 2007 - 12th International Conference - Part I July 22-27, 2007, Beijing, China.
Jacko, Julie A. (ed.) HCI International 2007 - 12th International Conference - Part II July 22-27, 2007, Beijing, China.
Jacko, Julie A. (ed.) HCI International 2007 - 12th International Conference - Part III 2007.
Jacko, Julie A. (ed.) HCI International 2007 - 12th International Conference - Part IV 2007.
» 2006 «
Alonso, Miguel, Barreto, Armando, Jacko, Julie A. and Adjouadi, Malek (2006): A multi-domain approach for enhancing text display for users with visual aberrations. In: Eighth Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies 2006. pp. 34-39. Available online
“In this paper, we describe a multi-domain approach for enhancing text displayed on a computer screen for users with visual aberrations. This research is based on a priori knowledge of the user's visual aberration, as measured by a wavefront analyzer. With this information it is possible to generate text that, when displayed to this user, will counteract his/her visual aberration. The method described in this paper advances the development of techniques for providing such compensation by integrating spatial information in the image as a means to eliminate some of the shortcomings inherent in using display devices such as monitors or LCD panels.”
Copyrights may apply
Choi, Young Sang, Yi, Ji Soo, Law, Chris M. and Jacko, Julie A. (2006): Are "universal design resources" designed for designers?. In: Eighth Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies 2006. pp. 87-94. Available online
“Universal design (UD) is an approach to design that incorporates things which can be used by all people to the greatest extent possible. UD in information and communication technologies (ICTs) is of growing importance because standard ICTs have great potential to be usable by all people, including people with disabilities (PWDs). Currently, PWDs who need ICTs often have less access because the products have not been universally designed. We hypothesize that one of the reasons for the slow adoption of UD is that universal design resources (UDRs) are not adequate for facilitating designers' tasks. We investigated the usability of UDRs from designers' perspectives. A heuristic evaluation on eight selected UDRs was conducted, and the opinions of contributors to the content of these resources were collected through a web-based survey study. The results of the heuristic evaluation show that most of the investigated UDRs do not provide a clear central idea and fail to support the cognitive processes of designers. The results of the survey also confirmed that the content of these resources do not systematically address the needs of designers as end-users during the development process.”
Copyrights may apply
Leonard, V. K., Jacko, Julie A. and Pizzimenti, J. J. (2006): An investigation of handheld device use by older adults with age-related macular degeneration. In Behaviour and Information Technology, 25 (4) pp. 313-332
“This study investigates factors affecting handheld human-computer interaction (HCI) for older adults with Age-related Macular Degeneration (AMD). This is largely an uncharted territory, as empirical investigations of HCI concerning users with visual dysfunction and/or older adults have focused primarily on desktop computers. For this study, participants with AMD and visually healthy controls used a handheld computer to search, select and manipulate familiar playing card icons under varied icon set sizes, inter-icon spacing and auditory feedback conditions. While all participants demonstrated a high rate of task completion, linear regression revealed several relationships between task efficiency and the interface, user characteristics and ocular factors. Two ocular measures, severity of AMD and contrast sensitivity, were found to be highly predictive of efficiency. The outcomes of this work reveal that users with visual impairments can effectively interact with graphical user interfaces on small displays in the presence of low-cost, easily implemented design interventions. Furthermore, results demonstrate that the detrimental influence of AMD and contrast sensitivity on handheld technology interaction can be offset by such interventions. This study presents a rich data set and is intended to inspire future work characterizing and modeling the interactions of individuals with visual impairments with non-traditional information technology platforms and contexts.”
Copyrights may apply
Moloney, Kevin P., Jacko, Julie A., Vidakovic, Brani, Sainfort, Francois, Leonard, V. Kathlene and Shi, Bin (2006): Leveraging data complexity: Pupillary behavior of older adults with visual impairment during HCI. In ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 13 (3) pp. 376-402
“The current ubiquity of information technology has increased variability among users, creating a corresponding need to properly capture and understand these individual differences. This study introduces a novel application of multifractal statistical methods to distinguish users via patterns of variability within high frequency pupillary response behavior (PRB) data collected during computer-based interaction. PRB was measured from older adults, including two groups diagnosed with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) maintaining a range of visual acuities (n = 14), and one visually healthy control group (i.e., disease-free, 20/20-20/32 acuity) (n = 14). Three measures of the multifractal spectrum, the distribution of regularity indices extracted from time series data, distinguished the user groups, including: 1) Spectral Mode; 2) Broadness; and 3) Left Slope. The results demonstrate a clear relationship between the values of these measures and the level of visual capabilities. These analytical techniques leverage the inherent complexity and richness of this high frequency physiological response data, which can be used to meaningfully differentiate individuals whose sensory and cognitive capabilities may be affected by aging and visual impairment. Multifractality analysis provides an objective, quantifiable means of uncovering and examining the underlying signatures in physiological behavior that may account for individual differences in interaction needs and behaviors.”
Copyrights may apply
Vadas, Kristin, Patel, Nirmal, Lyons, Kent, Starner, Thad and Jacko, Julie A. (2006): Reading on-the-go: a comparison of audio and hand-held displays. In: Proceedings of 8th conference on Human-computer interaction with mobile devices and services 2006. pp. 219-226. Available online
“In this paper we present a 20-participant controlled experiment to evaluate and compare a head-down visual display and a synthesized speech audio display for comprehending text while mobile. Participants completed reading comprehension trials while walking a path and sitting. We examine overall performance and perceived workload for four conditions: audio-walking, audio-sitting, visual-walking, and visual-sitting. Results suggest audio is an acceptable modality for mobile comprehension of text. Participants' comprehension scores for the audio-walking condition were comparable to the scores for the visual-walking condition. More importantly, participants saw improvements in their ability to navigate the environment when using the audio display.”
Copyrights may apply
Law, Chris M., Yi, Ji Soo, Choi, Young Sang and Jacko, Julie A. (2006): Are disability-access guidelines designed for designers?: do they need to be?. In: Kjeldskov, Jesper and Paay, Jane (eds.) Proceedings of OZCHI06, the CHISIG Annual Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2006. pp. 357-360. Available online
“In this paper we discuss the implications of recent research studies on disability-related design guidelines. We have investigated the quality of guidelines with respect to designers as their end-users, and we have conducted field studies of the use design resources in practice. We now look at gaps in the current knowledge regarding the conceptualized system that comprises: the designer of technology, end-users of technologies, and guideline-setting committees. We look at the practice of setting up accessibility program offices in large companies as a means to tackle accessibility issues, and examine the implications of this practice for product designers, and people creating disability-based guidelines for technology.”
Copyrights may apply
Price, Kathleen J., Lin, Min, Feng, Jinjuan, Goldman, Rich, Sears, Andrew and Jacko, Julie A. (2006): Motion does matter: an examination of speech-based text entry on the move. In Universal Access in the Information Society, 4 (3) pp. 246-257
“Desktop interaction solutions are often inappropriate for mobile devices due to small screen size and portability needs. Speech recognition can improve interactions by providing a relatively hands-free solution that can be used in various situations. While mobile systems are designed to be transportable, few have examined the effects of motion on mobile interactions. This paper investigates the effect of motion on automatic speech recognition (ASR) input for mobile devices. Speech recognition error rates (RER) have been examined with subjects walking or seated, while performing text input tasks and the effect of ASR enrollment conditions on RER. The obtained results suggest changes in user training of ASR systems for mobile and seated usage.”
Copyrights may apply
Vadas, Kristin, Patel, Nirmal J., Lyons, Kent, Starner, Thad and Jacko, Julie A. (2006): Reading on-the-go: a comparison of audio and hand-held displays. In: Nieminen, Marko and Röykkee, Mika (eds.) Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services - Mobile HCI 2006 September 12-15, 2006, Helsinki, Finland. pp. 219-226. Available online
Jr., Miguel Alonso, Barreto, Armando, Adjouadi, Malek and Jacko, Julie A. (2006): HOWARD: High-Order Wavefront Aberration Regularized Deconvolution for Enhancing Graphic Displays for Visually Impaired Computer Users. In: Miesenberger, Klaus, Klaus, Joachim, Zagler, Wolfgang L. and Karshmer, Arthur I. (eds.) ICCHP 2006 - Computers Helping People with Special Needs, 10th International Conference July 11-13, 2006, Linz, Austria. pp. 1163-1170. Available online
» 2005 «
Law, Chris, Jacko, Julie A., Peterson, Bill and Tobias, Jim (2005): Universal designs versus assistive technologies: research agendas and practical applications. In: Seventh Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies 2005. pp. 2-3. Available online
Leonard, V. Kathlene, Jacko, Julie A. and Pizzimenti, Joseph J. (2005): An exploratory investigation of handheld computer interaction for older adults with visual impairments. In: Seventh Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies 2005. pp. 12-19. Available online
“This study explores factors affecting handheld computer interaction for older adults with Age-related Macular Degeneration (AMD). This is largely uncharted territory, as empirical investigations of human-computer interaction (HCI) concerning users with visual dysfunction and/or older adults have focused primarily on desktop computers. For this study, participants with AMD and visually-healthy controls used a handheld computer to search, select and manipulate familiar playing card icons under varied icon set sizes, inter-icon spacing and auditory feedback conditions. While all participants demonstrated a high rate of task completion, linear regression revealed several relationships between task efficiency and the interface, user characteristics and ocular factors. Two ocular measures, severity of AMD and contrast sensitivity, were found to be highly predictive of efficiency. The outcomes of this work reveal that users with visual impairments can effectively interact with GUIs on small displays in the presence of low-cost, easily implemented design interventions. This study presents a rich data set and is intended to inspire future work exploring the interactions of individuals with visual impairments with non-traditional information technology platforms, such as handheld computers.”
Copyrights may apply
Law, Chris, Jacko, Julie A. and Edwards, Paula (2005): Programmer-focused website accessibility evaluations. In: Seventh Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies 2005. pp. 20-27. Available online
“Suggested methods for conducting website accessibility evaluations have typically focused on the needs of end-users who have disabilities. However, programmers, not people with disabilities, are the end-users of evaluations reports generated by accessibility specialists. Programmers' capacity and resource needs are seldom met by the voluminous reports and long lists of individual website fixes commonly produced using earlier methods. The rationale for the need to consider the whole website development process, and the social characteristics of programmers and project managers is presented. A new programmer-centric Streamlined Evaluation and Reporting Process for Accessibility (SERPA) is described in detail.”
Copyrights may apply
Alonso, Miguel, Barreto, Armando, Jacko, Julie A. and Adjouadi, Malek (2005): Verification of computer display pre-compensation for visual aberrations in an artificial eye. In: Seventh Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies 2005. pp. 210-211. Available online
“The possibility of pre-compensating images in a computer display according to the visual aberrations previously assessed in an optical system (e.g., the computer user's eye) has been confirmed for a simple "artificial eye". This device has been constructed from optical components, which include a plano-convex lens, an adjustable aperture, and a Charged-Couple Device (CCD) array that mimics the retina of a real eye. While the CCD array allows for the inspection of the image as it would form on the retina of a real eye, its specular reflection does not allow the resulting "artificial eye" to be measured appropriately in a wavefront analyzer (a necessary pre-requisite for the image precompensation process). Therefore, an alternative, interchangeable CCD array covered with gray paint (i.e., disabled) was also created to provide the diffuse reflectivity that is presumed in the operation of the wavefront analyzer. Experiments with this system show that the visual aberrations in a properly characterized optical system can, in fact, be precompensated by the methods proposed by Alonso et al., [1]. These same experiments, however, reveal the need to adjust the precompensation method according to the effective pupil diameter in the system during viewing.”
Copyrights may apply
Barnard, Leon, Yi, Ji Soo, Jacko, Julie A. and Sears, Andrew (2005): An empirical comparison of use-in-motion evaluation scenarios for mobile computing devices. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 62 (4) pp. 487-520
“There is a clear need for evaluation methods that are specifically suited to mobile device evaluation, largely due to the vast differences between traditional desktop computing and mobile computing. One difference of particular interest that needs to be accounted for is that mobile computing devices are frequently used while the user is in motion, in contrast to desktop computing. This study aims to validate the appropriateness of two evaluation methods that vary in representativeness of mobility, one that uses a treadmill to simulate motion and another that uses a controlled walking scenario. The results lead to preliminary guidelines based on study objectives for researchers wishing to use more appropriate evaluation methodologies for empirical, data-driven mobile computing studies. The guidelines indicate that using a treadmill for mobile evaluation can yield representative performance measures, whereas a controlled walking scenario is more likely to adequately simulate the actual user experience.”
Copyrights may apply
Yi, Ji Soo, Choi, Young Sang, Jacko, Julie A. and Sears, Andrew (2005): Context awareness via a single device-attached accelerometer during mobile computing. In: Proceedings of 7th conference on Human-computer interaction with mobile devices and services 2005. pp. 303-306. Available online
“Interest in context-aware computing has expanded the use of sensing technologies. The accelerometer is one of the most widely used sensors for capturing context because it is small, inexpensive, lightweight, and self-operable. In efforts to obtain behavioral patterns, many studies have reported the use of multiple accelerometers attached to the human body. However, this is difficult to implement in real-life situations and may not fully address the context of user interaction. In contrast, the present study employed a single tri-axial accelerometer attached to a handheld computing device instead of to a user. The objective was to determine what contextual information could be obtained from this more feasible, albeit limited, source of acceleration data. Data analyses confirmed that changes in both mobility and lighting conditions induced statistically significant differences in the output of the accelerometer.”
Copyrights may apply
Yi, Ji Soo, Choi, Young Sang, Jacko, Julie A. and Sears, Andrew (2005): Context awareness via a single device-attached accelerometer during mobile computing. In: Tscheligi, Manfred, Bernhaupt, Regina and Mihalic, Kristijan (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services - Mobile HCI 2005 September 19-22, 2005, Salzburg, Austria. pp. 303-306. Available online
» 2004 «
Jacko, Julie A., Barnard, Leon, Kongnakorn, Thitima, Moloney, Kevin P., Edwards, Paula J., Emery, V. Kathlene and Sainfort, Francois (2004): Isolating the effects of visual impairment: exploring the effect of AMD on the utility of multimodal feedback. In: Dykstra-Erickson, Elizabeth and Tscheligi, Manfred (eds.) Proceedings of ACM CHI 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems April 24-29, 2004, Vienna, Austria. pp. 311-318. Available online
“This study examines the effects of multimodal feedback on the performance of older adults with an ocular disease, Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD), when completing a simple computer-based task. Visually healthy older users (n = 6) and older users with AMD (n = 6) performed a series of drag-and-drop tasks that incorporated a variety of different feedback modalities. The user groups were equivalent with respect to traditional visual function metrics and measured subject cofactors, aside from the presence or absence of AMD. Results indicate that users with AMD exhibited decreased performance, with respect to required feedback exposure time. Some non-visual and multimodal feedback forms show potential as solutions to enhance performance, for those with AMD as well as for visually healthy older adults.”
Copyrights may apply
Price, Kathleen J., Lin, Min, Feng, Jinjuan, Goldman, Rich, Sears, Andrew and Jacko, Julie A. (2004): Data Entry on the Move: An Examination of Nomadic Speech-Based Text Entry. In: Proceedings of the 8th ERCIM Workshop on User Interfaces for All 2004. p. 460. Available online
“Desktop interaction solutions are often inappropriate for mobile devices due to small screen size and portability needs. Speech recognition can improve interactions by providing a relatively hands-free solution that can be used in various situations. While mobile systems are designed to be transportable, few have examined the effects of motion on mobile interactions. We investigated the effect of motion on automatic speech recognition (ASR) input for mobile devices. We examined speech recognition error rates (RER) with subjects walking or seated, while performing text input tasks and the effect of ASR enrollment conditions on RER. RER were significantly lower for seated conditions. There was a significant interaction between enrollment and task conditions. When users enrolled while seated, but completed walking tasks, RER increased. In contrast, when users enrolled while walking, but completed seated tasks, RER decreased. These results suggest changes in user training of ASR systems for mobile and seated usage.”
Copyrights may apply
Edwards, Paula J., Barnard, Leon, Emery, V. Kathlene, Yi, Ji Soo, Moloney, Kevin P., Kongnakorn, Thitima, Jacko, Julie A., Sainfort, Francois, Oliver, Pamela R., Pizzimenti, Joseph, Bade, Annette and Fecho, Greg (2004): Strategic design for users with diabetic retinopathy: factors influencing performance in a menu-selection task. In: Sixth Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies 2004. pp. 118-125. Available online
“This paper examines factors that affect performance of a basic menu selection task by users who are visually healthy and users with Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) in order to inform better interface design. Interface characteristics such as multimodal feedback, Windows accessibility settings, and menu item location were investigated. Analyses of Variance (ANOVA) were employed to examine the effects of interface features on task performance. Linear regression was used to further examine and model various contextual factors that influenced task performance. Results indicated that Windows accessibility settings significantly improved performance of participants with more progressed DR. Additionally, other factors, including age, computer experience, visual acuity, and menu location were significant predictors of the time required for subjects to complete the task.”
Copyrights may apply
Jacko, Julie A., Emery, V. Kathlene, Edwards, Paula J., Ashok, Mahima, Barnard, Leon, Kongnakorn, Thitima, Moloney, Kevin P. and Sainfort, Francois (2004): The effects of multimodal feedback on older adults' task performance given varying levels of computer experience. In Behaviour and Information Technology, 23 (4) pp. 247-264
“This experiment examines the effect that computer experience and various combinations of feedback (auditory, haptic, and/or visual) have on the performance of older adults completing a drag-and-drop task on a computer. Participants were divided into three computer experience groups, based on their frequency of use and breadth of computer knowledge. Each participant completed a series of drag-and-drop tasks under each of seven feedback conditions (three unimodal, three bimodal, one trimodal). Performance was assessed using measures of efficiency and accuracy. Experienced users responded well to all multimodal feedback while users without experience responded well to auditory-haptic bimodal, but poorly to haptic-visual bimodal feedback. Based on performance benefits for older adults seen in this experiment, future research should extend investigations to effectively integrate multimodal feedback into GUI interfaces in order to improve usability for this growing and diverse user group.”
Copyrights may apply
» 2003 «
Jacko, Julie A., Scott, Ingrid U., Sainfort, Francois, Barnard, Leon, Edwards, Paula J., Emery, V. Kathlene, Kongnakorn, Thitima, Moloney, Kevin P. and Zorich, Brynley S. (2003): Older adults and visual impairment: what do exposure times and accuracy tell us about performance gains associated with multimodal feedback?. In: Cockton, Gilbert and Korhonen, Panu (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 2003 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 5-10, 2003, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA. pp. 33-40.
Emery, V. Kathlene, Edwards, Paula J., Jacko, Julie A., Moloney, Kevin P., Barnard, Leon, Kongnakorn, Thitima, Sainfort, Francois and Scott, Ingrid U. (2003): Toward achieving universal usability for older adults through multimodal feedback. In: Proceedings of the 2003 ACM Conference on Universal Usability 2003. pp. 46-53. Available online
“This experiment examines the effect of combinations of feedback (auditory, haptic, and/or visual) on the performance of older adults completing a drag-and-drop computer task. Participants completed a series of drag-and-drop tasks under each of seven feedback conditions (3 unimodal, 3 bimodal, 1 trimodal). Performance was assessed using measures of efficiency and accuracy. For analyses of results, participants were grouped based on their level of computer experience. All users performed well under auditory-haptic bimodal feedback and experienced users responded well to all multimodal feedback. Based on performance benefits for older adults seen in this experiment, future research should extend investigations to effectively integrate multimodal feedback into GUI interfaces in order to improve usability for this growing and diverse user group.”
Copyrights may apply
Jacko, Julie A. and Sears, Andrew (eds.) (2003): The human-computer interaction handbook: fundamentals, evolving technologies, and emerging applications. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
View info on Amazon.com or .co.uk
Sears, Andrew, Lin, M., Jacko, Julie A. and Xiao, Y. (2003): When Computers Fade... Pervasive Computing and Situationally-Induced Impairments and Disabilities. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2003. pp. 1298-1302.
Lu, Y.-C., Xiao, Y., Sears, Andrew and Jacko, Julie A. (2003): An Observational and Interview Study on Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) Uses by Clinicians in Different Contexts. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2003. pp. 93-97.
» 2002 «
Jacko, Julie A., Scott, Ingrid U., Sainfort, Francois, Moloney, Kevin P., Kongnakorn, Thitima, Zorich, Brynley S. and Emery, V. Kathlene (2002): Effects of Multimodal Feedback on the Performance of Older Adults with Normal and Impaired Vision. In: Carbonell, Noelle and Stephanidis, Constantine (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th ERCIM Workshop on User Interfaces for All October 23-25, 2002, Paris, France. pp. 3-22.
“The augmentation of computer technologies with multimodal interfaces has great potential for improving interaction with these technologies via the use of different sensory feedback. This may be of particular importance for individuals from divergent user populations, who have varying interaction needs and abilities. This study examines the effects of a multimodal interface, utilizing auditory, haptic, and visual feedback, on the performance of elderly users with varying levels of visual abilities. Older adults who possess normal vision (n=29) and those who have been diagnosed with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) (n=30), with different levels of visual acuity, were involved in the study. Participants were asked to complete a series of `drag-and-drop' tasks under varying forms of feedback. User performance was assessed with the measure of final target highlight time. The findings suggest that the addition of other feedback modalities, to the traditionally used visual feedback form, can enhance the performance of users, particularly those with visual impairments.”
Copyrights may apply
Vitense, Holly S., Jacko, Julie A. and Emery, V. Kathlene (2002): Multimodal feedback: establishing a performance baseline for improved access by individuals with visual impairments. In: Fifth Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies 2002. pp. 49-56. Available online
“Multimodal interfaces have the potential to enhance a user's overall performance, especially when one perceptual channel, such as vision, is compromised. This research investigated how unimodal, bimodal, and trimodal feedback affected the performance of fully sighted users. Limited research exists that investigates how fully sighted users react to multimodal feedback forms, and to-date even less research is available that has investigated how users with visual impairments respond to multiple forms of feedback. A complex direct manipulation task, consisting of a series search and selection drag-and-drop subtasks, was evaluated in this study. The multiple forms of feedback investigated were auditory, haptic and visual. Each form of feedback was tested alone and in combination. User performance was assessed through measures of workload time. Workload was measured objectively and subjectively, through the physiological measure of pupil diameter and a portion of the NASA Task Load Index (TLX) workload survey, respectively. Time was captured by a measure of how long it took to complete a particular element of the task. The results demonstrate that multimodal feedback improves the performance of fully sighted users and offers great potential to users with visual impairments. As a result, this study serves as a baseline to drive the research and development of effective feedback combinations to enhance performance for individuals with visual impairments.”
Copyrights may apply
Jacko, Julie A., Barreto, Armando, Scott, Ingrid U., Chu, Josey Y. M., Vitense, Holly S., Conway, Frank T. and Fain, W. Bradley (2002): Macular degeneration and visual icon use: deriving guidelines for improved access. In Universal Access in the Information Society, 1 (3) pp. 197-206
“The objective of this study was to derive empirical knowledge of the visual search strategies of computer users who suffer from age-related macular degeneration (AMD). This was accomplished by recording eye movement during the use of feature-enhanced software. The results from this study show that there are differences between users who have AMD and users who are fully sighted (FS). Detailed analyses confirmed the hypotheses that there would be performance differences between the AMD and FS participants, and that specific features of the interface, namely icon size, background color, and the number of icons on a display, would significantly affect the search strategies of users.”
Copyrights may apply
Jacko, Julie A. and Hanson, Vicki L. (2002): Universal Access and Inclusion in Design. In Universal Access in the Information Society, 2 (1) pp. 1-2
Vitense, H. S., Jacko, Julie A. and Emery, V. K. (2002): Foundation for improved interaction by individuals with visual impairments through multimodal feedback. In Universal Access in the Information Society, 2 (1) pp. 76-87
“Through an investigation of how the performance of people who have normal visual capabilities is affected by unimodal, bimodal, and trimodal feedback, this research establishes a foundation for presenting effective feedback to enhance the performance of individuals who have visual impairments. Interfaces that employ multiple feedback modalities, such as auditory, haptic, and visual, can enhance user performance for individuals with barriers limiting one or more channels of perception, such as a visual impairment. Results obtained demonstrate the effects of different feedback combinations on mental workload, accuracy, and performance time. Future, similar studies focused on participants with visual impairments will be grounded in this work.”
Copyrights may apply
» 2001 «
Sears, Andrew, Jacko, Julie A., Chung, James C. and Moro, Francisco (2001): The role of visual search in the design of effective soft keyboards. In Behaviour and Information Technology, 20 (3) pp. 159-166
“As portable, handheld computing devices become more common, alternatives to traditional keyboards must be explored. These alternatives must be compact, lightweight and sufficiently efficient to support the users' tasks. One alternative is the use of small physical keyboards or soft keyboards presented on touch-sensitive surfaces. Many alternative layouts have been explored, including the QWERTY, Dvorak, telephone and various alphabetic organizations. Soukoreff and MacKenzie proposed a model to predict typing times for alternative layouts, but have experienced limited success matching their predictions to observed performance. This paper proposes a revision of the visual search component of their model that considers the familiarity of the organization and the number of letters represented by each key. Results are reported of an experiment that supports the claim that both familiarity and the number of letters per key must be considered when predicting visual search times for alternative keyboard layouts.”
Copyrights may apply
Bautsch-Vitense, H. S., Marmet, G. J. and Jacko, Julie A. (2001): Investigating PDA Web Browsing Through Eye Movement Analysis. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2001. pp. 6-10.
Jacko, Julie A., Scott, Ingrid U., Barreto, A. B., Bautsch, H. S., Chu, J. Y. M. and Fain, W. B. (2001): Iconic Visual Search Strategies: A Comparison of Computer Uers with AMD Versus Computer Users with Normal Vision. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2001. pp. 423-427.
Jacko, Julie A. and Vitense, H. S. (2001): The Foundation of a Conceptual Framework for Individuals with Disabilities. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2001. pp. 913-917.
Marmet, G. J., Jacko, Julie A., Brennan, P. F. and Hamilton, K. (2001): Cognitive Load for WebTV and PC Browser. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2001. pp. 923-926.
Jacko, Julie A. and Vitense, Holly S. (2001): A review and reappraisal of information technologies within a conceptual framework for individuals with disabilities. In Universal Access in the Information Society, 1 (1) pp. 56-76
“With over thirty million individuals with disabilities being reported in the United States, and with information systems permeating nearly every aspect of society, there is a growing urgency to ensure that everyone has equal access to technology. To render information technologies universally accessible, researchers must have at their disposal an accurate and reliable user model. Through the use of the conceptual framework presented here, accurate assumptions can be generated from knowledge of an individual's impairments, and functional abilities to influence the creation of a user profile. Ultimately, user profiles serve as a vital attribute of user models applied to the design of technology in an effort to achieve universal access.”
Copyrights may apply
Emery, V. Katie, Jacko, Julie A., Kongnakorn, Thitima, Kuruchittham, Vipat, Landry, Steven, Nickles, George McLeland, Sears, Andrew and Whittle, Justin (2001): Identifying Critical Interaction Scenarios for Innovative User Modeling. In: Stephanidis, Constantine (ed.) HCI International 2001 - Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction August 5-10, 2001, New Orleans, USA. pp. 481-485.
» 2000 «
Jacko, Julie A., Sears, Andrew and Borella, Michael S. (2000): The Effect of Network Delay and Media on User Perceptions of Web Resources. In Behaviour and Information Technology, 19 (6) pp. 427-439
“This research experimentally examines the effects of network delays, document type, and various user characteristics on the perceived usability of distributed documents on the internet. Six experimental conditions were analysed: text only documents and documents including text and graphics at three levels of delay. Users were undergraduate and graduate students who reported spending zero to 50 hours per week on the internet. Usability was assessed by analysing responses to questions about ease of locating information, information organization, information quality, and navigation problems. The results showed significant interactions of network delay and document type on subjects' perceptions of quality, organization, navigation, and several additional factors that are important to organizations providing information on the internet. Both the number of hours subjects reported spending using the internet and subjects' self-reported command of the English language were significantly correlated with perceptions of various aspects of the internet sites examined. While the results indicate that internet users may prefer highly graphical web sites, it appears that they are unwilling to tolerate substantial delays. As a result, users in the study preferred plain text documents as delays increased.”
Copyrights may apply
Sears, Andrew and Jacko, Julie A. (2000): Understanding the Relation Between Network Quality of Service and the Usability of Distributed Multimedia Documents. In Human-Computer Interaction, 15 (1) pp. 43-68
“Network quality of service, as manifest in the delays users experience, effects both user perceptions and performance. Unfortunately, existing research on the usability of network-based documents and applications does not always adequately address the issue of network delays. In this article, we assert that researchers must document, and should consider manipulating, the delays users experience during studies exploring the usability of network-based computing systems. This article provides an overview of the factors that contribute to the delays users experience and the issues involved in modeling these delays. It also provides advice on how delays should be documented and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of the various techniques available for integrating delays into usability studies and controlled experiments. The existing literature reports numerous inconsistent results, which may be due to different experimental designs, participants, tasks, independent variables, and dependent variables. Therefore, this article concludes by outlining the experimental design considerations that must be considered as the relation between network quality of service and the usability of network-based computing systems is investigated. The result is a framework that will guide future research and allow more effective comparisons of the results of that research.”
Copyrights may apply
Jacko, Julie A., Barreto, Armando, Scott, Ingrid U., Rosa Jr, Robert H. and Pappas, Charles J. (2000): Using Electroencephalogram to Investigate Stages of Visual Search in Visually Impaired Computer Users: Preattention and Focal Attention. In International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 12 (1) pp. 135-150
“Researchers have shown that computer users with impaired vision perform visual search more slowly than their fully sighted counterparts. However, little is known about intermediate stages of visual search that exist between stimuli detection and identification. Therefore, the primary focus of this research is to investigate 2 intermediate stages of visual search in visually impaired computer users: preattention and focal attention. A total of 10 volunteers, 1 participant who possessed normal vision and 9 participants possessing impaired vision, underwent clinical visual examinations consisting of assessments of visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, visual field, and color perception. The involvement of each participant's visual cortex while performing a continuous matching task of visual icons on a computer screen was recorded. Results demonstrated that additional time required by visually impaired computer users is not a result of delayed engagement of the visual cortex, but rather due to time spent in active search once the visual cortex has already been engaged. Directions for future research are provided.”
Copyrights may apply
Jacko, Julie A., Rosa Jr, Robert H., Scott, Ingrid U., Pappas, Charles J. and Dixon, Max A. (2000): Visual Impairment: The Use of Visual Profiles in Evaluations of Icon Use in Computer-Based Tasks. In International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 12 (1) pp. 151-164
“This research investigates an empirical link between characteristics of impaired vision and user performance on computer-based systems. The underlying premise of this research is twofold: specific aspects of visual dysfunction can be linked to the task performance demonstrated by computer users with impaired vision, and graphical user interfaces can be modified to evoke enhanced performance from low-vision users. Iconic selection time and accuracy within a graphical user interface were evaluated, comparing performance of low-vision users with performance of fully sighted users, and linking task performance to specific profiles of visual impairment. Results indicate that visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, visual field, and color perception were significant predictors of task performance. In addition, icon size, set size, and background color significantly influenced performance. This research confirmed the validity of both underlying premises and serves as a launching point for future research concerned with developing features that will assist users with a variety of visual deficits.”
Copyrights may apply
Sears, Andrew, Jacko, Julie A. and Dubach, Erica M. (2000): International Aspects of World Wide Web Usability and the Role of High-End Graphical Enhancements. In International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 12 (2) pp. 241-261
“Through 2 experiments, we examined both international differences and the effects of high-end graphical enhancements on the perceived usability of World Wide Web (WWW) sites. To accomplish this goal, we recruited Internet users from Switzerland and the United States to explore 1 of 2 versions of a Web site with the goal of retrieving specific information from the site. The first Web site was a self-contained subset of a large corporate Web site, and the second was a systematically simplified version of the first. After retrieving the required information from the site, participants responded to questions regarding their perception of the Web site's usability and its information presentation. Their responses provided detailed insights into significant differences between WWW users from 2 different cultures with respect to how they perceive the same Web sites. The importance of basic user demographics is documented, and empirical evidence is provided that devalues some high-end graphical enhancements.”
Copyrights may apply
Jacko, Julie A., Barreto, Armando, Marmet, Gottlieb J., Chu, Josey Y. M., Bautsch, Holly S., Scott, Ingrid U. and Rosa, Robert H. (2000): Low Vision: The Role of Visual Acuity in the Efficiency of Cursor Movement. In: Fourth Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies 2000. pp. 1-8. Available online
“Graphical user interfaces are one of the more prevalent interface types which exist today. The popularity of this interface type has caused problems for users with poor vision. Because usage strategies of low vision users differ from blind users, existing research focusing on blind users is not sufficient in describing the techniques employed by low vision users. The research presented here characterizes the interaction strategies of a particular set of low vision users, those with Age-related Macular Degeneration, using an analysis of cursor movement. The low vision users have been grouped according to the severity of their vision loss and then compared to fully sighted individuals, with respect to cursor movement efficiency. Results revealed that as the size of the icons on the computer screen increased, so did the performance of the fully sighted participants as well as the participants with AMD.”
Copyrights may apply
Jacko, Julie A., Barreto, Armando, Chu, Josey Y. M., Bautsch, Holly S., Marmet, Gottlieb J., Scott, Ingrid U. and Jr., Robert H. Rosa (2000): Using eye tracking to investigate graphical elements for fully sighted and low vision users (poster session). In: Duchowski, Andrew T. (ed.) ETRA 2000 - Proceedings of the Eye Tracking Research and Application Symposium November 6-8, 2000, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, USA. p. 112. Available online
» 1999 «
Jacko, Julie A., Dixon, Max A., Rosa Jr, Robert H., Scott, Ingrid U. and Pappas, Charles J. (1999): Visual Profiles: A Critical Component of Universal Access. In: Altom, Mark W. and Williams, Marian G. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 99 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference May 15-20, 1999, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. pp. 330-337. Available online
“This research focuses on characterizing visually impaired computer users' performance on graphical user interfaces by linking clinical assessments of low vision with visual icon identification. This was accomplished by evaluating user performance on basic identification and selection tasks within a graphical user interface, comparing partially sighted user performance with fully sighted user performance, and linking task performance to specific profiles of visual impairment. Results indicate that visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, visual field and color perception were significant predictors of task performance. In addition, icon size and background color significantly influenced performance. Suggestions for future research are provided.”
Copyrights may apply
Jacko, Julie A. (1999): The importance of clinical diagnoses in the prediction of performance on computer-based tasks for low vision users. In: 1999. pp. 787-791.
Jacko, Julie A., Rosa, Robert H., Scott, Ingrid U., Pappas, C. J. and Dixon, M. A. (1999): Linking visual capabilities of partially sighted computer users to psychomotor task performance. In: 1999. pp. 975-979.
» 1998 «
Jacko, Julie A. and Sears, Andrew (1998): Designing Interfaces for an Overlooked User Group: Considering the Visual Profiles of Partially Sighted Users. In: Third Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies 1998. pp. 75-77. Available online
“In this position paper we argue the importance of research focusing on the issues involved in designing computer systems for partially sighted computer users. Currently, there is a lack of data that explores how combinations of impaired visual processes affect preferences for, and performance with, graphical user interfaces. This lack of fundamental information about how an individual's visual profile determines the strategies and behaviors exhibited while using computers limits our ability to design effective user interfaces for partially sighted computer users. The objective of this position paper is to motivate research that addresses this deficiency in our knowledge base so that researchers can design enabling technologies in a systematic fashion for this unique user group as has been done for fully sighted users and blind users.”
Copyrights may apply
Jacko, Julie A. (1998): HCI Education and Its Role in Industrial Engineering. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 30 (1) pp. 5-6
“Researchers, practitioners, and educators in the field of human-computer interaction are engaged in endeavors as dynamic and colorful as the variety of people who contribute to the body of knowledge we have come to know intimately as CHI. The knowledge base amassed by our community has been painstakingly constructed by experts from a variety of disciplines and backgrounds who share a common goal: to know the truth about the interactions that define mankind's relationship with the computer. Our strength lies in our ability to draw upon the collective wisdom of this knowledgeable and diverse group of people. The objective of this article is to enable the CHI community as a whole to gain a bird's eye view into one of the commonly represented disciplines in the CHI community: Industrial Engineering (IE). As is the case in most disciplines, CHI is a relative newcomer to the IE discipline. This poses challenges and opportunities for people within IE to pursue solutions and extend inquiries within the CHI domain. This article explores these challenges and opportunities by first providing a historical perspective of the IE discipline. The role of CHI in IE will be pondered, and then an opportunity will be discussed that challenges researchers and educators in the IE discipline to infuse CHI into the more traditional areas of IE so the discipline can finally realize its goal of being both systems- and solutions-oriented.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1997 «
Sears, Andrew, Jacko, Julie A. and Mantei, Marilyn (1997): The SIGCHI Educational Resource Development Group. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 29 (3) pp. 4-6
Jacko, Julie A. and Duffy, Vincent G. (1997): Interface Requirements: An Analysis of Technologies Designed for Individual and Group Work. In: Smith, Michael J., Salvendy, Gavriel and Koubek, Richard J. (eds.) HCI International 1997 - Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction - Volume 2 August 24-29, 1997, San Francisco, California, USA. pp. 347-350.
Sears, Andrew, Jacko, Julie A. and Borella, Michael S. (1997): The Effect of Internet Delay on the Perceived Quality of Information. In: Smith, Michael J., Salvendy, Gavriel and Koubek, Richard J. (eds.) HCI International 1997 - Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction - Volume 2 August 24-29, 1997, San Francisco, California, USA. pp. 335-338.
» 1996 «
Jacko, Julie A. (1996): "Extra-Ordinary Human Computer Interaction," by A. Edwards. In International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 8 (4) pp. 473-474
Jacko, Julie A. (1996): The Identifiability of Auditory Icons for Use in Educational Software for Children. In Interacting with Computers, 8 (2) pp. 121-133
“The research explored how subjects in grade 1 (6-7 years old) and grade 3 (8-9 years old) identify auditory icons that are commonly introduced in educational software applications. The subjects were required to identify 37 auditory icons by specifying two dimensions: the object associated with producing the sound and the action which could be causing the sound. It was hypothesized that the ecological frequency versus relative uniqueness feature would be more salient for third-graders. Thus, they would be better equipped to identify the auditory cues than the first-graders. The results indicated that the third-grade subjects were better equipped to identify auditory cues based upon two dimensions of interest than the first-grade subjects. This information is useful for interface designers incorporating auditory icons into educational software for children at various developmental levels. Suggestions for future research are provided.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1995 «
Jacko, Julie A. (1995): "Understanding Interfaces: A Handbook of Human-Computer Dialogue," by M. W. Lansdale and T. C. Ormerod. In International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 7 (1) pp. 99-100
Jacko, Julie A., Salvendy, Gavriel and Koubek, Richard J. (1995): Modelling of Menu Design in Computerized Work. In Interacting with Computers, 7 (3) pp. 304-330
“The objective of the research was to propose and validate a theoretically meaningful link between three constructs of hierarchical menu design: menu dimension, task complexity, and user knowledge structure. Twenty-four subjects participated in a nested factorial experiment. The subjects performed a menu retrieval task using a hierarchical menu system constructed for use in the domain of utility boiler control. The dependent variables were time to respond and accuracy. The independent variables were menu dimension, task complexity and user knowledge structure. Four hypotheses were tested. The foundation of the hypotheses was based upon the premise that when task complexity is low, the short-term memory requirements of the menu retrieval task are low. Thus, the user's knowledge structure will not affect performance because it is not required for the chunking of visual information. The objectives of this research were met and are presented in the context of an information processing model for psychomotor tasks.”
Copyrights may apply
SHOW THIS LIST ON YOUR HOMEPAGE
What do YOU think?
Give us your opinion! Do you have any comments/additions that you would like other visitors to see?
You say:
Mar 18th, 2010
Changes to this page (author)
27 Feb 2010: Enabled abstracts to be shown on Julie A. Jacko's author page.12 Feb 2010: Author was added to the bibliography (approved by an editor)23 Jul 2009: Author was edited
27 Jun 2009: Author was edited
27 Jun 2009: Author was added to the bibliography
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
05 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
04 Jun 2009: Author was edited
01 Jun 2009: Author was edited
31 May 2009: Author was edited
29 May 2009: Author was edited
29 May 2009: Author was edited
08 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
12 May 2008: Author was edited
12 May 2008: Author was edited
12 May 2008: Author was edited
24 Apr 2008: Author was added to the bibliography (approved by an editor)
05 Nov 2007: Author was edited (approved by an editor)
13 Aug 2007: Author was added to the bibliography (approved by an editor)
08 Aug 2007: Author was added to the bibliography (approved by an editor)
25 Jul 2007: Author was edited (approved by an editor)
24 Jul 2007: Author was edited
24 Jul 2007: Author was edited
24 Jul 2007: Author was edited
24 Jul 2007: Author was edited
16 Jul 2007: Author was added to the bibliography (approved by an editor)
29 Jun 2007: Author was edited
29 Jun 2007: Author was edited
28 Jun 2007: Author was edited
28 Jun 2007: Author was added to the bibliography
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
24 Jun 2007: Author was edited
24 Jun 2007: Author was edited
22 Jun 2007: Author was edited
22 Jun 2007: Author was added to the bibliography
22 Jun 2007: Author was edited
22 Jun 2007: Author was edited
22 Jun 2007: Author was edited
22 Jun 2007: Author was edited
22 Jun 2007: Author was edited
22 Jun 2007: Author was edited
22 Jun 2007: Author was edited
22 Jun 2007: Author was added to the bibliography
22 Jun 2007: Author was edited
22 Jun 2007: Author was edited
22 Jun 2007: Author was edited
11 Jun 2007: Author was edited
28 Apr 2003: Added the author to the bibliography
