About Contact Help us

Join us ! Publish !

Interaction Design Foundation

Free educational materials - made by the world's technology elite

About sponsorships

References

Paul McInerney

iPad and tablet version

Publication statistics

Pub. period:1988-2005
Pub. count:4
Number of co-authors:3

Co-authors

Number of publications with 3 favourite co-authors:

David W. Biers:2
Frank Maurer:1
Donald J. Polzella:1

Productive colleagues

Paul McInerney's 3 most productive colleagues in number of publications:

David W. Biers:18
Frank Maurer:14
Donald J. Polzella:4

Calendar

May 20

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

May 22

Knowing (by) Designing 2013

May 27

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

May 18

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

-- Steve Jobs, 1998

Share this quote on...
Get more quotes via RSS or by joining our Usability Quote of the Day Facebook Page

Featured chapter

Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann

Read Steve's chapter !

Help us help you!

Spread the word:
Donate
Other ways to help

Paul McInerney

Add description

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Rename / change spelling

Add publication

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Publications by Paul McInerney (bibliography)

2005

Edit | Del

McInerney, Paul and Maurer, Frank (2005): UCD in agile projects: dream team or odd couple?. In Interactions, 12 (6) pp. 19-23.

1996

Edit | Del

McInerney, Paul (1996): "Scenario-Based Design: Envisioning Work and Technology in System Development,. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 28 (4) pp. 85-86.

1988

Edit | Del

Biers, David W., Polzella, Donald J. and McInerney, Paul (1988): A Physical Measure of Subjective Workload. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd Annual Meeting 1988. pp. 1131-1135.

“This investigation compared a physical measure of subjective workload (i.e. hand dynamometer) with traditional verbal scaling techniques. There were four subjective rating groups. One group employed the Subjective Workload Assessment Technique (SWAT) which required three separate ratings of time stress, mental effort, and psychological stress. A second group used verbal magnitude estimation (ME). Two physical measure groups estimated the magnitude of workload by squeezing a dynamometer in accordance with the magnitude of workload experienced. The DYNA1 group made one overall rating of workload similar to the ME group. The DYNA3 group made three workload ratings along the same dimensions as SWAT. All groups rated the workload associated with the performance of a continuous memory task under twelve levels of task difficulty. The physical measure of subjective workload most closely corresponded to actual task performance differences. The results suggest future development of a physical measure of subjective workload which can be utilized on a continuous basis, thus avoiding a major shortcoming of typical verbal measures of subjective workload.”

Edit | Del

Biers, David W. and McInerney, Paul (1988): An Alternative to Measuring Subjective Workload: Use of SWAT Without the Card Sort. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd Annual Meeting 1988. pp. 1136-1139.

“One major drawback in some applications of the Subjective Workload Assessment Technique (SWAT) is the time required to administer the card sort. There are alternative methods of forming a workload composite from the SWAT instrument (i.e. a simple sum of the three scales or composite derived from multivariate statistics) which do not require the card sort. The present study compared the sensitivity of these alternative SWAT composite measures with the typical SWAT conjoint scaling metric which requires the card sort. A two group study was conducted in which subjects engaged in a continuous recognition task under twelve levels of task difficulty. One group (Pre-Task), performed the card sort prior to engaging in the task whereas in the other group (Post-Task) completed the card sort subsequent to task performance. Results indicated that placement of the card sort did not affect the task ratings on the three dimensions of SWAT nor did it affect the relative sensitivity of the three workload composites. All three composite measures were found equally sensitive to the task demands. These results indicate that the SWAT instrument can be used to effectively measure workload without having to perform the card sort.”

Add publication