Peter G. Polson
Has also published under the name of:
"P. G. Polson", "Peter Polson", and "P. Polson"
About the author:
No description available of Peter G. Polson...
Publications by Peter G. Polson (bibliography)
» 2005 «
Blackmon, Marilyn Hughes, Kitajima, Muneo and Polson, Peter G. (2005): Tool for accurately predicting website navigation problems, non-problems, problem severity, and effectiveness of repairs. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2005 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2005. pp. 31-40. Available online
“The Cognitive Walkthrough for the Web (CWW) is a partially automated usability evaluation method for identifying and repairing website navigation problems. Building on five earlier experiments [3,4], we first conducted two new experiments to create a sufficiently large dataset for multiple regression analysis. Then we devised automatable problem-identification rules and used multiple regression analysis on that large dataset to develop a new CWW formula for accurately predicting problem severity. We then conducted a third experiment to test the prediction formula and refined CWW against an independent dataset, resulting in full cross-validation of the formula. We conclude that CWW has high psychological validity, because CWW gives us (a) accurate measures of problem severity, (b) high success rates for repairs of identified problems (c) high hit rates and low false alarms for identifying problems, and (d) high rates of correct rejections and low rates of misses for identifying non-problems.”
Copyrights may apply
» 2003 «
Blackmon, Marilyn Hughes, Kitajima, Muneo and Polson, Peter G. (2003): Repairing usability problems identified by the cognitive walkthrough for the web. 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. 497-504.
Feary, M., Sherry, L., Polson, Peter G. and Fennel, K. (2003): Incorporating Cognitive Usability into Software Design Processes. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2003. pp. 427-431.
» 2002 «
Blackmon, Marilyn Hughes, Polson, Peter G., Kitajima, Muneo and Lewis, Clayton H. (2002): Cognitive walkthrough for the web. In: Terveen, Loren (ed.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 2002 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 20-25, 2002, Minneapolis, Minnesota. pp. 463-470.
» 2000 «
Kellogg, Wendy A., Lewis, Clayton H. and Polson, Peter G. (2000): Introduction to This Special Issue on New Agendas for Human-Computer Interaction. In Human-Computer Interaction, 15 (2) pp. 69-74
Kitajima, Muneo, Blackmon, M. H. and Polson, Peter G. (2000): A Comprehension-based Model of Web Navigation and Its Application to Web Usability Analysis. In: Proceedings of the HCI00 Conference on People and Computers XIV 2000. pp. 357-374.
» 1999 «
Kieras, David E. and Polson, Peter G. (1999): An Approach to the Formal Analysis of User Complexity. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 51 (2) pp. 405-434
“A formal approach to analysing the user complexity of interactive systems or devices is described, based on theoretical results from cognitive psychology. The user's knowledge of how to use a system to accomplish the various tasks is represented in a procedural notation that permits quantification of the amount and complexity of the knowledge required and the cognitive processing load involved in using a system. Making a system more usable can be accomplished by altering its design until the knowledge is adequately simplified. By representing the device behaviour formally as well, it is possible to simulate the user-device interaction to obtain rigorous measures of user complexity.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1998 «
Kitajima, Muneo and Polson, Peter G. (1998): Knowledge Required for Understanding Task-Oriented Instructions. In: Third Asian Pacific Computer and Human Interaction July 15-17, 1998, Kangawa, Japan. pp. 19-24. Available online
» 1997 «
Kitajima, Muneo and Polson, Peter G. (1997): A Comprehension-Based Model of Exploration. In Human-Computer Interaction, 12 (4) pp. 345-389
“The linked model of comprehension-based action planning and instruction taking (LICAI) simulates performing by exploration tasks using applications hosted on systems with graphical user interfaces. The tasks are given to the user as written exercises containing no information about the correct action sequences. LICAI's comprehension and action-planning processes are based on Kintsch's construction-integration (C-I) theory for text comprehension. The model assumes that comprehending instructions is a strategic process; instruction texts must be elaborated using specialized strategies that guide goal generation. LICAI comprehends the instructions and generates goals that are then stored in memory. The action-planning processes are controlled by goals retrieved from memory. Representations of goals that can guide exploration are restricted by the C-I architecture. The model predicts that successful exploration requires linking of the goal representation with the label on the correct object. The model is evaluated by comparing its predictions with results from an experimental study of learning by exploration by Franzke (1994, 1995). We discuss the implications of LICAI for designing instruction materials and interfaces that facilitate exploration.”
Copyrights may apply
Kitajima, Muneo and Polson, Peter G. (1997): Mapping Instructions onto Actions: A Comprehension-Based Model of Display-Based Human-Computer Interaction. 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. 83-86.
» 1996 «
Kitajima, Muneo and Polson, Peter G. (1996): A Comprehension-Based Model of Exploration. In: Tauber, Michael J., Bellotti, Victoria, Jeffries, Robin, Mackinlay, Jock D. and Nielsen, Jakob (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 96 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 14-18, 1996, Vancouver, Canada. pp. 324-331. Available online
“This paper describes a comprehension-based model of how experienced Macintosh users learn a new application by doing a task presented as a series of exercises. A comprehension mechanism transforms written instructions into goals that control an action planning process proposed by Kitajima and Polson [11]. The transformation process is based on a theory of solving word problems developed by Kintsch [8,9]. The comprehension and action planning processes define constraints on the wording of effective instructions. The combined model is evaluated using data from Franzke [3]. We discuss implications of these results for Minimalist Instructions [1] and Cognitive Walkthroughs [17].”
Copyrights may apply
» 1995 «
Kitajima, Muneo and Polson, Peter G. (1995): A Comprehension-Based Model of Correct Performance and Errors in Skilled, Display-Based, Human-Computer Interaction. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43 (1) pp. 65-99
“This paper describes a computational model of skilled use of an application with a graphical user interface. The model provides a principled explanation of action slips, errors made by experienced users. The model is based on Hutchins, Hollan and Norman's analysis of direct manipulation and is implemented using Kintsch and Mannes's construction-integration theory of action planning. The model attends to a limited number of objects on the screen and then selects action on one of them, such as moving mouse cursor, clicking mouse button, typing letters, and so on, by integrating information from various sources. These sources include the display, task goals, expected display states, and knowledge about the interface and the application domain. The model simulates a graph drawing task. In addition, we describe how the model makes errors even when it is provided with the knowledge sufficient to generate correct actions.”
Copyrights may apply
Rudisill, Marianne, Lewis, Clayton H., Polson, Peter G. and McKay, Tim (eds.) (1995): Human-Computer Interface Design: Success Stories, Emerging Methods, and Real-World Context. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers
View info on Amazon.com or .co.uk 
Kitajima, Muneo and Polson, Peter G. (1995): Mechanisms of Slips in Display-Based Human-Computer Interaction: A Model-Based Analysis. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction July 9-14, 1995, Tokyo, Japan. pp. 515-520.
» 1994 «
Irving, Sharon, Polson, Peter G. and Irving, J. E. (1994): A GOMS Analysis of the Advanced Automated Cockpit. In: Adelson, Beth, Dumais, Susan and Olson, Judith S. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 94 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 24-28, 1994, Boston, Massachusetts. pp. 344-350. Available online
“Using models developed to analyze office automation (e.g. [3]), we identified skills needed to perform tasks using the flight management computer on advanced commercial aircraft. Our GOMS analysis showed that all tasks carried out on the device can be described in terms of three methods. Novices who received instruction in a part-task computer based training guided by the GOMS analysis were tested in a flight simulator. Their performance was compared with pilots who received an integrated type of training representing three to ten times the amount of time on task and with pilots who had been using this equipment on the line for at least one year ("experts"). Inconsistencies revealed by the analysis were reflected in the performance of novices (experimentally and professionally trained) as well as the experts.”
Copyrights may apply
Rieman, John, Lewis, Clayton H., Young, Richard M. and Polson, Peter G. (1994): "Why is a Raven Like a Writing Desk?" Lessons in Interface Consistency and Analogical Reasoning from Two Cognitive Architectures. In: Adelson, Beth, Dumais, Susan and Olson, Judith S. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 94 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 24-28, 1994, Boston, Massachusetts. pp. 438-444. Available online
“Users who have worked with just a few pieces of application software on a computer system are often faced with the need to use a new program on the same system. Consistency between program interfaces is intended to make the new program easier to learn in this situation, but how "consistency" should be defined is not always clear. We present a model of analogical reasoning that describes how users rely on interface consistency to induce correct actions in a new situation. Versions of the model are implemented in ACT-R and Soar. The model yields a clearer and more principled understanding of design guidelines that recommend interface consistency.”
Copyrights may apply
Lee, Adrienne Y., Foltz, Peter W. and Polson, Peter G. (1994): Memory for Task-Action Mappings: Mnemonics, Regularity and Consistency. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 40 (5) pp. 771-794
“Much of the knowledge required to use modern computing systems takes the form of mappings or associations. These associations occur between user goals and the functions that accomplish those goals, between functions and the user actions that activate a desired function, and between a menu item or a button label and the function associated with that item or label. The question we explore in this paper is: when is it worthwhile, if ever, to make a user pay the price of learning a new set of task-action mappings? In other words, how much interference is there when the new set is inconsistent with the original set of task-action mappings of the previously known system? We consider three factors that determine the ease of learning and retention of task-action mappings: mnemonics, regularity within a set of mappings, and consistency of mapping across different system contexts. In two experiments, we found that Irregular-Non-Mnemonic mappings take much longer to master than Regular-Mnemonic mappings and that Irregular-Non-Mnemonic mappings are more rapidly forgotten and subject to interference effects due to inconsistency. Regular-Non-Mnemonic mappings fall between the two groups. They are easier to learn and retain than Irregular-Non-Mnemonic but harder than Regular-Mnemonic mappings. We conclude that transferring from a well-learned set of old task-action mappings is simple when the new set is regular (completely consistent) and mnemonic.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1993 «
Henderson, Austin and Polson, Peter G. (1993): Chairs' Column. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 25 (1) pp. 3-4
Henderson, Austin and Polson, Peter G. (1993): Chairs' Column. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 25 (2) pp. 2-4
“In this column we want to discuss five matters: the new SIGCHI bylaws, the new dues structure, holding CHI '95 in Colorado, the visioning process undertaken at the December SIGCHI Executive Committee (EC) meeting, and the directions for SIGCHI within ACM.”
Copyrights may apply
Henderson, Austin and Polson, Peter G. (1993): Chairs' Column. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 25 (3) pp. 3-6
Henderson, Austin, Polson, Peter G., Miller, Jim and Atwood, Michael E. (1993): Chairs' Column. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 25 (4) pp. 4-5
“We will use this column to make some announcements and to transition to the new Executive Committee.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1992 «
Kitajima, Muneo and Polson, Peter G. (1992): A Computational Model of Skilled Use of a Graphical User Interface. In: Bauersfeld, Penny, Bennett, John and Lynch, Gene (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 92 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference June 3-7, 1992, Monterey, California. pp. 241-249. Available online
“This paper describes a computational model of skilled use of a graphical user interface based on Kintsch's construction-integration theory [4, 8]. The model uses knowledge of a detailed representation of information on the display, a user's goals and expectations, knowledge about the interface, and knowledge about the application domain to compute actions necessary to accomplish the user's current goal. The model provides a well-motivated account of one kind of errors, action slips [14], made by skilled users. We show how information about the intermediate state of a task on the display plays a critical role in skilled performance, i.e., display-based problem solving [10].”
Copyrights may apply
Nilsen, Erik, Jong, HeeSen, Olson, Judith S. and Polson, Peter G. (1992): Method Engineering: From Data to Model to Practice. In: Bauersfeld, Penny, Bennett, John and Lynch, Gene (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 92 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference June 3-7, 1992, Monterey, California. pp. 313-320. Available online
“This paper explores the behavior of experts choosing among various methods to accomplish tasks. Given the results showing that methods are not chosen solely on the basis of keystroke efficiency, we recommend a technique to help designers assess whether they should offer multiple methods for some tasks, and if they should, how to make them so that they are chosen appropriately.”
Copyrights may apply
Polson, Peter G., Lewis, Clayton H., Rieman, John and Wharton, Cathleen (1992): Cognitive Walkthroughs: A Method for Theory-Based Evaluation of User Interfaces. In International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 36 (5) pp. 741-773
“This paper presents a new methodology for performing theory-based evaluations of user interface designs early in the design cycle. The methodology is an adaptation of the design walkthrough techniques that have been used for many years in the software engineering community. Traditional walkthroughs involve hand simulation of sections of code to ensure that they implement specified functionality. The method we present involves hand simulation of the cognitive activities of a user, to ensure that the user can easily learn to perform tasks that the system is intended to support. The cognitive walkthrough methodology, described in detail, is based on a theory of learning by exploration presented in this paper. These is a summary of preliminary results of effectiveness and comparisons with other design methods.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1991 «
Rieman, John, Davies, Susan, Hair, D. Charles, Esemplare, Mary, Polson, Peter G. and Lewis, Clayton H. (1991): An Automated Cognitive Walkthrough. In: Robertson, Scott P., Olson, Gary M. and Olson, Judith S. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 91 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 28 - June 5, 1991, New Orleans, Louisiana. pp. 427-428. Available online
Lee, Adrienne Y., Foltz, Peter W. and Polson, Peter G. (1991): Consistency versus Mnemonics in Text Editor Command Sets. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 23 (4) p. 41
» 1990 «
Lewis, Clayton H., Polson, Peter G., Wharton, Cathleen and Rieman, John (1990): Testing a Walkthrough Methodology for Theory-Based Design of Walk-Up-and-Use Interfaces. In: Carrasco, Jane and Whiteside, John (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 90 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference 1990, Seattle, Washington,USA. pp. 235-242.
“The value of theoretical analyses in user interface design has been hotly debated. All sides agree that it is difficult to apply current theoretical models within the constraints of real-world development projects. We attack this problem in the context of bringing the theoretical ideas within a model of exploratory learning to bear on the evaluation of alternative interfaces for walk-up-and-use systems. We derived a "cognitive walkthrough" procedure for systematically evaluating features of an interface in the context of the theory. Four people independently applied this procedure to four alternative interfaces for which we have empirical usability data. Consideration of the walkthrough sheds light on the consistency with which such a procedure can be applied as well as the accuracy of the results.”
Copyrights may apply
Bovair, Susan, Kieras, David E. and Polson, Peter G. (1990): The Acquisition and Performance of Text-Editing Skill: A Cognitive Complexity Analysis. In Human-Computer Interaction, 5 (1) pp. 1-48
“Kieras and Polson (1985) proposed an approach for making quantitative predictions on ease of learning and ease of use of a system, based on a production system version of the goals, operators, methods, and selection rules (GOMS) model of Card, Moran, and Newell (1983). This article describes the principles for constructing such models and obtaining predictions of learning and execution time. A production rule model for a simulated text editor is described in detail and is compared to experimental data on learning and performance. The model accounted well for both learning and execution time and for the details of the increase in speed with practice. The relationship between the performance model and the Keystroke-Level Model of Card et al. (1983) is discussed. The results provide strong support for the original proposal that production rule models can make quantitative predictions for both ease of learning and ease of use.”
Copyrights may apply
Card, Stuart K. and Polson, Peter G. (1990): Introduction to this Special Issue on Foundations of Human-Computer Interaction. In Human-Computer Interaction, 5 (2) pp. 119-123
Polson, Peter G. and Lewis, Clayton H. (1990): Theory-Based Design for Easily Learned Interfaces. In Human-Computer Interaction, 5 (2) pp. 191-220
“Many important computer applications require that users be able to use them effectively with little or no formal training. Current examples include bank teller machines and airport information kiosks. Today successful systems of this kind can only be developed by iteration using costly empirical testing. This article aims to provide a theoretical foundation for the design of such systems, a model of learning by exploration, called CE+. The theory incorporates assumptions from (a) the GOMS model and cognitive complexity theory (CCT) on the representation of procedural knowledge as productions, (b) the EXPL model on learning from examples, and (c) research on problem-solving processes for simple puzzlelike problems. Design guidelines for systems that can be learned by exploration, "design for successful guessing," are derived from the theory. These principles are compared to those developed by Norman (1988).”
Copyrights may apply
Doane, Stephanie M., Polson, Peter G. and Kintsch, Walter (1990): Design Issues for Graphical UNIX User Interfaces. In: D., Woods, and E., Roth, (eds.) Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 34th Annual Meeting 1990, Santa Monica, USA. pp. 272-276.
“This paper discusses important usability issues that impact the future development of graphical user interfaces for UNIX. UNIX provides a user with the capability to combine basic commands using input/output redirection to create new commands to perform more complex tasks. The new graphical interfaces do not directly aid composing commands. However, it takes more than five years of experience to begin to be able to fluently compose new, complex commands. This paper describes a methodology which focuses attention on the problems that must be solved in order for these core features of UNIX to be accessible to individuals with one to five years of experience.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1989 «
Lee, Adrienne Y., Polson, Peter G. and Bailey, Wayne A. (1989): Learning and Transfer of Measurement Tasks. 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. 115-120.
“This study presents a theoretically motivated analysis of learning and performance on a micro-processor based oscilloscope. An analysis of the knowledge required to make basic measurements was done using the GOMS model and Cognitive Complexity Theory (CCT). From these analyses and the criterion used in Polson, Muncher, and Engelbeck (1986), tasks were selected for an experiment evaluating training order manipulations using naive users of oscilloscopes. Production system models for each training task were derived from CCT. The models successfully predicted transfer between tasks and training order effects. Implications for the design of systems with embedded micro-processors are discussed.”
Copyrights may apply
Polson, Peter G. (1989): Summary of the CHI'89 Doctoral Consortium. 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. 393-394.
“The Doctoral Consortium is a meeting of Ph.D. students who are doing their dissertation research on topics in human-computer interaction. The first meeting was organized by Marilyn Mantei and held at CHI'85 in San Francisco. For CHI'89, the students who attended the consortium meeting were selected from a pool of applicants by the Consortium faculty. They spent a day and a half prior to the beginning of the CHI'89 meeting presenting their dissertations and receiving feedback from the faculty, a group of well-known researchers in the field from both academic and industrial laboratories.”
Copyrights may apply
Butler, Keith A., Bennett, John, Polson, Peter G. and Karat, John (1989): Report on the Workshop on Analytical Models. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 20 (4) pp. 63-79
Atwood, Michael E., Fischer, Gerhard, Gray, Wayne D. and Polson, Peter G. (1989): Theoretical Models for System Design. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 33rd Annual Meeting 1989. pp. 278-280.
“In the history of human factors in computer systems, one of the most significant events of the past decade was the work on GOMS and keystroke models (cf. Card, Moran, and Newell, 1983). While a clear success in causing software developers to focus on the importance of interface design and attracting researchers to this areas, GOMS approaches have not significantly improved the quality of the systems that are developed. Why has this work, that has a great theoretical impact, had so little practical impact on existing systems? Is it that the GOMS formalism is not valid outside of laboratory contexts? Is it that it misses important aspects of behavior such as how people learn to use systems? Is it that GOMS was developed in the context of computer systems that are less powerful and interactive than we have today? Or, are there other reasons? In this panel, we argue that additional cognitive science approaches are needed to improve the quality of developed system. Dr. Gray extends this approach by reporting the first "real world": test of the GOMS-style of system modeling. Dr. Polson extends these models to how people learn to use systems. Dr. Fischer extends this style of research by focusing on cooperative, rather than passive computer systems. Audience members will have an opportunity to describe other approaches to developing theoretical models of system design.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1988 «
Foltz, Peter W., Davies, Susan, Polson, Peter G. and Kieras, David E. (1988): Transfer Between Menu Systems. In: Soloway, Elliot, Frye, Douglas and Sheppard, Sylvia B. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 88 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference June 15-19, 1988, Washington, DC, USA. pp. 107-112.
“This paper investigates whether changes in the user/computer dialogue structure will affect the performance of users who are familiar with an earlier version of the product. Quantitative predictions using the Kieras and Polson (1985) production system model were derived to test whether changing the lexical attributes and structure of a popular menu-driven word-processor would permit transfer of existing knowledge of the word-processor to a new version. The results show that changes to the dialogue structure of the menu-system are not detrimental, while changes to the lexical attributes of the menus will hinder user performance.”
Copyrights may apply
Engelbeck, George and Polson, Peter G. (1988): An Interference Theory Explanation of Retention Errors. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 19 (3) pp. 61-63
“We have extended Cognitive Complexity Theory (CCT) (Kieras and Polson, 1985) to provide an explanation of why some production rules are remembered and others are forgotten. The explanation is based on interference theory. Inconsistent user interfaces force users to learn different operations to accomplish common user goals. Such inconsistent knowledge is represented as two or more rules with common conditions and different actions. Let A represent the common condition and C and D represent different actions. The rules can be described as A-B and A-C which conform to a classical interference paradigm. Sixty subjects were trained to perform seven utility tasks on a popular, stand-alone, menu-based word processor. Subjects were brought back one day after the training session for a retention test. The retention test involved retraining subjects on the same set of utility tasks. Production rule models were written for all tasks. Each rule represents a step in one of the seven tasks. The rules were classified as A-B, A-C, or C-D rules. C-D rules are rules with a unique condition and action. The rule that appeared more frequently was predicted to interfere with the retention of the less frequent version of the rule (Postman & Underwood, 1973). Each step can be associated with a rule, and the number of errors were tabulated for each rule type. The overall probability of an error was .076. The observed probability of an error was .56 for the four low-frequency A-C rules. Over half the errors observed in this study were made on these four steps. The probability of an error on a low-frequency C-D rule was .005.”
Copyrights may apply
Foltz, Peter W., Davies, Susan E., Polson, Peter G. and Kieras, David E. (1988): Transfer between Similar Menu Systems. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 19 (3) pp. 63-65
» 1987 «
Bennett, John, Lorch, Douglas J., Kieras, David E. and Polson, Peter G. (1987): Developing a User Interface Technology for Use in Industry. 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. 21-26.
“We are developing a user interface technology to address ease of learning and ease of use concerns on the user side of the interface during the design process. Modelling the user how-to-do-it knowledge required by a design is one step toward development of such a technology. We report on an evolving methodology that is intended to give developers early warning indications of potential usability problems that may arise from a set of design decisions.”
Copyrights may apply
Polson, Peter G., Bovair, Susan and Kieras, David E. (1987): Transfer between text editors. In: Graphics Interface 87 (CHI+GI 87) April 5-9, 1987, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. pp. 27-32.
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.
» 1985 «
Polson, Peter G. and Kieras, David E. (1985): A Quantitative Model of the Learning and Performance of Text Editing Knowledge. 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. 207-212.
“A model of manuscript editing, implemented as a simulation program, is described in this paper. The model provides an excellent, quantitative description of learning, transfer, and performance data from two experiments on text editing methods. Implications of the underlying theory for the design process are briefly discussed.”
Copyrights may apply
Kieras, David E. and Polson, Peter G. (1985): An Approach to the Formal Analysis of User Complexity. In International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 22 (4) pp. 365-394
“A formal approach to analysing the user complexity of interactive systems or devices is described, based on theoretical results from cognitive psychology. The user's knowledge of how to use a system to accomplish the various tasks is represented in a procedural notation that permits quantification of the amount and complexity of the knowledge required and the cognitive processing load involved in using a system. Making a system more usable can be accomplished by altering its design until the knowledge is adequately simplified. By representing the device behaviour formally as well, it is possible to simulate the user-device interaction to obtain rigorous measures of user complexity.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1983 «
Kieras, David E. and Polson, Peter G. (1983): A Generalized Transition Network Representation for Interactive Systems. 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. 103-106.
“A general method for describing the behavior of an interactive system is presented which is based on transition networks generalized enough to describe even very complex systems easily, as shown by an example description of a word processor. The key feature is the ability to easily describe hierarchies of modes or states of the system. The representation system is especially valuable as a design tool when used in a simulation of a proposed user interface. In order to characterize the interaction between a user and a system, an explicit and formal representation of the behavior of the system itself is needed. To be of value in the design of user interfaces, the representation should be independent of the actual implementation of the system, but also reflect the structural properties of the system's behavior, such as its hierarchical form, the possible modes, and the consistent patterns of interaction. At the same time, the presentation must be easy to define and understand. This paper presents a representation notation with these properties.”
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 19th, 2010
Changes to this page (author)
17 Feb 2010: Enabled abstracts to be shown on Peter G. Polson's author page.04 Jun 2009: Author was edited 30 May 2009: Author was edited
26 Jul 2007: Author was added to the bibliography
29 Jun 2007: Author was edited
29 Jun 2007: Author was edited
28 Jun 2007: Author was added to the bibliography
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
26 Jun 2007: Author was edited
26 Jun 2007: Author was edited
24 Jun 2007: Author was edited
24 Jun 2007: Author was edited
24 Jun 2007: Author was edited
24 Jun 2007: Author was edited
23 Jun 2007: Author was edited
23 Jun 2007: Author was added to the bibliography
23 Jun 2007: Author was edited
23 Jun 2007: Author was edited
28 Apr 2003: Added the author to the bibliography
