Steven Draper
Has also published under the name of:
"Steve Draper", "Stephen W. Draper", and "Stephen Draper"
About the author:
No description available of Steven Draper...
Publications by Steven Draper (bibliography)
» 1999 «
Draper, Steven (1999): Supporting Use, Learning, and Education. In ACM SIGDOC *Journal of Computer Documentation, 23 (2) pp. 19-24
“In the second of three commentaries on Guzdial, Stephen Draper notes that because most software users resemble Guzdial's educational learners in trying to do real work while learning new tools, his example-based and learner-created documentation techniques could have wide applicability.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1997 «
Draper, Steven and Dunlop, Mark D. (1997): New IR - New Evaluation: the impact of interaction and multimedia on information retrieval and its evaluation. In New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 3 pp. 107-121
“The field of information retrieval (IR) traditionally addressed the problem of retrieving text documents from large collections by full-text indexing of words. It has always been characterised by a strong focus on evaluation to compare the performance of alternative designs. The emergence into widespread use both of multimedia and of interactive user interfaces has extensive implications for this field and the evaluation methods on which it depends. This paper discusses what we currently understand about those implications. The "system" being measured must be expanded to include the human users, whose behaviour has a large effect on overall retrieval success, which now depends upon sessions of many retrieval cycles, rather than a single transaction. Multimedia raise issues not only of how users might specify a query in the same medium (e.g. sketch the kind of picture they want), but of cross-medium retrieval. Current explorations in IR evaluation show diversity along at least two dimensions. One is that between comprehensive models that have a place for every possible relevant factor, and lightweight methods. The other is that between highly standardised workbench tests avoiding human users vs. workplace studies.”
Copyrights may apply
Draper, Steven (1997): New Guises for Recurring Problems in Documentation. In ACM SIGDOC *Journal of Computer Documentation, 21 (1) pp. 15-18
» 1996 «
Gray, Philip D. and Draper, Steven (1996): A Unified Concept of Style and its Place in User Interface Design. In: Sasse, Martina Angela, Cunningham, R. J. and Winder, R. L. (eds.) Proceedings of the Eleventh Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers XI August, 1996, London, UK. pp. 49-62.
“The term 'style' is used with great regularity in user interface design literature, yet it appears to refer to widely disparate phenomena. We present a notion of style which unifies these various uses. We then demonstrate how the notion may form the basis of a representation of style that can provide design assistance.”
Copyrights may apply
O'Donnell, Paddy and Draper, Steven (1996): How Machine Delays Change User Strategies. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 28 (2) pp. 39-42
“As machine response delays vary, the most important effect on users may be not their annoyance but that they change the way they use an interface. Even the very simple task of copytyping three digit numbers gives rise to at least three different user strategies (i.e. procedures). However the effect seems not be a simple function of delay length, contrary to earlier reported work. Instead users are probably shifting between strategies more fluidly.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1995 «
Draper, Steven (1995): More Than We Think: Facing Up to the Plurality of Goals Methods Needs and Resources in HCI. In: Proceedings of OZCHI95, the CHISIG Annual Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 1995. pp. 6-9.
“Most analyses of how humans use artifacts, and interactive software in particular, have a strong tendency to assign 1:1 correspondences between goals and methods: to see software as supporting one task, users as having one way of executing a task, one thing to learn when learning a command, and one source for discovering the information. In fact this is a rare case, and multiplicity of goals, methods, information needs, and information resources is the rule even in simple software. How this causes problems for the design and testing of user interfaces can be illustrated by examples from a wide range of domains and levels of design, including studies on learning by exploration, the effect of machine delays on user strategies, the learnability of icon sets, evaluation studies of Computer Assisted Learning, and an analysis of the concept of affordance. Such plurality can be a source of robustness for the performance of interfaces: it is a problem mainly for analysis and HCI research, which struggle to account for the frequent case of high average performance levels mixed with a few residual problems. To address this plurality, we must extend our analyses to cover sets of alternative methods for tasks rather than single user procedures, and perhaps draw on concepts such as Activity Theory to address users' mental organisation of such plurality.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1994 «
Cockton, Gilbert, Draper, Steven and Weir, George R. S. (eds.) Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers IX August 23-26, 1994, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
» 1992 «
Draper, Steven (1992): Activity Theory: The New Direction for HCI?. In International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 37 (6) pp. 811-821
Draper, Steven (1992): Activity Theory: The New Direction for HCI?. In International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 37 (6) pp. 811-821
England, David, Johnson, Peter, Took, Roger and Draper, Steven (1992): Interface Construction for the Millennium: Beyond Objects and Widget Pushers. In: Monk, Andrew, Diaper, Dan and Harrison, Michael D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Seventh Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers VII August 15-18, 1992, University of York, UK. pp. 485-487.
Draper, Steven (1992): Some Research at Glasgow Interactive Systems cenTre. In: Monk, Andrew, Diaper, Dan and Harrison, Michael D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Seventh Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers VII August 15-18, 1992, University of York, UK. pp. 503-506.
» 1991 «
Draper, Steven and Waite, Kevin W. (1991): Iconographer as a Visual Programming System. In: Diaper, Dan and Hammond, Nick (eds.) Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers VI August 20-23, 1991, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK. pp. 171-185.
“Iconographer, a tool for exploring alternative iconic representations of objects, is briefly introduced. Its own user interface, which itself is largely though not completely visual (pictorial), is described in detail: it comprises five separate interactive representations. These visualisations are then analysed in an attempt to understand their nature and limitations. This analysis is then supported by showing how Iconographer can be directly extended to an isomorphic, yet apparently quite different, task: a subset of the class of data processing programs addressed by the JSD (Jackson System Development) method.”
Copyrights may apply
Waite, Kevin W. and Draper, Steven (1991): User Input to Iconographer. In: Diaper, Dan and Hammond, Nick (eds.) Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers VI August 20-23, 1991, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK. pp. 187-198.
“Iconographer is a toolkit that allows designers to explore alternative iconic representations of collections of application entities in a highly interactive manner. This paper describes the development of a complementary facility for exploring alternative regimes for interacting with these generated iconic representations. This mechanism provides a flexible means for selecting and modifying entities and their attributes' values using a strict direct manipulation style of interaction. The paper considers generalised editors and virtual input devices as a means of implementing this input mechanism.”
Copyrights may apply
Jordan, Patrick W., Draper, Steven, MacFarlane, Kirsteen K. and McNulty, Shirley-Anne (1991): Guessability, Learnability, and Experienced User Performance. In: Diaper, Dan and Hammond, Nick (eds.) Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers VI August 20-23, 1991, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK. pp. 237-245.
“An experimental study investigated three distinct components of usability, that account for how a user's performance with a system changes with learning: guessability, learnability, and experienced user performance (EUP). Two small experiments, involving the performance of simple editing tasks on a word processor, were used to illustrate these components. Further possible components of usability are discussed with a view to obtaining a comprehensive definition.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1990 «
Draper, Steven, Waite, Kevin W. and Gray, Philip D. (1990): Alternative Bases for Comprehensibility and Competition for Expression in an Icon Generation Tool. In: Diaper, Dan, Gilmore, David J., Cockton, Gilbert and Shackel, Brian (eds.) INTERACT 90 - 3rd IFIP International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction August 27-31, 1990, Cambridge, UK. pp. 473-477.
“We have constructed an icon generation tool (called "Iconographer"), as reported in a companion paper [1]. It can be regarded as possessing multiple inheritance of research areas: either as a user interface management system (UIMS) narrowly specialised on iconic presentation, or as a data visualisation package specialised to apply to user interfaces. There are similarly contrasts in whether the icons are hand drawn or generated, and in the sources of knowledge which users bring to bear in interpreting graphics: resemblance to known objects (e.g. little drawings of printers), or comparison with the other icons in view and with axes and keys drawn on the background. The work of Gaver and J. J. Gibson suggests the possibility of a closer synthesis of these approaches. The information competing for expression comes from several distinct general sources. We distinguish three: the central arena of system objects offering system properties such as file size, the semantic arena of concepts coded by the user such as "all files to do with my current project", and the articulatory arena concerned with interactive properties such as "this object may be clicked on".”
Copyrights may apply
Gray, Philip D., Waite, Kevin W. and Draper, Steven (1990): Do-It-Yourself Iconic Displays: Reconfigurable Iconic Representations of Application Objects. In: Diaper, Dan, Gilmore, David J., Cockton, Gilbert and Shackel, Brian (eds.) INTERACT 90 - 3rd IFIP International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction August 27-31, 1990, Cambridge, UK. pp. 639-644.
“It is often a major programming task to associate user interface objects with the application objects they are to represent. This discourages the exploration of alternative representations. In this paper we describe the architecture and interface of Iconographer, a system which enables iconic representations of (sets of) application objects to be specified in a highly interactive manner. At its heart is a direct manipulation "switchboard" by which attributes of application objects may be mapped on to icon attributes with a resultant change in the display.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1988 «
Mayes, J. T., Draper, Steven, McGregor, Alison M. and Oatley, Keith (1988): Information Flow in a User Interface: The Effect of Experience and Context on the Recall of MacWrite Screens. In: Jones, Dylan M. and Winder, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourth Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers IV August 5-9, 1988, University of Manchester, UK. pp. 275-289.
“A major theoretical and practical concern in HCI is to discover and characterise what it is that users know -- of what their expertise consists. We have tested what users remember of the detailed content of the MacWrite interface. We found that even experienced users can recall little of the menu contents, even though during use those menus are the instruments of their successful performance. It seems that the necessary information is picked up, used, and discarded; it is not learned in the sense that commands are learned. More exactly, users retain only enough information for recognition, not the much greater amount required for recall. This has implications for predicting learning times (not having to learn commands even for skilled performance should make for fast skill acquisition), and for writing documentation (no need to teach what won't be learned): thus the 'information flow' view of human action (Norman & Draper [1986]) can be used to re-interpret the findings and recommendations of the 'minimal manual' approach developed by Jack Carroll and his associates (Carroll [1984a]; Carroll [1984b]).”
Copyrights may apply
» 1986 «
Norman, Donald A. and Draper, Steven (eds.) (1986): User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
View info on Amazon.com or .co.uk 
» 1984 «
Draper, Steven and Norman, Donald A. (1984): Software engineering for user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Software Engineering 1984, Silver Spring, MD. pp. 214-220.
O'Malley, C. E., Draper, Steven and Riley, M. S. (1984): Constructive Interaction: A Method for Studying Human-Computer-Human Interaction. In: Shackel, Brian (ed.) INTERACT 84 - 1st IFIP International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction September 4-7, 1984, London, UK. pp. 269-274.
“In this paper we describe a promising technique for studying human-machine interaction (HMI) called Constructive Interaction. We describe two pilot studies from a set which explore its application to HMI. Constructive Interaction was developed by Naomi Miyake (Miyake, 1982). It consists essentially of recording sessions with two participants who are discussing some topic which they do not fully understand, in the hope of sharing their knowledge and arriving at a fuller understanding. Miyake was interested in what was revealed about the underlying schemas of the participants and how new schemas can originate in an interaction between two people. We are interested in what this basic situation can offer for the study of HMI.”
Copyrights may apply
Draper, Steven (1984): The Nature of Expertise in UNIX. In: Shackel, Brian (ed.) INTERACT 84 - 1st IFIP International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction September 4-7, 1984, London, UK. pp. 465-471.
“This paper discusses the nature of expertise in Unix, arguing that in certain senses of the word there are no experts. The consequences for interface design of revising the common-sense notion of expertise, particularly with respect to designing help facilities, are then discussed.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1983 «
Root, Robert W. and Draper, Steven (1983): Questionnaires as a Software Evaluation Tool. 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. 83-87.
“This paper reports on a study investigating the strengths and weaknesses of questionnaires as software evaluation tools. Two major influences on the usefulness of questionnaire-based evaluation responses are examined: the administration of the questionnaire, and the background and experience of the respondent. Two questionnaires were administered to a large number of students in an introductory programming class. The questionnaires were also given to a group of more experienced users (including course proctors). Respondents were asked to evaluate the text editor used in the class along a number of dimensions; evaluation responses were solicited using a number of different question types. Another group of students received the questionnaire individually, with part of it presented on the computer; a third group also evaluated an enhanced version of the editor in followup sessions.”
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 12th, 2010
Changes to this page (author)
13 Feb 2010: Enabled abstracts to be shown on Steven Draper's author page.24 Jul 2007: Author was added to the bibliography 24 Jul 2007: Author was edited
27 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
28 Apr 2003: Added the author to the bibliography
28 Apr 2003: Added the author to the bibliography
