Iterative methodology and designer training in human-computer interface design

ABSTRACT

One of the most promising methods for user interface design is the iterative design methodology. To this point only case study support for this method has been given. There are still many unanswered questions about the effectiveness of this method. One difficulty encountered in user interface design is knowing what set of knowledge and skill the designer must possess to ensure good user interface design. Many different people have designed user interfaces for computer systems. These people came from a variety of backgrounds and viewpoints. Two of the most common groups involved in user interface design are human factors specialists and programmers. This study investigates these two issues. One factor in this study is the iterative design methodology. An empirical evaluation of this method was conducted. The strengths and weaknesses of this method are discussed. A second factor in this study is a comparison of human factors specialists and programmers in an actual user interface design task. The results of this study indicate that iterative design methodology can improve the usability of a product. The amount of the improvement may be constrained by the original design. This study also supports the use of human factors specialists in user interface design. A significant difference between designs produced by human factors specialists and programmers was found.

REFERENCES

• 1: Robert W. Bailey, Human performance engineering: using human factors/ergonomics to achieve computer system usability (2nd ed.), Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1989
• 2: Stuart K. Card , Allen Newell , Thomas P. Moran, The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, NJ, 1983
• 3: John M. Carroll, Interfacing thought: cognitive aspects of human-computer interaction, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987
• 4: J. S. Dumas, Stimulating change through usability testing, ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, v.21 n.1, p.37-44, July 1989 [doi>10.1145/67880.67884]
• 5: Galitz, W. O. (1989). Handbook of Screen Format Design Third Edition, Welleslye, Massachusetts, QED information Sciences, Inc.
• 6: Margaret M. Gardiner , Bruce Christie, Applying cognitive psychology to user-interface design, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1987
• 7: Gilbert, T.F., & Gilbert, M. B. (1989). Performance engineering: Making human productivity a science. Performance & Instruction, 3-9.
• 8: Douglas J. Gillan , Sarah D. Breedin, Designers' models of the human-computer interface, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Empowering people, p.391-398, April 01-05, 1990, Seattle, Washington, United States [doi>10.1145/97243.97315]
• 9: John D. Gould , Clayton Lewis, Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think, Communications of the ACM, v.28 n.3, p.300-311, March 1985 [doi>10.1145/3166.3170]
• 10: John D. Gould , Stephen J. Boies , Stephen Levy , John T. Richards , Jim Schoonard, The 1984 Olympic Message System: a test of behavioral principles of system design, Communications of the ACM, v.30 n.9, p.758-769, Sept. 1987 [doi>10.1145/30401.30402]
• 11: Jonathan Grudin , Susan F. Ehrlich , Rick Shriner, Positioning human factors in the user interface development chain, Proceedings of the SIGCHI/GI conference on Human factors in computing systems and graphics interface, p.125-131, April 05-09, 1987, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
• 12: O. Gutierrez, Prototyping techniques for different problem contexts, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Wings for the mind, p.259-264, March 1989
• 13: T. T. Hewett , C. T. Meadow, On designing for usability: an application of four key principles, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.247-252, April 13-17, 1986, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
• 14: Ives, B., & Olson, M. H. (1984). User involvement and MIS success: A review of research. Management Science, 30 (5), 586-603.
• 15: B. Janosky , P. J. Smith , C. Hildreth, Online library catalog systems: an analysis of user errors, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, v.25 n.5, p.573-592, Nov. 1987 [doi>10.1016/S0020-7373(86)80024-4]
• 16: Robin Jeffries , James R. Miller , Cathleen Wharton , Kathy Uyeda, User interface evaluation in the real world: a comparison of four techniques, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Reaching through technology, p.119-124, April 27-May 02, 1991, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States [doi>10.1145/108844.108862]
• 17: John Kammersgaard, Four different perspectives on human-computer interaction, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, v.28 n.4, p.343-362, April 1988 [doi>10.1016/S0020-7373(88)80017-8]
• 18: Claire-Marie Karat , Robert Campbell , Tarra Fiegel, Comparison of empirical testing and walkthrough methods in user interface evaluation, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.397-404, May 03-07, 1992, Monterey, California, United States [doi>10.1145/142750.142873]
• 19: J. Nielsen , R. Molich, Teaching user interface design based on usability engineering, ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, v.21 n.1, p.45-48, July 1989 [doi>10.1145/67880.67885]
• 20: Norman, D. A., & Draper, S. W. (Eds) (1986). User Centered System Design, Hillsdale, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• 21: Perlman, G. (1989). The checklist method for applying guidelines to design and evaluation. Proceedings of INTERFACE 89, 271-276.
• 22: Peter G. Polson, A quantitative theory of human-computer interaction, Interfacing thought: cognitive aspects of human-computer interaction, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987
• 23: Suzanne Rivard , Sid L. Huff, Factors of success for end-user computing, Communications of the ACM, v.31 n.5, p.552-561, May 1988 [doi>10.1145/42411.42418]
• 24: Rubini, D., & Thompson, C. (1989). The box continuum: A model for design evaluation. Proceedings of INTERFACE 89, 101-104.
• 25: Schneider, E., & Wilcox, S. B. (1989). Getting designers involved with research: The case for early participation. Proceedings of INTERFACE 89, 29-32.
• 26: Ben Shneiderman, Designing the user interface (2nd ed.): strategies for effective human-computer interaction, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1992
• 27: Shneiderman, B. (1988). We can design better user interfaces: A review of human-computer interaction styles. Ergonomics, 31 (5), 699-710.
• 28: Surya,B. Yadav , Ralph,R. Bravoco , Akemi,T. Chatfield , T. M. Rajkumar, Comparison of analysis techniques for information requirement determination, Communications of the ACM, v.31 n.9, p.1090-1097, Sept. 1988 [doi>10.1145/48529.48533]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)
          Subjects: Evaluation/methodology

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.m Miscellaneous
          Subjects: Rapid prototyping**

  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.2 User/Machine Systems
          Subjects: Human factors

General Terms:
Design, Experimentation, Human Factors, Performance

Keywords:
iterative design methodology, programmers, user interface specialists