How machine delays change user strategies

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

How machine delays change user strategies

Full text

Pdf (364 KB)

Source

ACM SIGCHI Bulletin archive
Volume 28 , Issue 2 (April 1996) table of contents

Pages: 39 - 42

Year of Publication: 1996

ISSN:0736-6906

Authors

Paddy O'Donnell
Stephen W. Draper

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 2, Downloads (12 Months): 10, Citation Count: 6

Additional Information:

abstract references cited by index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/226650.226665 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

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.

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	1	Raymond E. Barber , Henry C. Lucas, Jr., System response time operator productivity, and job satisfaction, Communications of the ACM, v.26 n.11, p.972-986, Nov. 1983 [doi>10.1145/182.358464]
	2	G.L. Dannenbring (1983), The effect of computer response time on user performance and satisfaction: a preliminary investigation, Behavior research methods & instrumentation vol. 15 no. 2 pp. 213-216.
	3	J. Gibbon (1977), Scalar expectancy theory and Weber's law in animal timing, Psychological Review vol. 84 pp. 279-335.
	4	G.N. Lambert (1984), A comparative study of system response time on program developer productivity, IBM Systems journal vol. 23 no. 1 pp. 36-43.
	5	G.L. Martin & K.G. Corl (1986), System response time effects on user productivity, Behaviour and Information Tecnology vol. 5 no. 1 pp. 3-13.
	6	Avi Rushinek , Sara F. Rushinek, What makes users happy?, Communications of the ACM, v.29 n.7, p.594-598, July 1986 [doi>10.1145/6138.6140]
	7	Steven L. Teal , Alexander I. Rudnicky, A performance model of system delay and user strategy selection, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.295-305, May 03-07, 1992, Monterey, California, United States [doi>10.1145/142750.142818]

CITED BY 6

	Maria R. Ebling , Bonnie E. John , M. Satyanarayanan, The importance of translucence in mobile computing systems, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), v.9 n.1, p.42-67, March 2002
	Yasuhiro Endo , Margo Seltzer, Improving interactive performance using TIPME, ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, v.28 n.1, p.240-251, June 2000
	Martín González Rodríguez, Automatic Data-Gathering Agents for Remote Navigability Testing, IEEE Software, v.19 n.6, p.78-85, November 2002
	Changxu Wu , Kan Zhang , Yongge Hu, Human performance modeling in temporary segmentation Chinese character handwriting recognizers, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, v.58 n.4, p.483-508, April 2003
	Jonathan L. Schilling, The simplest heuristics may be the best in Java JIT compilers, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, v.38 n.2, February 2003
	Juha Marila , Sami Ronkainen, Time-out in user interface: the case of mobile text input, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, v.8 n.2, p.110-116, May 2004