Using GOMS for user interface design and evaluation: which technique?

ABSTRACT

Since the seminal book, The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction, the GOMS model has been one of the few widely known theoretical concepts in human-computer interaction. This concept has spawned much research to verify and extend the original work and has been used in real-world design and evaluation situations. This article synthesizes the previous work on GOMS to provide an integrated view of GOMS models and how they can be used in design. We briefly describe the major variants of GOMS that have matured sufficiently to be used in actual design. We then provide guidance to practitioners about which GOMS variant to use for different design situations. Finally, we present examples of the application of GOMS to practical design problems and then summarize the lessons learned.

REFERENCES

• 1: Michael E. Atwood , Wayne D. Gray , Bonnie E. John, Project Ernestine: analytic and empirical methods applied to a real-world CHI problem, Proceedings of a workshop on Human-computer interface design : success stories, emerging methods, and real-world context: success stories, emerging methods, and real-world context, p.101-121, June 1995, Boulder, Colorado, United States
• 2: BEARD,D.V.,SMITH,D.K.,AND DENELSBECK, K. M. 1996. Quick and dirty GOMS: A case study of computed tomography interpretation. Hum. Comput. Interact. 11, 2, 157-180.
• 3: Michael D. Byrne , Scott D. Wood , James D. Foley , David E. Kieras , Piyawadee Noi Sukaviriya, Automating interface evaluation, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: celebrating interdependence, p.232-237, April 24-28, 1994, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/191666.191752]
• 4: S. K. Card , T. P. Moran, User technology: from pointing to pondering, A history of personal workstations, ACM Press, New York, NY, 1988 [doi>10.1145/61975.66925]
• 5: Stuart K. Card , Thomas P. Moran , Allen Newell, The keystroke-level model for user performance time with interactive systems, Communications of the ACM, v.23 n.7, p.396-410, July 1980 [doi>10.1145/358886.358895]
• 6: Stuart K. Card , Allen Newell , Thomas P. Moran, The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, NJ, 1983
• 7: Kathleen M. Carley , Michael J. Prietula, Computational organization theory, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, NJ, 1994
• 8: Mei C. Chuah , Bonnie E. John , John Pane, Analyzing graphic and textual layouts with GOMS: results of a preliminary analysis, Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems, p.323-325, April 24-28, 1994, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/259963.260393]
• 9: Dan Diaper, Task Analysis for Human-Computer Interaction, Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1990
• 10: DILLON, A., SWEENEY, M., AND MAGUIRE, M. 1993. A survey of usability engineering within the European IT industry:Current practice and needs. In People and Computers, Proceed-ings of HCI 93, J. L. Alty, D. Diaper, and S. Guest Eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 81-94.
• 11: ELKERTON, J. 1993. Using GOMS models to design documentation and user interfaces: An uneasy courtship. In Proceedings of INTERCHI'93. Position paper for workshop on human-computer interaction advances derived from real world experiences. ACM, New York.
• 12: Jay Elkerton , Susan L. Palmiter, Designing help using a GOMS model: an information retrieval evaluation, Human Factors, v.33 n.2, p.185-204, April 1991
• 13: ENDESTAD,T.AND MEYER, P. 1993. GOMS analysis as an evaluation tool in process control: An evaluation of the ISACS-1 prototype and the COPMA system. Tech. Rep. HWR-349, OECD Halden Reactor Project, Inst. for Energiteknikk, Halden, Norway.
• 14: GILBRETH,F.B.AND GILBRETH, L. M. 1917. Applied Motion Study. The MacMillan Company, New York.
• 15: Richard Jeffrey Gong, Validating and refining the GOMS model methodology for software user interface design and evaluation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 1993
• 16: Richard Gong , Jay Elkerton, Designing minimal documentation using a GOMS model: a usability evaluation of an engineering approach, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Empowering people, p.99-107, April 01-05, 1990, Seattle, Washington, United States [doi>10.1145/97243.97261]
• 17: Richard Gong , David Kieras, A validation of the GOMS model methodology in the development of a specialized, commercial software application, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: celebrating interdependence, p.351-357, April 24-28, 1994, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/191666.191782]
• 18: GOTT, S. P. 1988. Apprenticeship instruction for real-world tasks: The coordination of procedures, mental models, and strategies. In Review of Research in Education, Ernst Z. Rothkopf, Ed. AERA, Washington, D. C.
• 19: GRAY,W.D.AND SALZMAN, M. C. 1996. Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods. Unpublished report, Dept. of Psychology, George Mason Univ., Fairfax, Va.
• 20: GRAY,W.D.,JOHN,B.E.,AND ATWOOD, M. E. 1993. Project Ernestine: A validation of GOMS for prediction and explanation of real-world task performance. Hum. Comput. Interact. 8, 3, 237-209.
• 21: Bonnie E. John, Extensions of GOMS analyses to expert performance requiring perception of dynamic visual and auditory information, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Empowering people, p.107-116, April 01-05, 1990, Seattle, Washington, United States [doi>10.1145/97243.97262]
• 22: Bonnie E. John, Toward a deeper comparison of methods: a reaction to Nielsen & Phillips and new data, Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems, p.285-286, April 24-28, 1994, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/259963.260495]
• 23: Bonnie John, Why GOMS?, interactions, v.2 n.4, p.80-89, Oct. 1995 [doi>10.1145/225362.225374]
• 24: Bonnie E. John , Wayne D. Gray, CPM-GOMS: an analysis method for tasks with parallel activities, Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems, p.393-394, May 07-11, 1995, Denver, Colorado, United States [doi>10.1145/223355.223738]
• 25: Bonnie E. John , David E. Kieras, The GOMS family of user interface analysis techniques: comparison and contrast, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), v.3 n.4, p.320-351, Dec. 1996 [doi>10.1145/235833.236054]
• 26: Bonnie E. John , Alonso H. Vera, A GOMS analysis of a graphic machine-paced, highly interactive task, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.251-258, May 03-07, 1992, Monterey, California, United States [doi>10.1145/142750.142805]
• 27: JOHN,B.E.,VERA,A.H.,AND NEWELL, A. 1994. Toward real-time GOMS: A model of expert behavior in a highly interactive task. Behav. Inf. Tech. 13, 4, 255-267.
• 28: Hee-Sen Jong, The subgoal structure as a cognitive control mechanism in a human-computer interaction framework, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 1992
• 29: KARAT,J.AND BENNETT, J. 1991. Modeling the user interaction methods imposed by designs. In Mental Models and Human-Computer Interaction, M. Tauber and D. Ackermann Eds. Vol. 2. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
• 30: J. Karat , L. Boyes , S. Weisgerber , C. Schafer, Transfer between word processing systems, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.67-71, April 13-17, 1986, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
• 31: KIERAS, D. E. 1988. Towards a practical GOMS model methodology for user interface design. In The Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, M. Helander, Ed. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 135-158.
• 32: David Kieras, GOMS modeling of user interfaces using NGOMSL, Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems, p.371-372, April 24-28, 1994, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/259963.260467]
• 33: KIERAS, D. E. 1996a. Guide to GOMS model usability evaluation using NGOMSL. In The Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, M. Helander and T. Landauer Eds. 2nd ed. North-Holland, Amsterdam.
• 34: KIERAS, D. E. 1996b. Task analysis and the design of functionality. In Handbook of Computer Science and Engineering, T. Allen, Ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla.
• 35: KIERAS,D.E.AND POLSON, P. G. 1985. An approach to the formal analysis of user complexity. Int. J. Man-Machine Stud. 22, 365-394.
• 36: David E. Kieras , Scott D. Wood , Kasem Abotel , Anthony Hornof, GLEAN: a computer-based tool for rapid GOMS model usability evaluation of user interface designs, Proceedings of the 8th annual ACM symposium on User interface and software technology, p.91-100, November 15-17, 1995, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States [doi>10.1145/215585.215700]
• 37: KIRWAN,B.AND AINSWORTH, L. K. 1992. A Guide to Task Analysis. Taylor and Francis, London.
• 38: Thomas K. Landauer, The trouble with computers, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995
• 39: A. Y. Lee , P. G. Polson , W. A. Bailey, Learning and transfer of measurement tasks, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Wings for the mind, p.115-120, March 1989
• 40: F. J. Lerch , M. M. Mantei , J. R. Olson, Skilled financial planning: the cost of translating ideas into action, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Wings for the mind, p.121-126, March 1989
• 41: LEWIS,C.AND RIEMAN, J. 1994. Task-Centered User Interface Design: A Practical Introduc-tion. Shareware book available at ftp.cs.colorado.edu/pub/cs/distribs/clewis/HCI-Design-Book.
• 42: LOHSE, G. L. 1993. A cognitive model for understanding graphical perception. Hum. Com-put. Interact. 8, 4, 353-388.
• 43: MONKIEWICZ, J. 1992. CAD's next-generation user interface. Comput. Aided Eng. (Nov.), 55-56.
• 44: NESBITT, K., GORTON, D., AND RANTANEN, J. 1994. A case study of GOMS analysis: Extension of user interfaces. Tech. Rep. BHPR/ETR/R/94/048, BHP Research-Newcastle Laboratories, Australia.
• 45: Allen Newell, Human Problem Solving, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1972
• 46: Jakob Nielsen , Robert L. Mack, Usability inspection methods, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1994
• 47: Jakob Nielsen , Victoria L. Phillips, Estimating the relative usability of two interfaces: heuristic, formal, and empirical methods compared, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.214-221, April 24-29, 1993, Amsterdam, The Netherlands [doi>10.1145/169059.169173]
• 48: Erik Nilsen , Hee Sen Jong , Judith S. Olson , Peter G. Polson, Method engineering: from data to model to practice, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.313-320, May 03-07, 1992, Monterey, California, United States [doi>10.1145/142750.142822]
• 49: Donald A. Norman, Design rules based on analyses of human error, Communications of the ACM, v.26 n.4, p.254-258, April 1983 [doi>10.1145/2163.358092]
• 50: OBERG, E., JONES,F.D.,AND HORTON, H. L. 1978. Machinery's Handbook: A Reference Book for the Mechanical Engineer, Draftsman, Toolmaker and Machinist. 20th ed. Industrial Press, New York.
• 51: Judith S. Olson , Thomas P. Moran, Mapping the method muddle: guidance in using methods for user interface design, Proceedings of a workshop on Human-computer interface design : success stories, emerging methods, and real-world context: success stories, emerging methods, and real-world context, p.269-300, June 1995, Boulder, Colorado, United States
• 52: OLSON,J.R.AND OLSON, G. M. 1990. The growth of cognitive modeling in human-computer interaction since GOMS. Hum. Comput. Interact. 5, 221-265.
• 53: Virginia A. Peck , Bonnie E. John, Browser-Soar: a computational model of a highly interactive task, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.165-172, May 03-07, 1992, Monterey, California, United States [doi>10.1145/142750.142782]
• 54: REASON, J. 1990. Human Error. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
• 55: John Rieman , Clayton Lewis , Richard M. Young , Peter G. Polson, Why is a raven like a writing desk?: lessons in interface consistency and analogical reasoning from two cognitive architectures, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: celebrating interdependence, p.438-444, April 24-28, 1994, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/191666.191816]
• 56: J. B. Smelcer, Understanding user errors in database query, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 1990
• 57: Linda S. Steinberg , Drew H. Gitomer, Cognitive task analysis, interface design, and technical troubleshooting, Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Intelligent user interfaces, p.185-191, January 04-07, 1993, Orlando, Florida, United States [doi>10.1145/169891.169965]
• 58: VAN COTT,H.P.AND KINKADE, R. G. 1972. Human Engineering Guide to Equipment Design, Rev. ed. American Institutes for Research, Washington, D.C.
• 59: VERA,A.H.AND ROSENBLATT, J. K. 1995. Developing user model-based intelligent agents. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, J. D. Moore and J. F. Lehman, Eds. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., 500-505.
• 60: Cathleen Wharton , John Rieman , Clayton Lewis , Peter Polson, The cognitive walkthrough method: a practitioner's guide, Usability inspection methods, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1994
• 61: WOOD, S. 1993. Issues in the Implementation of a GOMS-Model Design Tool. Unpublished report, Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.2 User/Machine Systems
          Subjects: Human information processing

General Terms:
Human Factors

Keywords:
GOMS, cognitive modeling, usability engineering