Natural command names and initial learning: a study of text-editing terms

ABSTRACT

In the first of two studies of “naturalness” in command names, computer-naive typists composed instructions to “someone else” for correcting a sample text. There was great variety in their task-descriptive lexicon and a lack of correspondence between both their vocabulary and their underlying conceptions of the editing operations and those of some computerized text editors. In the second study, computer-naive typists spent two hours learning minimal text-editing systems that varied in several ways. Lexical naturalness (frequency of use in Study 1) made little difference in their performance. By contrast, having different, rather than the same names for operations requiring different syntax greatly reduced difficulty. It is concluded that the design of user-compatible commands involves deeper issues than are captured by the slogan “naturalness.” However, there are limitations to our observations. Only initial learning of a small set of commands was at issue and generalizations to other situations will require further testing.

REFERENCES

• 1: P. Barnard , N. Hammond , A. MacLean , J. Morton, Learning and remembering interactive commands, Proceedings of the 1982 conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.2-7, March 15-17, 1982, Gaithersburg, Maryland, United States [doi>10.1145/800049.801744]
• 2: Black, J.B., and Sebrechts, M.M. Facilitating human-computer communications. Applied Psycholinguistics 2 (1981), 149-177.
• 3: Furnas, G.W., Landauer, T.K., Gomez, L.M., and Dumais, S.T. Statistical semantics: Analysis of the potential performance of keyword information systems. Bell Syst. Tech. I. To appear.
• 4: Gomez, L.M., Egan, D.E., and Bowers, S. Personal communication, 1981. Gomez and Egen are at Bell Labs, Murray Hill, N.J. 07974.
• 5: Goss, A.E., and Nodine, C.F. Paired-Associate Learning. The role of Meaningfulness, Similarity and Familiarization. Academic Press, New York, 1965.
• 6: Kniskal, J.B., and Wish, M. Multidimensional Scaling (Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-011). Sage Publishers, Beverly Hills, Calif., 1978.
• 7: Henry Ledgard , John A. Whiteside , Andrew Singer , William Seymour, The natural language of interactive systems, Communications of the ACM, v.23 n.10, p.556-563, Oct. 1980 [doi>10.1145/359015.359018]
• 8: Norman, D.A. The trouble with UNIX. Datomation 27 (1981), 139-150.
• 9: Reisner, P. Formal grammar and factors of design of an interactive graphics system. IEEE Trans. Soflw. Eng. SE-7, 2 (Mar. 1981), 229-240.
• 10: Sheeter, LA., Ackroff, J.M., Taylor, G.A., and Galotti, K.M. Personal communication, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Holmdal, N.J. 1979.
• 11: Winer, B.J. Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1971.

INDEX TERMS

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

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.2 User/Machine Systems
          Subjects: Human information processing
  H.4 INFORMATION SYSTEMS APPLICATIONS

General Terms:
Human Factors

Keywords:
dialogue, human-computer interaction, user interfaces