Warming up to computers: A study of cognitive and affective interaction over time

ABSTRACT

This experiment studies how people learn to use computers. Four computer-naive persons performed six computer tasks at each of 20 task sessions over a one month period. Participants were allowed to choose a menu-driven or command-driven dialogue at any point during the study. Cognitive, affective, and performance variables were closely monitored. Results generally support the appropriateness of a menu-driven dialogue for novice users and the transition to a command-driven dialogue after approximately 16 - 20 hours of task experience. With experience, users were shown to a) choose b) perform better, and c) be more satisfied with a command driven dialogue. Results are explained within the context of a “cognitive schema” theory.

REFERENCES

• 1: Anderson, R. C. The notion of schemata and the educational enterprise. In R.C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro, and W.E. Montague (Eds) schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge. Hillsdale, N.J. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1977.
• 2: Baker, J. and Goldstein, I. Batch vs. sequential displays: Effects on human problem solving. Human Factors, 1966, 8, 225-235.
• 3: Bartlett, F. Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge Press, 1932.
• 4: Boehm, B., Brown, J., Kaspar, H., Lipow, M., MacLeod, G., and Merritt, M. Characteristics of software quality. TRW-SS 73-09 Redondo Beach, California 1973.
• 5: B. W. Boehm , J. R. Brown , M. Lipow, Quantitative evaluation of software quality, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Software engineering, p.592-605, October 13-15, 1976, San Francisco, California, United States
• 6: Boise, S. J. Unpublished study cited in Miller and Thomas, 1977, p512.
• 7: Brown, J.S., Collins, A., and Harris, G. Artificial intelligence and learning strategies. In H.F. O'Neil (ED) Learning Strategies New York: Academic Press, 1978.
• 8: Business Week Missing computer software: A bottleneck slows new applications, spawns a booming new industry. Sept. 1, 1980.
• 9: James Hollen Carlisle, Man-computer interactive problem-solving--relationships between user characteristics and interface complexity., 1974
• 10: Chafin, R., Martin, T. DSN Human Factors Project Final Report, University of Southern Calif., Los Angeles, 1980, Contract No. 955013, RD-142
• 11: Chase, W. and Simon, H. Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 1973, 4, 55-81.
• 12: DeGroot, A.D. Thought and Choice in Chess. Paris: Mouton and Co., 1965.
• 13: Dzida, W., Herda, S., and Itzfelt, W. User-perceived quality of interactive systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 1978, SE-4 (4), 270-276.
• 14: Eason, K. A task-tool analysis of manager-computer interaction. A paper presented at NATO Advanced Study Institute on Man-Computer Interaction. Mati, Greece, Sept.,1976.
• 15: Egan, D.E., and Schqartz, F.J. Chunking in recall of symbolic drawings. Memory and Cognition, 1979, 7,(2), 149-158.
• 16: Hayes-Roth, B. Evaluation of cognitive structures and processes. Psychological Review, 1977, 84(3), 260-278.
• 17: Just, M.A., and Carpenter, P.A. A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 1980, 87(4), 329-354.
• 18: James Martin, Design of Man-Computer Dialogues, Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, 1990
• 19: Neisser, U. Cognition and Reality San Francisco: W.H. Freeman, 1976.
• 20: Piaget, J. The Construction of Reality in the Child. New York: Basic Books, 1954.
• 21: Reitman, J.S. Skilled perception in go: deducing memory structures from inter-response times. Cognitive Psychology, 1976, 8, 336-356.
• 22: Raymond J. Rubey , R. Dean Hartwick, Quantitative measurement of program quality, Proceedings of the 1968 23rd ACM national conference, p.671-677, August 27-29, 1968 [doi>10.1145/800186.810631]
• 23: Schank, R., and Abelson, R. Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ Lawrence Erlbaum, 1977.
• 24: Simon, D.P. and Simon, H.A. Individual differences in solving physics problems. In R.S. Seigler (Ed.) Children's Thinking: What Develops? Hillsdale, NJ Lawrence Erlbaum, 1978.
• 25: Smith, F. Understanding Reading: A Psycholinguistic Analysis of Reading and Learning to Read. (2nd edition) New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1978.
• 26: Spilich, G.J., Vesonder, G.T., Chiesi, H.L., and Voss, J.F. Text processing of domain-related information for individuals with high and low domain knowledge. Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1979, 18, 275-290.
• 27: Stewart, T.F.M. The specialist user. Paper presented at NATO Advanced Study Institute On Man-Computer Interaction, Mati, Greece. September, 1976(b).
• 28: Thorndyke, P.W. and Hayes-Roth, B. The use of schemata in the acquisition and transfer of knowledge. Cognitive Psychology, 1979, 11, 82-106.
• 29: George Howard Walther, The on-line user-computer interface: the effects of interface-flexibility, experience, and terminal-type on user-satisfactionand performance., 1973
• 30: Laurence Mark Weissman, A methodology for studying the psychological complexity of computer programs., 1974
• 31: Wood, R.C. Inferences from the UCSB on-line system for man-machine interface design. In Proceedings of the 1972 International Conference on Cybernetics and Society NY: IEEE, 1972, 120-125.

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: Interaction styles (e.g., commands, menus, forms, direct manipulation)

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.2 User/Machine Systems
          Subjects: Human factors
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)

General Terms:
Design, Performance