Why good engineers (sometimes) create bad interfaces

ABSTRACT

This paper presents a view of system design that shows how good engineering practice can lead to poor user interfaces. From the engineer's perspective, the ideal interface reflects the underlying mechanism and affords direct access to the control points of the mechanism. The designer of the user interface is often also the designer of the mechanism (or at least is very familiar with the mechanism), and thus has a strong bias toward basing the interface on the engineering model. The user, however, wants to complete a task, and an interface that is based on the task is often more appropriate than one based on the system mechanism. We discuss these issues, and also discuss where to position the user interface between the poles of the engineering model and the task model.

REFERENCES

• 1: Bjerknes, G., Ehn, P., and Kyng, M. (Eds.), Computers and democracy - a Scandinawian challenge. Gower, Aldershot, UK, 1987.
• 2: Buxton, B. On the road to Brighton. SIGCHI Bulletin, 20, 4 (Apill, 1989), 16-17.
• 3: Clymer, F. Treasury of early American automobiles. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1950.
• 4: B R Gaines , M L G Shaw, Foundations of dialog engineering: the development of human-computer interaction. Part II, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, v.24 n.2, p.101-123, Feb. 1986 [doi>10.1016/S0020-7373(86)80043-8]
• 5: John D. Gould , Clayton Lewis, Designing for usability—key principles and what designers think, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, p.50-53, December 12-15, 1983, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/800045.801579]
• 6: Jonathan Grudin, The case against user interface consistency, Communications of the ACM, v.32 n.10, p.1164-1173, Oct. 1989 [doi>10.1145/67933.67934]
• 7: Jonathan Grudin, The computer reaches out: the historical continuity of interface design, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Empowering people, p.261-268, April 01-05, 1990, Seattle, Washington, United States [doi>10.1145/97243.97284]
• 8: Kieras, D. Mental models for engineered systems and computers. In A.A. Turner (Ed.), Mental models and user-centered design. TR 88-9 (Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO), 1988.
• 9: Landauer, T. In Proceedings of CHI+GI'87 (Toronto, April 1987). ACM, New York, 333-335.
• 10: B. A. Myers, Encapsulating interactive behaviors, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Wings for the mind, p.319-324, March 1989
• 11: Poison, P. The role of how-it-works knowledge in the acquisition of how-to-do-it knowledge. In A.A. Turner (Ed.), Mental models and user-centered design. TR 88- 9 (Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO), 1988.
• 12: J. Rosenberg , R. Hill , J. Miller , A. Schulert , D. Shewmake, UIMSs: threat or menace?, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.197-200, May 15-19, 1988, Washington, D.C., United States [doi>10.1145/57167.57200]
• 13: Wenger, E. Glass-box technology: Merging learning and doing. IRL Research Abstract 1 (Palo Alto, CA Institute for Research on Learning), 1988.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.4 OPERATING SYSTEMS
      D.4.7 Organization and Design
          Subjects: Interactive systems

  K. Computing Milieux
  K.6 MANAGEMENT OF COMPUTING AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
      K.6.1 Project and People Management
          Subjects: Systems analysis and design

General Terms:
Design, Human Factors, Management