skip to main content
10.1145/800045.801577acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Design practice and interface usability: Evidence from interviews with designers

Authors Info & Claims
Published:12 December 1983Publication History

ABSTRACT

Research into human-computer interaction (HCI) is mainly conducted by engineering psychologists, cognitive psychologists and computer scientists. The principal consumers of applied HCI research, on the other hand, are human factors practitioners and system designers and developers. The HCI researcher who believes his or her findings to be of practical relevance has therefore to consider the interface between researcher and practitioner as well as that between system and user: the products of HCI research must not only be relevant but also “user-friendly” to the practitioner. This problem is not merely one of communication between different professional communities, as the optimal route for the translation of research findings into terms that will be of practical use in the design process is itself a matter of considerable uncertainty and debate. Thus there are many instances in the research literature where apparently contradictory recommendations can all too easily be drawn from findings based on sound but, by its very nature, limited experimentation (e.g., compare the findings of Landauer et al., in press, Ledgard et al., 1980, and Scapin, 1981, on naming text-editing operations).

One of the prerequisites for tackling both the communication problem and the translation problem is an understanding of relevant aspects of decision-making in design which influence the usability of the end-user interface. This is so for three reasons. First, an appreciation of the nature of design practice will at least help identify those areas where research input might have the greatest impact and allow researchers to direct their efforts towards them. Second, it may identify possible modifications to existing design practice which would allow research input to be used more effectively. Finally, it would be somewhat surprising if current design practice were not to furnish researchers with any insights into the underlying processes of users. The experience and skills of the practitioner should be a valuable source of information for the HCI researcher. For these reasons, we have been documenting some of the relationships between design practice and the usability of systems for use by non-experts. While there is considerable literature on programming behaviour (e.g. Mayer, 1981), reports of design behaviour are rare, other than occasional descriptions by practitioners of the interface design of their own products (e.g., Botterill, 1982; Smith et al., 1982). This paper focusses on the influence of the individual designer's decision-making. Evidence is taken from interviews with experienced system designers concerning design issues influencing the nature of the user interface which had arisen with systems they had recently worked on. For two of the systems usability investigations had been performed (see Lewis & Mack, 1982 and Hammond et al., 1983).

References

  1. 1.Barnard,P.J. & Hammond,N.V. (1983). Cognitive contexts and interactive communication. IBM Hursley Human Factors Report HF070, Hursley Park, Winchester.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.Botterill,J.H. (1982). The design rationale of the System/38 user interface. IBM Systems Journal, 21, 384-423.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. 3.Hammond,N.V., Morton,J., MacLean,A. & Barnard,P. (1983). Fragments and signposts: Users' models of the system. Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Human Factors in Telecommunications, Helsinki, 81-88.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.Landauer,T., Gallotti,K. & Hartwell,S. (In press). Natural command names and learning: A study of text-editing terms. Communications of the ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. 5.Ledgard,H., Whiteside,J.A., Singer,A. & Seymour,W. (1980). The natural language of interactive systems. Communications of the ACM, 23, 556-563. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. 6.Lewis,C. & Mack,R. (1982). Learning to use a text-processing system: Evidence from "thinking aloud" protocols. In Human Factors in Computer Systems. ACM: Washington, 17-24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. 7.Mayer,R.E. (1981). The psychology of how novices learn computer programming. Computing Surveys, 13, 121-141. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. 8.Scapin,D.L. (1981). Computer commands in restricted natural language: Some aspects of memory and experience. Human Factors, 23, 365-375.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. 9.Smith,D.C., Irby,C., Kimball,R., Verplank,B. & Harslem,E. (1982). Designing the Star user interface. Byte, April, 242-282.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.Wright,P. & Bason,G. (1983). Detour routes to usability: a comparison of alternative approaches to multipurpose software design. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 18, 391-400.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Design practice and interface usability: Evidence from interviews with designers

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '83: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      December 1983
      306 pages
      ISBN:0897911210
      DOI:10.1145/800045

      Copyright © 1983 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 12 December 1983

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader