A model of novice and expert navigation performance in constrained-input interfaces

Many interactive systems require users to navigate through large sets of data and commands using constrained input devices—such as scroll rings, rocker switches, or specialized keypads—that provide less power and flexibility than traditional input devices like mice or touch screens. While performance with more traditional devices has been extensively studied in human-computer interaction, there has been relatively little investigation of human performance with constrained input. As a result, there is little understanding of what factors govern performance in these situations, and how interfaces should be designed to optimize interface actions such as navigation and selection. Since constrained input is now common in a wide variety of interactive systems (such as mobile phones, audio players, in-car navigation systems, and kiosk displays), it is important for designers to understand what factors affect performance. To aid in this understanding, we present the Constrained Input Navigation (CIN) model, a predictive model that allows accurate determination of human navigation and selection performance in constrained-input scenarios. CIN identifies three factors that underlie user efficiency: the performance of the interface type for single-level item selection (where interface type depends on the input and output devices, the interactive behavior, and the data organization), the hierarchical structure of the information space, and the user's experience with the items to be selected. We show through experiments that, after empirical calibration, the model's predictions fit empirical data well, and discuss why and how each of the factors affects performance. Models like CIN can provide valuable theoretical and practical benefits to designers of constrained-input systems, allowing them to explore and compare a much wider variety of alternate interface designs without the need for extensive user studies.

[1]  P. Fitts The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  Bonnie E. John Toward a deeper comparison of methods: a reaction to Nielsen & Phillips and new data , 1994, CHI '94.

[3]  Kenneth E. Iverson,et al.  Notation as a tool of thought , 1980, APLQ.

[4]  Allen Newell,et al.  The psychology of human-computer interaction , 1983 .

[5]  David E. Kieras,et al.  The GOMS family of user interface analysis techniques: comparison and contrast , 1996, TCHI.

[6]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  A predictive model of menu performance , 2007, CHI.

[7]  Jeff Sauro Estimating Productivity: Composite Operators for Keystroke Level Modeling , 2009, HCI.

[8]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  A Predictive Model of Human Performance With Scrolling and Hierarchical Lists , 2009, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[9]  W. E. Hick Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 1948, Nature.

[10]  Yuen Ren Chao,et al.  Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort: An Introduction to Human Ecology , 1950 .

[11]  D E Kieras,et al.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. , 1997, Psychological review.

[12]  Ravin Balakrishnan,et al.  "Beating" Fitts' law: virtual enhancements for pointing facilitation , 2004, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[13]  I. Scott MacKenzie,et al.  Theoretical upper and lower bounds on typing speed using a stylus and a soft keyboard , 1995, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[14]  Juha Lehikoinen,et al.  BinScroll: a rapid selection technique for alphanumeric lists , 2000, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[15]  Shumin Zhai,et al.  Scale effects in steering law tasks , 2001, CHI.

[16]  George Kingsley Zipf,et al.  Human Behaviour and the Principle of Least Effort: an Introduction to Human Ecology , 2012 .

[17]  Allen and Rosenbloom Paul S. Newell,et al.  Mechanisms of Skill Acquisition and the Law of Practice , 1993 .

[18]  I. Scott MacKenzie,et al.  Towards a standard for pointing device evaluation, perspectives on 27 years of Fitts' law research in HCI , 2004, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[19]  Bonnie E. John,et al.  Comparison of GOMS analysis methods , 1998, CHI Conference Summary.

[20]  Edward Cutrell,et al.  Quantitative analysis of scrolling techniques , 2002, CHI.

[21]  Gary M. Olson,et al.  The Growth of Cognitive Modeling in Human-Computer Interaction Since GOMS , 1990, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[22]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Chapter 6 – Usability Testing , 1993 .

[23]  Andrew Sears,et al.  The role of visual search in the design of effective soft keyboards , 2001, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[24]  Michael Freed,et al.  Automating Human-Performance Modeling at the Millisecond Level , 2005, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[25]  Allen Newell,et al.  SOAR: An Architecture for General Intelligence , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[26]  Tue Haste Andersen A simple movement time model for scrolling , 2005, CHI EA '05.

[27]  Juha Lehikoinen,et al.  An Empirical and Theoretical Evaluation of BinScroll: A Rapid Selection Technique for Alphanumeric Lists , 2002, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[28]  Steven C. Seow Information Theoretic Models of HCI: A Comparison of the Hick-Hyman Law and Fitts' Law , 2005, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[29]  Sher ry Folsom-Meek,et al.  Human Performance , 2020, Nature.

[30]  Shumin Zhai,et al.  Beyond Fitts' law: models for trajectory-based HCI tasks , 1997, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[31]  Allen Newell,et al.  The keystroke-level model for user performance time with interactive systems , 1980, CACM.

[32]  H. Albert Napier,et al.  Predicting the Skilled Use of Hierarchical Menus With the Keystroke-Level Model , 1993, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[33]  T. K. Landauer,et al.  Selection from alphabetic and numeric menu trees using a touch screen: breadth, depth, and width , 1985, CHI '85.

[34]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[35]  Anthony J. Hornof,et al.  Cognitive modeling reveals menu search in both random and systematic , 1997, CHI.

[36]  John Millar Carroll HCI Models, Theories, and Frameworks: Toward a Multidisciplinary Science , 2003 .

[37]  K. Stern Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language, Culture, and Personality , 1951 .

[38]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  Supporting Command Reuse: Mechanisms for Reuse , 1993, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[39]  B. John Information Processing and Skilled Behavior , 2003 .

[40]  Bonnie E. John,et al.  CHAPTER 4 – Information Processing and Skilled Behavior , 2003 .

[41]  C. Lebiere,et al.  The Atomic Components of Thought , 1998 .

[42]  R. Hyman Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[43]  Harold W. Thimbleby,et al.  Press on - principles of interaction programming , 2007 .

[44]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Split menus: effectively using selection frequency to organize menus , 1994, TCHI.

[45]  Kenneth R. Koedinger,et al.  Predictive human performance modeling made easy , 2004, CHI.

[46]  E. Sapir,et al.  Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language, Culture, and Personality , 1950 .

[47]  Harold W. Thimbleby,et al.  User interface design , 1990, ACM Press Frontier Series.

[48]  B. L. Whorf Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf , 1956 .

[49]  Erik Nilsen,et al.  PERCEPTUAL-MOTOR CONTROL IN HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERACTION , 1991, SGCH.