Layout attributes and recall

The spatial arrangement of elements such as icons in a computer interface may influence learning the interface. However, the effects of layout organization on users' information processing is relatively little studied so far. The three experiments of this paper examined two attributes of layouts: spatial grouping by proximity and semantic coherence. Learning was assessed by tasks in which 30 participants recalled icon-like items' labels, locations, or both as a series of study-recall trials. The results show that layout organization interacts with task demands. Semantic organization improves recall of labels, and spatial grouping supports recall of locations. When both labels and locations are learned concurrently, the best recall performance is associated with a simultaneously grouped and semantically coherent layout. However, semantic and spatial organization may interact unexpectedly on learning. The findings are discussed from the viewpoint of information chunking in memory processes and interface design.

[1]  Wayne H. Decker,et al.  Spatial Grouping, Imagery, and Free Recall , 1982 .

[2]  E. D. de Haan,et al.  What Was Where? Memory for Object Locations , 1996, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[3]  S. Palmer Common region: A new principle of perceptual grouping , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  Jukka Saarinen,et al.  Visual Search for Grouped versus Ungrouped Icons in a Computer Interface , 2000, Hum. Factors.

[5]  Murray Glanzer,et al.  Distance between related words in free recall: Trace of the STS , 1969 .

[6]  Jorma Sajaniemi,et al.  Extracting implicit tree structures in spreadsheet calculation , 1991 .

[7]  Susan Wiedenbeck,et al.  The use of icons and labels in an end user application program: An empirical study of learning and retention , 1999, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[8]  M. Toglia,et al.  The Blocked-Random Effect in Pictures and Words , 1997, Perceptual and motor skills.

[9]  Pertti Saariluoma,et al.  Do Visual Images have Gestalt Properties? , 1992, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[10]  Aaron Marcus Principles of effective visual communication for graphical user interface design , 1995 .

[11]  D A Allport,et al.  Perceptual integration of identity, location and colour , 1986, Psychological research.

[12]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[13]  Michael D. Byrne,et al.  Using icons to find documents: simplicity is critical , 1993, INTERCHI.

[14]  Richard E. Granda,et al.  The effects of positional constancy on searching menus for information , 1983, CHI '83.

[15]  Max Wertheimer,et al.  Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt , .

[16]  T. McNamara,et al.  Mental Representations of Spatial and Nonspatial Relations , 1989, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[17]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing The User Interface , 2013 .

[18]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .

[19]  D. Sagi,et al.  Perceptual grouping by similarity and proximity: Experimental results can be predicted by intensity autocorrelations , 1995, Vision Research.

[20]  A Treisman,et al.  Feature analysis in early vision: evidence from search asymmetries. , 1988, Psychological review.

[21]  Eva Bertha Kemps,et al.  Effects of Complexity on Visuo-spatial Working Memory , 1999 .

[22]  Gabriel A. Radvansky,et al.  Mental Organization of Maps , 1998 .

[23]  Stuart K. Card,et al.  User perceptual mechanisms in the search of computer command menus , 1982, CHI '82.

[24]  Marc W Howard,et al.  When Does Semantic Similarity Help Episodic Retrieval , 2002 .

[25]  Jorma Sajaniemi,et al.  Visual Information Chunking in Spreadsheet Calculation , 1989, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[26]  Knut Nordby,et al.  Micro‐position effects in visual short term memory , 1997 .

[27]  M. Mascolo,et al.  Effect of semantic clustering on the memory of spatial locations. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[28]  Pertti Saariluoma,et al.  Location Coding in Chess , 1994 .

[29]  Jackie Moyes When users do and don't rely on icon shape , 1994, CHI '94.

[30]  James E. McDonald,et al.  Searching for Items in Menus: The Effects of Organization and Type of Target , 1983 .

[31]  D E Egan,et al.  Chunking in recall of symbolic drawings , 1979, Memory & cognition.

[32]  Philip J. Barnard,et al.  Iconic interfacing: The role of icon distinctiveness and fixed or variable screen locations , 1990, INTERACT.

[33]  Nancy J. Cooke,et al.  Towards Ecological Validity in Menu Research , 1993, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[34]  Sven Blankenberger,et al.  Effects of Icon Design on Human-Computer Interaction , 1991, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[35]  M. Wertheimer Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt. II , 1923 .

[36]  David A. Balota,et al.  Test-expectancy and semantic-organization effects in recall and recognition , 1981 .

[37]  David Gittins,et al.  Icon-Based Human-Computer Interaction , 1986, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[38]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Uniform connectedness and classical gestalt principles of perceptual grouping , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[39]  F. Attneave Symmetry, information, and memory for patterns. , 1955, The American journal of psychology.

[40]  Brian D. Ehret,et al.  Learning where to look: location learning in graphical user interfaces , 2002, CHI.