Formal Modelling of Salience and Cognitive Load

Well-designed interfaces use procedural and sensory cues to increase the salience of appropriate actions and intentions. However, empirical studies suggest that cognitive load can influence the strength of procedural and sensory cues. We formalise the relationship between salience and cognitive load revealed by empirical data. We add these rules to our abstract cognitive architecture developed for the verification of usability properties. The interface of a fire engine dispatch task used in the empirical studies is then formally verified to assess the salience and load rules. Finally, we discuss how the formal modelling and verification suggests further refinements of the rules derived from the informal analysis of empirical data.

[1]  Wayne D. Gray.  The nature and processing of errors in interactive behavior , 2000, Cogn. Sci..

[2]  Nilli Lavie,et al.  The role of perceptual load in inattentional blindness , 2007, Cognition.

[3]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Formal Modelling of Cognitive Interpretation , 2006, DSV-IS.

[4]  Philip J. Barnard,et al.  Interactions with Advanced Graphical Interfaces and the Deployment of Latent Human Knowledge , 1994, DSV-IS.

[5]  James Reason,et al.  Human Error , 1990 .

[6]  A. Newell.  Unified Theories of Cognition , 1990 .

[7]  Michael D. Byrne,et al.  Visual Cues to Reduce Errors in a Routine Procedural Task , 2004 .

[8]  Howard Bowman,et al.  Analysing Cognitive Behaviour using LOTOS and Mexitl , 1999, Formal Aspects of Computing.

[9]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Proc. DSVIS 2006 , 2007 .

[10]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Demonstrating the Cognitive Plausibility of Interactive System Specifications , 2000, Formal Aspects of Computing.

[11]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Multiple resources and performance prediction , 2002 .

[12]  David A. Duce,et al.  Syndetic Modelling , 1998, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[13]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Slip errors and cue salience , 2007, ECCE '07.

[14]  P. Palanque,et al.  Design, Specification and Verification of Interactive Systems ’95 , 2000, Eurographics.

[15]  M. Byrne,et al.  A Working Memory Model of a Common Procedural Error , 1997 .

[16]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Combining Human Error Verification and Timing Analysis , 2008, EHCI/DS-VIS.

[17]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Detecting Multiple Classes of User Errors , 2001, EHCI.

[18]  John M. Rushby,et al.  Analyzing Cockpit Interfaces Using Formal Methods , 2001, FM-Everywhere@FORTE/PSTV.

[19]  Nancy G. Leveson,et al.  An investigation of the Therac-25 accidents , 1993, Computer.

[20]  E. Allen Emerson,et al.  Computer Aided Verification , 2000, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[21]  A. Hale,et al.  Individual behaviour in the control of danger. , 1987 .