Monitoring and Evaluation of Time Delay

In general, users act as if their behavior is controlled by a self-regulatory system (Carver & Scheier, 1998) during user-system interaction. The self-regulatory system is specified as a feedback control mechanism consisting of monitoring, evaluation, and action adjustment mechanisms. This article investigates whether perception processes take care of monitoring, and if a user's evaluation is based on the interpretation of the results of such monitoring. To do this, a typical system property, time delay, was manipulated. In an experiment, the relation between estimated task duration and actual time-to-task completion was studied. The findings support the premise that perception processes, interpreted as a monitoring mechanism, can keep track of physical task time. A monotonic, positive relation was found between the time-to-task completion and user satisfaction, which supports the assumption that objective efficiency influences the evaluation of interaction. A linear relation between the estimated duration and user satisfaction indicates that the monitoring mechanism transforms physical signals into a format that can be used in the evaluation process, thereby changing the internal reference frame of the evaluation mechanism.

[1]  Daniel G. Bobrow,et al.  SOME PRINCIPLES OF MEMORY SCHEMATA , 1975 .

[2]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Stages and Levels in Human-Machine Interaction , 1984, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[3]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  Towards a Cognitive Theory of Emotions , 1987 .

[4]  H. Eisler,et al.  A mathematical model for time perception with experimentally obtained subjective time scales for humans and rats. , 1991, Chronobiologia.

[5]  M. Cabanac.  Pleasure: the common currency. , 1992, Journal of theoretical biology.

[6]  Alexander I. Rudnicky,et al.  A performance model of system delay and user strategy selection , 1992, CHI.

[7]  D. Zakay.  Time Estimation Methods—Do They Influence Prospective Duration Estimates? , 1993, Perception.

[8]  Paul R. Cohen,et al.  The Interval Reduction Strategy for Monitoring Cupcake Problems , 1994 .

[9]  Daniel C. Dennett,et al.  Cognitive science as reverse engineering several meanings of “Top-down” and “Bottom-up” , 1995 .

[10]  Clifford Nass,et al.  The media equation - how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places , 1996 .

[11]  Fjj Frans Blommaert,et al.  Perceptual error measure and its application to sampled and interpolated single-edged images , 1997 .

[12]  C. Carver,et al.  On the Self-Regulation of Behavior , 1998 .

[13]  C. Carver,et al.  On the Self-Regulation of Behavior , 1998 .

[14]  D Zakay,et al.  Concurrent duration production as a workload measure. , 1998, Ergonomics.

[15]  B. Kahn,et al.  How Tolerable is Delay? Consumers’ Evaluations of Internet Web Sites after Waiting , 1998 .

[16]  Victor S. Johnston.  Why We Feel: The Science Of Human Emotions , 1999 .

[17]  F. Blommaert,et al.  Visual Metrics: Discriminative Power through Flexibility , 2000, Perception.

[18]  B. Mellers.  Choice and the relative pleasure of consequences. , 2000, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  Maria Kutar,et al.  Specifying Multiple Time Granularities in Interactive Systems , 2000, DSV-IS.

[20]  Mary Czerwinski,et al.  Subjective Duration Assessment: An Implicit Probe for Software Usability , 2001 .

[21]  J. Shepperd,et al.  The Affective Consequences of Expected and Unexpected Outcomes , 2002, Psychological science.

[22]  安藤 広志,et al.  20世紀の名著名論：David Marr:Vision:a Computational Investigation into the Human Representation and Processing of Visual Information , 2005 .