1 / 43

User Interface Design Consequences

By Corey Pennycuff. User Interface Design Consequences. Overview of Topics. Learning an Interface Navigating Data Market Results. Learning an interface. Problem: How do you teach someone a complicated interface? Specific case: Learning to use a desktop application. Cognitive Load Theory.

viola
Download Presentation

User Interface Design Consequences

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. By Corey Pennycuff User Interface Design Consequences

  2. Overview of Topics • Learning an Interface • Navigating Data • Market Results

  3. Learning an interface • Problem: How do you teach someone a complicated interface? • Specific case: Learning to use a desktop application

  4. Cognitive Load Theory • Intrinsic cognitive load • complexity and difficulty of the task • Extraneous cognitive load • improperly designed instructional material • Germane cognitive load • construction and automatization of schemata

  5. Cognitive Load Theory • Application in Software engineering • If the problem is complex and requires a complex interface, how can the interface be manipulated to facilitate learning?

  6. Early Discoveries • Users don't read manuals! • Users don't ask for help! • Users use trial and error!

  7. Three ways to modify a GUI for learning • Adaptive - automatically change by tracking most often used features • Adaptable - can be customized by user or a teacher • e.g., Training wheel interfaces • Mixed - combination of Adaptive and Adaptable

  8. Concerns when learning an interface • Findability • The user’s ability to find an option or function within an application’s interface • Awareness • The user’s level of perception of the capability of the application

  9. Ways to reduce complexity by structuring • Grouping functionality in dropdown menus • Subdividing menus • Showing only part of a menu • Right click context menus • Grouping functions in tabs • Palette windows

  10. Reduce complexity by functionality • Disable inapplicable items • Customizing toolbars • Offer multi-layer interfaces (novice to expert)

  11. Learning Path

  12. Full Interface

  13. Reduced Interface

  14. Compressed Interface

  15. Question: How does changing the interface affect learning? (1) • Full Interface • Findability - high • Awareness - high • Time to learn – longer • Reduced Interface • Findability - high • Awareness - low • Time to learn - short

  16. Question: How does changing the interface affect learning? (2) • Compressed Interface • Findability - high • Awareness - low • Time to learn - short

  17. Significance of results • UI should be modeled with long term intent in mind

  18. Visualizing Data • Problem: How can information be presented to users? • Specific case: Browsing a taxonomy

  19. Taxonomy • Hierarchical arrangement of categories • Advantage • Easy to identify relational information • Predictable placement • Disadvantage • Can be difficult to navigate • May require prior knowledge of subject matter • Cross-category inclusion

  20. Current obstacles in learning software • Commercial software - designed to be sold to adults • Institutional software - formal instruction • What's missing? • Exploration.

  21. Two visualization strategies tested • Lists • Circular Visual arrangement • Radial layout technique

  22. Lists (1)

  23. Lists (2)

  24. Circular (1)

  25. Circular (2)

  26. Circular (3)

  27. Results • Failed lookup rate - same for both interfaces • Mean search time - slightly less for list • Gender - no significant difference • Likability of interface - List • Circle likability correlated to video game usage

  28. Subjective Results From Users • Easier - List • Fun - Circle • Faster - List • Emotion • List - Familiar • Circle - Cooler

  29. Significance of results • Design for the desired experience of users, or let users decide

  30. Market Results • Question: How does User Interface Design affect market performance?

  31. Known factors • More choices do not always lead to better outcomes • fear of regret, missed opportunities, curse of high expectations, self-blame • Reality doesn't match economic theory • Cognitive cost • Bounded time for decision making • Bounded computational resources • Different interfaces optimal for different groups • Honorable mention: SUPPLE http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~kgajos/research/supple

  32. Market Design and UID areImportant Because: • UI is first point of contact in new market • UI choice constrains design space • UI defines how & how well user can express themselves • UI complexity imposes cognitive load

  33. Experiment: Allocate Bandwidth for a Month of Mobile Usage • Four design levers • Number of choices • Fixed vs. Changing price • Fixed vs. Adaptive choice sets • UI Optimization

  34. Number of Choices Example

  35. Results: Choice • More results = suboptimal decision • (increase choice options by 1 reduces optimal choice by 32%) • Incomplete searches can lead to positioning effects • Users make the wrong choice if there is a negative association with that choice

  36. Fixed vs. Adaptive Example

  37. Results: Fixed vs. Adaptive • Possible choices better tailored to situation • User had to process all information every time • Users made better decisions despite increased cognitive load

  38. UI Optimization Example

  39. Results: UI Optimizations • Generated using Optimal vs. Sub-optimal (derived) models • Less rational users did better in sub-optimal layouts

  40. Significance of Results • UI can significantly influence a user's performance in market conditions. • More study is needed in this field!

  41. References • Large, AndrewBeheshti, JamshidClement, IanTabatabaei, NahidTam, MorniTak Yin. "Visualizing A Hierarchical Taxonomy In A Children's Web Portal: User Evaluations Of A Prototype." Canadian Journal Of Information & Library Sciences 33.3/4 (2009): 255-282. Professional Development Collection. Web. 20 Sept. 2012. • Schimpf, Spannagel. "Reducing the graphical user interface of a dynamic geometry system". ZDM. 2011. Volume 43. Number 3. Pages 389-397. • Sven Seuken, David C. Parkes, Eric Horvitz, Kamal Jain, Mary Czerwinski, and Desney Tan. 2012. Market user interface design. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 898-915. DOI=10.1145/2229012.2229080 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2229012.2229080

More Related