PAPERBACK Free Resources |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 1
INTRODUCTION
At present, software for specific applications and
user-computer interfaces are aggressively developed in
industry, but they are designed largely with only the
designer's intuition as guide and often without empirical
testing with end users. Two observations made in a
popular software magazine point out the resulting problem:
The computer systems and software we have today
are too damn complicated for the end user. There
is too much to learn, too many fiddly details, too
much jargon, too much said that shouldn't be and
not enough said that should be . . . (A.
Johnson-Liaird, Software News, Apt il 1982) .
Data processing still has one ongoing problem to
solve: the end user 'n dissatisfaction with
today's systems. The entire industry has been
grappling with this problem of ergonomics, or the
Interface between human and machine. In the case
of data processing, ergonomics involves the
development of ~user-friendly. systems which can
be operated by the user at the terminal and which
generate results that the user can understand and
utilize (M. Parks, Software News, February 1983).
Because of such difficulties, some industry and
academic research groups are developing an interest in
gathering and building appropriate guidelines from basic
research and incorporating these guidelines and observa-
~cions of users' behavior into the design process. A new
field has emerged called software psychology or the
psychology of human-computer interaction. It is in a
very exciting state--a relatively new amalgam of
1
OCR for page 2
2
experimental/cognitive psychology, computer science,
business, and engineering.
The field is growing in a variety of sectors. There
are more human factors groups in industry than ever
before. Approximately 50 universities in this country
and abroad have PhD programs in human-computer inter-
action, which are housed in psychology, computer science,
social sciences, engineering, business, and English
departments (Mantel and Smelcer, 1984). Many more schools
offer one or more courses in the area. The Association
for Computing Machinery has a Special Interest Group for
Computer-Buman Interaction (SIGCHI). The Human Factors
Society has a group called the Computer Systems Technical
Group, which is concerned with human factors aspects of
interactive computing systems, the data processing
environment, and software development. Consumer demand
for computers is increasing at a rapid pace, and many
schools are acquiring computers for tutoring and the
word-processing and mathematical tools that they provide.
The systems that sell are those that provide the right
usability and functionality--that provide the right
design for the end user.
TEE NEED FOR NEW METRODS
Designing systems to fit the end user is a difficult
process. The field is searching for new methods.
Classical experimental design. (e.g., controlled
factorial designs) may not be appropriate for industrial
nettings in which cost-effectiveness and timeliness are
major concerns. Rowever, tests of single, intuition-
driven designs with users, measuring their performance
and satisfaction, do not advance our general knowledge
about designs and do not indicate why certain features
are good or bad.
There are, however, hybrid methods being used in
industry, and new, more complex laboratory tests being
constructed to assess users' performance in and under-
standing of complex systems. These methods are described
below, along with their advantages and disadvantages and
where they f it into the product development cycle. Each
method is annotated with references to a few key articles
that repor t its use .
OCR for page 3
3
THE PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT CYCLE
Software products are typically developed in three
general stages:
1. Analysis--the product's functionality and
initial hardware/software constraints are
determined, analysis is made of the product's
projected costs and benefits, and a
development schedule is projected.
Design--the product is designed, first at the
level of functional specifications and later
in complete de ta il. then coded and tes ted,
ending with a running system.
3. Implementation--the product is distributed and
installed in its f inal locations, and users
are trained and then operate the equipment
At all three stages human factors considerations
appear:
, —
1. In assessing user n' needs and capabilities
dur ing the analys is phase
In designing and redesigning the system with
human factors pr inciples of usability, and in
testing prototypes with end users dur ing the
design stage; and
3. In monitoring use of the system after its
implementation, gather ing information for
redesign to correct errors or to add new,
useful features.
Sin what follows the methods appropriate to each of
these stages are described. These methods, or their
variants, are useful for both laboratory research and
industry. They may be used in the slower, more con-
trolled environment of the laboratory, where research is
designed to study people's performance on complex tasks.
And they contribute equally to design and evaluation in
industry, where timeliness is frequently considered to be
more important than the ability to generalize from the
results.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
dur ing
