Triggers and barriers to customizing software
CHI '91 Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Human-computer interaction
Learning to use word processors: problems and prospects
ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS)
Image retrieval by color semantics
Multimedia Systems - Special issue on video content based retrieval
GROUP '99 Proceedings of the international ACM SIGGROUP conference on Supporting group work
Human computer interaction models and application development (panel session)
SAC '97 Proceedings of the 1997 ACM symposium on Applied computing
SIGCSE '02 Proceedings of the 33rd SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education
Tool Support for Planning the Restructuring of Data Abstractions in Large Systems
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
A Probabilistic Relational Student Model for Virtual Laboratories
ENC '05 Proceedings of the Sixth Mexican International Conference on Computer Science
The reification of metaphor as a design tool
ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI)
Modeling human computer interactions with automata
ICECS'03 Proceedings of the 2nd WSEAS International Conference on Electronics, Control and Signal Processing
| Hi-index | 4.10 |
Computer-human interfaces are a Rorschach test for their designers-their inner views and biases are unconsciously reflected in the types of user interfaces they construct. There is no "best" way to design a user interface. Interface designers must be aware that a user interface can be based on any of several models, that each model has its advantages, and that their job is to choose the approach most suitable for the project at hand. Two principal approaches are the engineering model and the user-task model. In general, an interface based on the engineering model allows full access to the system's capabilities, whereas an interface based on the user-task model is easier to learn and use but provides access to only a subset of the system capabilities. This article examines the models underlying computer-human interface designs by considering a wide variety of systems, including many from areas outside of computing. These noncomputer examples can be instructive because they are simpler and thus clearer. They also provide some helpful detachment and perspective for those of us who are immersed in computers.