Human-computer interaction (2nd ed.)
Human-computer interaction (2nd ed.)
Human-Computer Interaction
Oops! silly me! errors in a handwriting recognition-based text entry interface for children
Proceedings of the second Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction
Requirements for a multimedia museum environment
Proceedings of the third Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction
A review of research methods in children's technology design
Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Interaction design and children
Using the fun toolkit and other survey methods to gather opinions in child computer interaction
Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Interaction design and children
A study of the usability of handwriting recognition for text entry by children
Interacting with Computers
Evaluating Children's Interactive Products: Principles and Practices for Interaction Designers
Evaluating Children's Interactive Products: Principles and Practices for Interaction Designers
Interaction Design and Children
Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction
Design in evaluation: reflections on designing for children's technology
BCS-HCI '07 Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: HCI...but not as we know it - Volume 2
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
When people use interactive technology, they construct a 'mental model' of the processes that are going on. This model assists the user in error repair and in task completion. The mental models that children have of computer systems are known to be brittle and incomplete. This paper describes how three different methods - structured interview, questionnaire, and talk back, were used with 7 and 8-year-old children to identify children's mental models of a handwriting-recognition based interface. The time taken by both the child and the researcher, the insights reported by the children, and the ease of use of each of the three methods is reported. The three methods are then compared, both in terms of cost/benefit and with relation to the influence of the researcher in the process. The paper concludes that the interview and questionnaire were both effective in this study, and that questionnaires can be surprisingly informative with children of this age.