Wayne D. Gray
ABSTRACT
Memory can be internal or external - knowledge in-the-world or knowledge in-the-head. Making needed information available in an interface may seem the perfect alternative to relying on imperfect memory. However, the rational analysis framework (Anderson, 1990) suggests that least-effort tradeoffs may lead to imperfect performance even when perfect knowledge in-the-world is readily available. The implications of rational analysis for interactive behavior are investigated in two experiments. In experiment 1 we varied the perceptual-motor effort of accessing knowledge in-the-world as well as the cognitive effort of retrieving items from memory. In experiment 2 we replicated one of the experiment 1 conditions to collect eye movement data. The results suggest that milliseconds matter. Least-effort tradeoffs are adopted even when the absolute difference in effort between a perceptual-motor versus a memory strategy is small, and even when adopting a memory strategy results in a higher error rate and lower performance.
- 1.Altmann,E.M.,& Gray,W.D.(1999).Serial attention as strategic memory.In M.Hahn & S.C.Stoness (Eds.),Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp.25- 30).Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- 2.Altmann,E.M.,& Gray,W.D.(2000a).An integrated model of set shifting and maintenance.In N.Taatgen &J.Aasman (Eds.),Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Cognitive Modeling (pp. 17-24).Veenendal,NL:Universal Press.Google Scholar
- 3.Altmann,E.M.,&Gray,W.D.(2000b).Managing attention by preparing to forget,Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 44th Annual Meeting .Santa Monica,CA:Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.Google Scholar
- 4.Anderson,J.R.(1990).The adaptive character of thought .Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- 5.Anderson,J.R.(1991).Is human cognition adaptive? Behavioral and Brain Sciences,14 (3),471-517.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 6.Anderson,J.R.,&Lebiere,C.(Eds.).(1998).Atomic components of thought .Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- 7.Ehret,B.D.(1999).Learning where to look:The acquisition of knowledge in display-based interaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,George Mason University,Fairfax,VA.Google Scholar
- 8.Frohlich,D.M.(1997).Direct manipulation and other lessons.In M.Helander T.K.Landauer & P.Prabhu (Eds.),Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (Second ed.,pp.463-488).New York:Elsevier.Google Scholar
- 9.Fu,W.-t.(in press).ACT-PRO:Action protocol tracer --a tool for analyzing simple,rule-based tasks. Behavior Research Methods,Instruments,& Computers .Google Scholar
- 10.Fu,W.-t.,&Gray,W.D.(1999).Redirecting directmanipulation,or,what happens when the goal is in front of you but the interface says to turn left?, Proceedings of the CHI 99 Extended Abstracts (pp. 226-227).New York:ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 11.Fu,W.-t.,&Gray,W.D.(2000).Memory versus Perceptual-Motor Tradeoffs in a Blocks World Task, Proceedings of the Twenty-second Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp.154-159). Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- 12.Gray,W.D.(2000).The nature and processing of errors in interactive behavior.Cognitive Science,24 (2), 205-248.Google Scholar
- 13.Gray,W.D.,&Boehm-Davis,D.A.(in press). Milliseconds Matter:An introduction to microstrategies and to their use in describing and predicting interactive behavior.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Applied .Google Scholar
- 14.Gray,W.D.,John,B.E.,&Atwood,M.E.(1993). Project Ernestine:Validating a GOMS analysis for predicting and explaining real-world performance. Human-Computer Interaction,8 (3),237-309.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 15.Gray,W.D.,&Salzman,M.C.(1998).Damaged merchandise?A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods.Human-Computer Interaction,13 (3),203-261. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 16.Hutchins,E.L.,Hollan,J.D.,&Norman,D.A. (1985).Direct manipulation interfaces.Human- Computer Interaction,1 (4),311-338.Google Scholar
- 17.Karsh,R.,&Breitenbach,F.W.(1983).Looking at looking:The amorphous fixation measure.In R. Groner & C.Menz & D.F.Fisher R.A.Monty (Eds.),Eye movements and psychological functions: International views (pp.53-64).Hillsdale,NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- 18.Kieras,D.E.,&Meyer,D.E.(1997).An overview of the EPIC architecture for cognition and performance with application to human-computer interaction. Human-Computer Interaction,12 (4),391-438. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 19.Larkin,J.H.,&Simon,H.A.(1987).Why a diagram is (sometimes)worth ten thousand words.Cognitive Science,11 ,65-99.Google Scholar
- 20.Norman,D.A.(1989).The design of everyday things . New York:DoubleDay.Google Scholar
- 21.Schunn,C.D.(2000).Statistical significance bars (SSB):A way to make graphs more interpretable. Manuscript submitted for publication .Google Scholar
- 22.Shneiderman,B.(1982).The future of interactive systems and the emergence of direct manipulation. Behaviour and Information Technology,1 (3),237-256.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 23.Simon,H.A.(1974).How big is a chunk?Science, 183 (4124),482-488.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Ignoring perfect knowledge in-the-world for imperfect knowledge in-the-head
Recommendations
User Eye Fatigue Detection via Eye Movement Behavior
CHI EA '15: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing SystemsIn this study we propose and evaluate a novel approach that allows detection of physical eye fatigue. The proposed approach is based on the analysis of the recorded eye movements via what is called behavioral scores. These easy-to-compute scores can be ...
Eye Tracking in Human-Computer Interaction and Usability Research
INTERACT '09: Proceedings of the 12th IFIP TC 13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Part IIThe objective of the tutorial is to give an overview on how eye tracking is currently used and how it can be used as a method in human computer interaction research and especially in usability research. An eye tracking system records how the eyes move ...
Reviews
Christopher Fox
Knowledge in-the-head refers to what is represented in our memories, while knowledge in-the-world is representations obtainable from our environment (although arguably neither of these may in fact be “knowledge”). This article reports on an elaborate experiment, showing that college students who have memorized TV show schedule data can program a computer-simulated VCR better than students doing the task without memorization, but with the data displayed directly before them. This latter group in turn does better than students who must click the mouse to obtain the data. The perfectly reasonable explanation for this is that it takes less effort to disgorge memorized data than to copy it from elsewhere on the screen, and in turn less effort to do either of these than to move and click the mouse to obtain data. The conclusion is that user interfaces must be carefully designed so that using them correctly and without error requires less effort than using them incorrectly or in error. The experiment is well designed and conducted, and its results are well analyzed and reported. It investigates a theory called the rational analysis framework, which claims that the principle of least effort can explain various aspects of human cognitive performance. This theory could surely explain the behavior of college students required to participate in psychology experiments for course credit. This paper sheds no light on how much the theory could explain in other, more interesting circumstances. Online Computing Reviews Service
Access critical reviews of Computing literature here
Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.
Comments