| Brooks, R. E. Comparative task analysis: An alternative direction for human-computer interaction science. In Carroll [101], ch. 4, pp. 50--61. |
....behavior objectively, most specialists in domains other than psychology are unlikely to have the skill or knowledge to relate their observations to observations made in other domains. Ruven Brooks, Comparative Task Analysis: An Alternative Direction for Human Computer Interaction Science [77], pg. 51. The previous scenario illustrated some of the problems inherent when human computer interaction was treated as a black box, i.e. with maximal ignorance of what is happening when users sit down with the tool. The following scenario illustrates that opening up the black box introduces ....
....It is important to remember the advantages in order to accept what may be unavoidable overheads. Cognitive support models need to explain how tools transform the tasks [470] to improve the cognitive ergonomics. Some method of comparing work done while using different tools must be generated [77]. Ways of establishing work equivalence seem important to making fair evaluations or comparisons of tools. Also required are ways of distinguishing between the main work being done from the overheads created. USABILITY AND TESTING Once a mechanical explanation of leverage is available, it can be ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Brooks, R. E. Comparative task analysis: An alternative direction for human-computer interaction science. In Carroll [101], ch. 4, pp. 50--61.
No context found.
Brooks, R., Comparative Task Analysis: An Alternative Direction for Human-Computer Interaction Science, in Designing Interaction: Psychology at the HumanComputer Interface, J.M. Carroll, ed., 1991, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, England, pp. 50-59.
No context found.
Brooks, R., Comparative Task Analysis: An Alternative Direction for Human-Computer Interaction Science, in Designing Interaction: Psychology at the HumanComputer Interface, J.M. Carroll, ed., 1991, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, England, pp. 50-59.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC