CS 3724 : Introduction to HCI

CS 3724 : Introduction to HCI

Kibum Kim

Agenda

• Evaluation ( cont.)

– An Empirical Study of Web Personalization Assistants

• Unifying HCI and SE approach

– Unifying SE and UE

• CSCW (Computer-Supported Cooperative Work)

– TeacherBridge: KM in Communities of Educators

• Visualization Design

– Class activity : visualizing travel schedules

Adaptive Web for End-Users• Adaptive Web domain

– Web sites that automatically improve their organization and

presentation by learning from user access patterns.

– Collaboration from diverse research communities:

hypermedia and hypertext, information filtering, intelligent tutoring

systems, natural language generation, usability, data mining, e-

commerce, web agents, recommendation systems, personalization,

and user interface.

• Empirical evaluation can determine the strength and weakness of

each opposed interface design paradigm for supporting end-users in

Adaptive Web domain.

• Direct Manipulation- immediately and explicitly visible interaction

- comprehensibility, predictability, and control

- graphical macros tools for visual programming

• Interface Agents- personal SW assistants using PBE/PBD technique

- users can access information without explicit operation

- allow interface simple and independent of increase of information

- indirect management to engage the user with intelligent SW

* The following empirical study would give some idea how end-users tend to feel about these two user interface technology in web recommendation systems.

User Interface Technologies

• WebPersonalizer* : Agent-Based Personalized Web Recommendation Tool

WebPersonalizer

* B. Mobasher, R. Cooley, and J. Srivastava, “Automatic personalization based on web usage mining,” Communications of the ACM, 43(8), 2000, pp.142-151

AntWorld• AntWorld *: Direct-Manipulated Collaborative Web Recommendation Tool

* P. Kantor, E. Boros, B. Melamed, D.J. Neu, V. Meñkov, Q. Shi, and M. Kim, "Ant World," In Proceedings of SIGIR'99, 1999, pp. 323.

1. Selecting Participants: - Six volunteers: three grads, five males, two CS major, two ISE, one Business, and one Nutrition.

2. Generating and Collecting the Data:- General survey regarding web personalization was conducted during the orientation session.

- Participant performs four benchmark tasks during the evaluation session.

- Also participant completes the questionnaire and brief interviews were conducted after the evaluation.

Comparative Evaluation Experiment

• Four benchmark task problemsSolve the following two problems with/without the "WebPersonalizer" system:Problem 1> In the ACR (Association for Consumer Research) site, find "Date" and "Place" for 2000 Asia-Pacific conference.Problem 2> In the ACR (Association for Consumer Research) site, find "City" for the Society for Consumer Psychology Winter 2000 conference.

Solve the following two problems with/without the "AntWorld" system:Problem 3> Find the "five" cars between $10,000 and $15,000 for "Ford."Problem 4> Find "three" days of coming weather for the city of "Seoul."

• Distribution of benchmark tasks Group WebPersonalizer AntWorld

Problem P 1 P2 P3 P4Subject 1 w/o w w/o wSubject 2 w/o w w/o wSubject 3 w w/o w w/oSubject 4 w w/o w w/oSubject 5 w w/o w w/oSubject 6 w/o w w/o w

Benchmark Task

• With WebPersonalizer, participants were able to solve P1 more quickly by 31% and P2 by 43%. Also visited 59% fewer pages for P1 and 43% for P2.

• In case of AntWorld, they took 46% longer to solve P3 and 80% to solve P4. And visited more pages

Results : Task Performance

Average task completion times Average number of visited pages

Evaluation Questionnaire

• PUEU survey by IBM (Davis, 1989)

• More participants agree that WebPersonalizer is easier to use and useful for their job.

• The results indicate that the participants generally responded

more positively to WebPersonalizer than to AntWorld

Results : questionnaire analysis

Questionnaire statements regarding perceived easy of use Mean (WP) S.Dev. (WP) Mean (AW) S. Dev. (AW)I would find the system easy to use 6.00 0.63 4.33 2.16

Questionnaire statements regarding perceived usefulnessI would find the system useful in my job 5.17 1.33 3.50 2.81

Conclusion & Discussion

• The benchmark test results emphasized the importance of user

interface and ease of use.

• Initiating all tasks explicitly and monitoring all events using DM

interface might be considered inconvenient by new, untrained users.

• However, the participants did not have to learn anything new or

special in order to use WebPersonalizer.

• A lower likelihood of feedback is another problem for AntWorld.

• The interface design has an important effect on end-users’

experience in their first episode with Adaptive Web system.

Agenda



• Unifying HCI and SE approach– SE development process– UE development process– Unifying SE and UE





• Software process: a set of activities whose goal is the development or evaluation of software.

• These activities are:

1. Software specification - functionality and constraints must be defined.

2. Software development – the software to meet the specification must be produced

3. Software validation – the software must be validated to ensure the customer’s want

4. Software evolution – the software must evolve to meet changing customer needs

Software Engineering Process

• Software engineering method: a structured approach to SW development whose aim is to facilitate the production of high-quality SW in a cost-effective way.

• The history of SW method:

1. Function-oriented methods: Structured Analysis (DeMarco, 1978) and Jackson Structured Development (JSD, 1983)

2. Object-oriented methods: Booch, 1994; Blaha et al., 1991

3. Unified Modeling Language (UML) – Fowler and Scott,1997; Rumbaugh et al., 1999; Jacobson et al., 1999.

Software Engineering Method

JSD ->

• Various models: water fall model, evolutionary development, formal systems development, workflow model, data-flow model, role

model, spiral model

Software Engineering Process Model

• Usability is a combination of the following user-oriented attributes:

1. Learnabiliy – the user can rapidly start getting some work done with the system.

2. Efficiency – once the user has learned, a high level of productivity is possible.

3. Memorability – the casual user is able to return to the system after some period, without having to learn everything all over again.

4. Errors – users make few errors during the use, and if make errors user can easily recover. Further, no catastrophic errors occur.

5. Satisfaction – The system should be pleasant to use.

Usability Engineering Process

• There are three general principles for the process of user interaction development (Gould, et.al, 1991; Hix and Hartson, 1993)

1. Development should include early and continuous empirical testing, during which appropriate users perform representative tasks.

2. As development proceeds, it should incorporate subsequent iterative refinement procedures and cost/benefit analyses to determine the most cost effective changes required by the user interaction design.

3. The management process should verify and control the overall development life cycle and assign accountability for each step.

Principles for the UE Process

• Various models: Star life cycle, Logical user centered interaction design (LUCID), Lucid-star*(LSS)

Usability Engineering Process Model

• Usability in software development

- The purpose is to increase user efficiency, satisfaction, and productivity.

- If users don’t think the system will help them perform their tasks, they are less likely to accept it.

- But, applying usability techniques is difficult because SW engineers and Usability engineers have different visions, goals and requirements.

• Connecting SE and UE process

-Rapid prototyping and formative evaluation is located in the early development cycle.

- Because costs are added only to a limited part of the total development process, added costs are minimal. Furthermore, UE can save many other costs, such as expenditures involving user-training, user errors and maintenance of a help desk and user support operations (personware).

Unifying HCI and SE process

Unifying SE and UE process

Agenda








The Current Situation: Teachers as Autonomous Knowledge Workers

For this semester, Sue, a high school Math teacher, is teaching basic probability and statistics concepts to her students. She wants to create the site that shows the example of harmonic mean, but she just knows text-related simple HTML markup tags. She does not know how to create tables, histograms and equations (actually, she has doubt about whether HTML can support those contents). During the traditional school day, Sue has difficulty creating a common time slot to collaborate with other teachers. Therefore, she has been forced to create the site on her own at home after school.

Extending the KM Vision to Educators

• Promote collaboration, increase idea creation, solve problems and therefore, foster social capital

• Teachers recognize the potential benefits of knowledge sharing through wired communities

• Use of technology changes how teachers learn as well as how teachers teach

Tapped In : Teacher Professional Development institute

Online workplace of an international community of education professionals for professional development programs and informal collaborative activities with colleagues

ILF : Inquiry Learning Forum• Online community of K-12 math and science educators

to share, improve, reflect, and create learner-centered classrooms

TeacherBridge (Basic Resources for Integrated Distributed Group Environment)

• A network developed for collaborative construction and sharing of online resources

(http://teacherbridge.cs.vt.edu)

WebPal : Example of Teachers’ Personalized Long Term Task

Integrating Web and Client-side Authoring

Web Editor Full Editor

• For basic editing within a browser

• No extra software

• Should work on any machine (old, slow, “locked-down”)

• Not graphical (uses simple shorthand)

• Creates basic pages with formatted text

• Launches interactive editing software

• Available on the Web as you work

• Useful for “live” editing of content

• Sharable in real time with others who are logged in

• Supports uploading files and creating additional objects/tools

• Provides chat capabilities

• New tools in the works to support new kinds of classroom activities

Encouraging Adoption of TeacherBridge

• One of the fundamental design goals of TeacherBridge: facilitate teacher participation in knowledge sharing activities

• Teachers’ lack of time for online activities, difficulty learning the required commands and how to navigate the site

• Minimize the amount of effort, technological savvy, and time required

Apply minimalist design principles to TeacherBridge tools and activities

Minimalist Theory

• Originally, the design of training materials for computer users

• Extended both to applications and to other technological domains

• Present the smallest possible obstacles to learner’s efforts

• Accommodate all learning strategies

Minimalist approach as design features

Minimalist approach as design features to generate system easier to learn and to use

Minimalism Design features• Working on real tasks Meaningful tasks for each teacher • Getting started quickly Making templates available• Reasoning and improvising Providing discussion spaces• Reading in any order Organizing small units and providing search functionality.• Coordinating system and training Creating tutorial under full systems• Supporting error recognition and recovery Providing history and feedback• Exploiting prior knowledge Common ground metaphor interface• Using the situations Participatory design

Activity Theory and TeacherBridge• Human activity can be depicted as subject-

object-community triangle expanded with societally constituted forms of mediation: tools, rules and division of labor

Tools: technology, methods

Subject: teachers

Rules: Disciplines, social norms

Community: Local Math & Science teachers

Division of Labor: Leaders, Contributors, Learner

Object: TeacherBridge

Outcome: Knowledge sharing environment

Agenda






• Visualization Design (hw 6)


Demo Video

SHriMP: Simple Hierarchical Multi-Perspective

• Data -> Visual mapping– sw structure -> nested graphs (containment)– code -> within hypertext linked node

• Navigation Strategy– combines both Pan+zoom and fisheye-view

• multiple focal points: fisheye-view (or dragonflyeye-view)

– browsing source code through hypertext

Class Activities• Data: The general problem is as follows. The data consists of a set of people traveling to

various destinations around the world. For each person, the data includes a list of destinations (name and geographic location), the time schedule (travel times, and length of stay), travel methods (e.g. airline, car, train, hitchhike,...). Destinations include long stays as well as very short stays (e.g. flight layovers, stopping for the night when driving, etc). Note that timezones mean same times at different locations have different clock times/dates. The data could be for future or past schedules. As to scalability, you should aim for as large a set of travelers and destinations as possible.

• Example domains for this general problem are:– Terrorist detection: Intelligence agencies track the travel plans and histories of a large group of

suspected terrorists. Analysts discover potential attack plans or analyze previous attacks to identify likely terrorist participants.

• Insights: Your visualization should provide insight into the travel schedules and the inter-relationships between them. In the case of terrorist detection, typical tasks include:

– when will each person be where? – when and where are potential group meetings? (e.g. so we can bomb them!) – is anyone traveling together? (e.g. potential hijacking) – is anyone flying at same time in different locations? (e.g. potential mass hijacking) – are there multi-person delivery sequences? (e.g. person A visits person B, then person B visits

person C, ...) – or information dissemination trees? (e.g. person A visits B and C, ...) – who doesn't seem to fit in with the rest? (e.g. probably not a terrorist)

Dheva(AR 345)

Pak(CAL 678)

Yan(UA 457)

Dan(AA 345)

Paul(Aumtrack

01)

Bob(KAL 782)

John(JAL 102)

Sydney 10 pm

12pm1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12am1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1010 11

John

Nov. 19, 2003

Bob

Reading Requirement

• UE 9.1 – 9.4

The Knowledge Management Vision

• Key-differentiating factor in business organizations

• Explicit KW and tacit KW

• Incentives for teachers to contribute knowledge

• Opportunity to refocus KM to support wired communities of educators

Challenges for Wired Communities Technology

• How to facilitate knowledge capture and utilization

• Temporal and spatial limitations as well as individualism in the culture of schools

• Need to accomplish strong social and intellectual benefits

• Innovative technology

The TeacherBridge visionSue, a high school Math teacher, is interested in helping her students

understand basic probability and statistics concepts. She launches her web browser, which opens to her TeacherBridge home page. Among other things, this page contains a list of her class project sites, with recently modified projects appearing at the top. The very top project shown is the site that she has created for her harmonic mean project. When she clicks on the top one in the list, she is taken to a page with details on the harmonic mean project, including collaborative data tables of temperatures and histograms containing the results of harmonic means for each data table.

She wants to add the complex formula that calculates a harmonic mean on her

project site, and tries to figure out how to do it. She knows from discussions at the last system-wide meeting of Math teachers that classes at other schools are probably conducting similar projects for basic probability and static concepts.

When she enters the full editor mode, the Users window pops up and shows

other teachers who are currently using the TeacherBridge system. Sue notices Mary, a high school Math teacher, and asks her help for creating the formula equation, using a chat tool in TeacherBridge. Mary shows Sue how to create the formula, using a collaborative equation editor in TeacherBridge.

Fig. Teacher-driven Harmonic Mean formula creating scenario

Discussion• Ubiquitous access to the Internet

• New communication patterns

• Socio-technical infrastructure to support and reshape the process of knowledge sharing and organizational learning

• Facilitate teachers’ involvement in knowledge-sharing activities

• Facilitate management of professional resources at home

Documents

CS 3724 : Introduction to HCI