Andy Cockburn
Saul Greenberg
ABSTRACT
Menus are a primary control in current interfaces, but there has been relatively little theoretical work to model their performance. We propose a model of menu performance that goes beyond previous work by incorporating components for Fitts' Law pointing time, visual search time when novice, Hick-Hyman Law decision time when expert, and for the transition from novice to expert behaviour. The model is able to predict performance for many different menu designs, including adaptive split menus, items with different frequencies and sizes, and multi-level menus. We tested the model by comparing predictions for four menu designs (traditional menus, recency and frequency based split menus, and an adaptive 'morphing' design) with empirical measures. The empirical data matched the predictions extremely well, suggesting that the model can be used to explore a wide range of menu possibilities before implementation.
- Accot, J. and Zhai, S. Beyond Fitts' Law: Models for Trajectory-Based HCI Tasks. Proc. CHI'97, 295--302. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ahlström, D. Modeling and Improving Selection in Cascading Pull-Down Menus Using Fitts' Law, the Steering Law and Force Fields. Proc. CHI'05, 61--70. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Anderson, J., Matessa, M. and Lebiere, C. ACT-R: A theory of higher level cognition and its relation to visual attention. JHCI, 12 (4). 1997. 439--462. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bederson, B. Fisheye Menus. Proc. UIST'00, 217--225. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Byrne, M. ACT-R/PM and menu selection: Applying a cognitive architecture to HCI. IJHCS, 55. 2001. 41--84.Google Scholar
- Byrne, M., Anderson, J., Douglass, S. and Matessa, M. Eye Tracking the Visual Search of Click-Down Menus. Proc. CHI'99, 402--409. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Card, S. Visual search of computer command menus. in Bouma, H. and Bouwhuis, D. eds. Attention and Performance X, LEA, London, 1984, 97--108.Google Scholar
- Card, S., Moran, T. and Newell, A. The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. LEA, 1983. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ellis, S. and Hitchcock, R. Emergence of Zipf's Law: Spontaneous Encoding Optimization by Users of a Command Language. IEEE Tran. Man & Cybernetics, 16, 1986. 423--427. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Findlater,L. and McGrenere,J. A comparison of static, adaptive, & adaptable menus. Proc. CHI'04, 89--96. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fitts, P. The Information Capacity of the Human Motor System in Controlling the Amplitude of Movement. J. Experimental Psych., 47. 1954. 381--391.Google Scholar
- Fitzmaurice, G., Khan, A., Pieke, R., Buxton, M. and Kurtenbach,G. Tracking menus. Proc. UIST'03, 71--79. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Greenberg, S. and Witten, I. Supporting Command Reuse. IJMMS, 39. 1993. 353--390. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gutwin, C. Improving Focus Targeting in Interactive Fisheye Views. Proc. CHI'02, 267--274. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hansen, S., Kraut, R. and Farber, J. Interface Design and Multivariate Analyis of Unix commands. ACM TOIS, 2 (1). 1984. 42--57. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hick, W. On the rate of gain of information. J. Experimental Psychology, 4. 1952. 11--36.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hoffmann, E. and Lim, J. Concurrent manual-decision tasks. Ergonomics, 40 (3). 1997. 293--318.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hornof, A. and Kieras, D. Cognitive Modeling Reveals Menu Search is Both Random and Systematic. Proc. CHI'97, 107--114. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Howes, A., Payne, S. and Woodward, A. The trouble with shortcuts. Proc. CHI'00, 267--268. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hyman, R. Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. J. Experimental Psych., 45. 1953. 188--196.Google ScholarCross Ref
- John, B. and Kieras, D. The GOMS family of user interface analysis techniques: comparison and contrast. ACM TOCHI, 3 (4). 1996. 320--351. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kaptelinin, V. Item Recognition in Menu Selection: The Effect of Practice. Proc. InterCHI'93., 183--184. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kurtenbach, G., Sellen, A. and Buxton, W. An empirical evaluation of some articulatory & cognitive aspects of marking menus. JHCI, 8 (1). 1993. 1--23.Google Scholar
- Landauer, T. and Nachbar, D. Selection from alphabetic and numeric menu trees using a touch screen: breadth, depth and width. Proc. CHI'85, 73--78. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lane, D., Napier, H., Batsell, R. and Naman, J. Predicting the skilled use of hierarchical menus with the keystroke-level model. JHCI, 8 (2). 1993. 185--192.Google Scholar
- Lee, E. and McGregor, J. Minimizing user search time in menu retrieval systems. Human Factors, 27 (2). 1985. 157--162.Google ScholarCross Ref
- MacKenzie, I. and Zhang, S. An empirical investigation of novice experience with soft keyboards. Behaviour & Info. Tech., 20. 2001. 411--418.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Miller, G. The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information. Psychological Review, 63. 1956. 81--97.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nilsen, E. Perceptual-motor control in human computer interaction. Report 37, The Cognitive Sci. & Machine Intelligence Lab., Univ. Michegan, 1991.Google Scholar
- Sears, A., Jacko, J., Chu, J. and Moro, F. The role of visual search in the design of effective soft keyboards. Behavior and Info. Tech., 20. 2001. 159--156.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sears, A. and Shneiderman, B. Split menus: Effectively using selection frequency to organize menus. ACM ToCHI., 1 (1). 2004. 27--51. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Seow, S. Information Theoretic Models of HCI: A Comparison of the Hick-Hyman Law and Fitts' Law. JHCI, 20 (3). 2005. 315--352. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shannon, C. and Weaver, W. The mathematical theory of communications. Urbana: Univ. Illinois Press, 1949. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Somberg, B. A comparison of rule-based and positionally constant arrangements of computer menu items. Proc. CHI+GI '87, 255--260. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Soukoreff, R. and MacKenzie, I. Theoretical upper & lower bounds on typing speed using a stylus and soft keyboard. Behavior & Info. Tech, 14. 1995. 370--379.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zipf, G. Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort: An Introduction to Human Ecology. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1949.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- A predictive model of menu performance
Recommendations
Cognitive modeling demonstrates how people use anticipated location knowledge of menu items
CHI '99: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsThis research presents cognitive models of a person selecting an item from a familiar, ordered, pull-down menu. Two different models provide a good fit with human data and thus two different possible explanations for the low- level cognitive processes ...
Effects of Frequency Distribution on Linear Menu Performance
CHI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsWhile it is well known that menu usage follows a Zipfian distribution, there has been little interest in the impact of menu item frequency distribution on user's behavior. In this note, we explore the effects of frequency distribution on average menu ...
Split menus: effectively using selection frequency to organize menus
When some items in a menu are selected more frequently than others, as is often the case, designers or individual users may be able to speed performance and improve preference ratings by placing several high-frequency items at the top of the menu. ...
Comments