skip to main content
10.1145/800049.801773acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Can we expect to improve text editing performance?

Published:15 March 1982Publication History

ABSTRACT

For some time now we have also been interested in studying human factors aspects of computer text editors. We have surveyed the literature [9], and we have conducted several investigations of our own [10] ranging from an application of file-comparison algorithms in editor research [1], through prediction of editing performance [7], to the design and implementation of SIMPLE, our own editing system for beginners [8, 11].

Currently we are concentrating our efforts on gathering data to determine how much time users spend performing various editing activities. We intend to extend the work begun in previous studies, to investigate suboptimal editor performance including errors and nonoptimal means of achieving goals, and to study the broder aspects of editing such as file manipulation and job control that have largely been ignored.

References

  1. 1.Anandan, P., Embley, D.W., and Nagy, G. An application of file-comparison algorithms to the study of program editors, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, Vol. 13, No. 2, August 1980, 201-211.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. 2.Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., and Newell, A. The manuscript editing task: a routine cognitive skill, Xerox Research Rep. SSL-76-8, Palo Alto Research Center, Palo Alto, California, December 1976.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.Card, S.K. Studies in the psychology of computer text editing systems, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Psychology, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; also Xerox Research Rep. SSL-78-1, Palo Alto Research Center, Palo Alto, California, August 1978.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., and Newell, A. Computer text editing: an information-processing analysis of a routine cognitive skill, Cognitive Psychology, Vol. 12, 1980a, 32-74.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. 5.Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., and Newell, A. The keystroke-level model for user performance time with interactive systems, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 23, No. 7, July 1980b, 396-410. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. 6.Coombs, M.J. and Alty, J.L. (Eds) Computing Skills and the User Interface. Academic Press, London, 1981. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. 7.Embley, D.W., Lan, M.T., Leinbaugh, D.W., and Nagy, G. A procedure for predicting program editor performance from the user's point of view, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, Vol. 10, No. 6, November 1978, 639-650.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. 8.Embley, D.W. and Nagy, G. SIMPLE specifications, Department of Computer Science Rep., University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska, June 1979.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.Embley, D.W. and Nagy, G. Behavioral aspects of text editors, Computing Surveys, Vol. 13, No. 1, March 1981a, 33-70. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.Embley, D.W. and Nagy, G. Empirical and formal methods for the study of computer editors, in Computing Skills and the User Interface, M.J. Coombs and J.L. Alty (eds.), Academic Press, London, 1981b, 465-496.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.Embley, D.W. and Nagy, G. SIMPLE - a programming environment for beginners, SIGCSE Bulletin, Vol. 13, No. 4, December 1981, 7-12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. 12.Hammer, J.M. and Rouse, W.B. Analysis and modeling of freeform text editing behavior, Proceedings of the 1979 International Conference on Cybernetics and Society, Denver, Colorado, October 1979.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.Hammer, J.M. The human as a constrained optimal text editor, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois, Urbana Illinois; also Coordinated Science Laboratory Rep. T-105, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, June 1981. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. 14.Ledgard, H., Whiteside, J.A., Singer, A., and Seymour, W. The natural language of interactive systems, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 23, No. 10, October 1980, 556-563. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. 15.Roberts, T.L. Evaluation of computer text editors, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California; also Xerox Research Rep. SSL-79-9, Palo Alto, California, November 1979. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. 16.Shneiderman, B. Software Psychology, Winthrop, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1980.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.Weinberg, G.M. The Psychology of Computer Programming, Van Nostrand Reinholt, New York, 1971. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Can we expect to improve text editing performance?

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            CHI '82: Proceedings of the 1982 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
            March 1982
            399 pages
            ISBN:9781450373890
            DOI:10.1145/800049

            Copyright © 1982 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 15 March 1982

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • Article

            Acceptance Rates

            CHI '82 Paper Acceptance Rate75of165submissions,45%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader