The Evaluation Of User Interface Notations

Over the last decade a wide range of graphical, tabular and textual notations have been proposed to support the design of human-computer interfaces. These notations are intended to strip away the clutter of implementation details that frequently obscure interaction properties. Unfortunately, relatively little work has been done to evaluate the usability of these notations for ‘real-world’ interfaces. We have, therefore, conducted an empirical evaluation of the User Action Notation (UAN), State Transition Networks (STN) and temporal logic ‘in the wild’. By this we mean that our subjects were drawn from realistic samples of users and designers. We also presented our subjects with realistic descriptions of two user interfaces. This avoids a weakness of previous investigations that have used ‘toy examples’. The results of our investigation show a strong preference amongst our subjects for the use of natural language descriptions. More surprisingly, our results also suggest a link between the frequency of comprehension errors and positive attitude statements towards particular notations. In other words, our subjects made most errors with the notations that they liked the best. This suggests that while graphical notations, such as state transition networks, have a strong intuitive appeal they may also create significant problems for real-world development tasks.