It has suggested that interactive computer users find “exploratory learning” to be an effective and attractive strategy for learning a new system or investigating unknown features of familiar software. In exploratory learning, instead of working through precisely sequenced training materials, the user investigates a system on his or her own initiative, often in pursuit of a real or artificial task. The value of exploratory learning has been studied in controlled settings, with special attention newly acquired systems, be there has been little investigation of its occurrence in natural situations or in support of ongoing learning. To address this question, a field study of the behavior and attitudes of computer users in everyday working situations was performed, using diaries and structured interviews that focused on learning events. The study showed that task-oriented exploration was a widely accepted method for learning, but that it often required support from manuals and from other users or system support personnel. Exploration not related to a current or pending task was infrequent, and most users believed it to be inefficient. These findings have implications for the design of systems, documentation, and training.

Users who have worked with just one or two pieces of application software on a computer system are often faced with the need to use a new piece of software on the same system.Consistency between program interfaces is intended to make the new program easier to learn in this situation, but how "consistency" should be defined is not always clear.We present a model of analogical reasoning that describes how users rely on interface consistency to induce correct actions in a new situation.Versions of the model are implemented in ACT-R and Soar.The model yields a clearer and more principled understanding of design guidelines that recommend interface consistency.

Abstract The programming walkthrough is a method for assessing how easy or hard it will be for users to write programs in a programming language. It is intended to enable language designers to identify problems early in design and to help them choose among alternative designs. We describe the method and present experience in applying it in four language design projects. Results indicate that the method is a useful supplement to existing design approaches.

Many of the principles that guide user-interface design for commercial systems do not scale down to simple applications developed on personal computers. These “very small systems” are typicaly designed within a high-level application such as a database or a spreadsheet. The entire development process may take no more than a few days. In this restricted context, iterative design and usability testing are unaffordable luxuries, while detailed task analysis and early focus on users fail because the task and users will not coalesce until the system is in place. We describe our experiences with developing and using a very small sytem. We present suggestions for successful design in similar situations.

Traditional programminglanguage design has focussed on efficiency and expressiveness, with minimal attention to the ease with which a programmer can translate task requirements into statements in the language, a characteristic we call "facility."The programming walkthrough is a method for assessing the facility of a language design before implementation.We describe the method and its predictions for a graphical programming language, ChemTrains.These predictions are contrasted with protocols of subjects attempting to write their first ChemTrains program.We conclude that the walkthrough is a valuable aid at the design stage, but it is not infallible.Our results also suggest that it may not be enough for programmers to know how to solve a problem; they must also understand why the solution will succeed.

No abstract available.

The value of theoretical analyses in user interface design has been hotly debated. All sides agree that it is difficult to apply current theoretical models within the constraints of real-world development projects. We attack this problem in the context of bringing the theoretical ideas within a model of exploratory learning [19] to bear on the evaluation of alternative interfaces for walk-up-and-use systems. We derived a “cognitive walkthrough” procedure for systematically evaluating features of an interface in the context of the theory. Four people independently applied this procedure to four alternative interfaces for which we have empirical usability data. Consideration of the walkthrough sheds light on the consistency with which such a procedure can be applied as well as the accuracy of the results.