Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Web Design: What’s Next? Mary Czerwinski Microsoft Research PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Overview • A Framework for Evaluating Future Web Designs – 1. Human Capabilities – 2. Technological Trends – 3. Social Use Dynamics • Examples of Web HCI Trends • Web Visualization Studies PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research 1. Current Web UI Designs Weak Support for Human Capabilities Limited Vision (Flat, 2D) Limited Audio One Hand Tied Behind Back No Speech No Gestures Limited Tactile 1 Person PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research 1. Strong Web UI Design Can Leverage... • Perception – Spatial relationships • Cognitive – Pattern recognition – Spatial, temporal memory – Object constancy – Cognitive chunking – Auditory – Attention – Tactile – Categorization • Communication PSHFES, May '98 – Language – Gesture Microsoft Research – Emotion 2. Exploiting Future Technologies • Look for & Exploit Multiple Discontinuities – Higher bandwidth affords multi-channel use – 3D: hardware ubiquitous, advanced displays – Speech + NLP: 30 year research payoff – Passive tracking: cameras ubiquitous – USB: multiple input devices – Audio: rich rendering engines PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research 3. WWW Social Use Trends • Email is the killer app • 34.4 M US adults currently use email (up 44% from last year)* • AOL users say they spend 1/3 of their time in email, another 8% in chat* • More powerful communication software ubiquitous soon PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research *American Internet User Survey, Cyber Dialogue, Inc., Feb., Web Research Framework • Identify and engage human cognitive abilities • Exploit technology discontinuities • Leverage natural social web usage patterns • Result: easier access to more web information • Result: dramatic increase in web user base PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Example Web Trends: Info Vis • Users need global and local info when searching large spaces of WWW – Global---used to guide lower-level, detailed tracking of information during a query • Both levels of detail cropping up in new browsers • Lack of empirical evidence of benefits PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research New Browsers: The Claims • Techniques attempt to exploit pattern perception to enable preattentive interaction (e.g.,Eick, 1997) • Cognitive capacity freed up so user can attend to relevant info related to the search task PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research More Claims • A formula for the next generation UI (Card, 1997) : – Perceptually-loaded, – Use human, time-layered interaction (use human interaction times + object constancy), – Rely on focus + periphery, animated transitions, enlarged, 3D spaces and moving points of view PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Revealing Things--Smithsonian without Walls • http://www.si.edu/rev ealingthings/loadindex.html • Uses everyday objects to tell stories about people, their cultures, ... their possessions. PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research PerspectaView: http://www.perspectaview.com PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research 3D Hyperbolic Space •Tamara Munzner (1997) •Hyperbolic navigation affords a Focus+Context view •Hierarchies of over 20,000 nodes •User studies badly needed PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Semantic VRML Layouts Chen & Czerwinski, 1998 PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Natrifical’s “The Brain” http://www.natrificial.com •Custom design your web sites and docs •See related “thoughts” •Shifting animation disorienting, lose sense of place PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Speech Trends: MSR’s WebGuide Gene Ball--MSR UI Group PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Personal Adaptation Trends •Recommender Systems •Preferences •Profile Info •Privacy and Security Issues PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Case Study Applying Framework • UI Research group studies human spatial abilities to design better electronic worlds • Research ways of chunking multi-modal interaction to reduce cognitive load • Examines 3D text perception at varying perspectives • Researches reading to support novel displays • Explores use of group psychology principles in support of virtual collaboration PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Studies of Browsers: Goals • Initial attempt to track user performance across info vis techniques during queries • Hyperbolic browser versus hierarchical tree • PerspectaView’s “flythrough” user interface • Performance and preference data collected • “Lostness” measures and spatial abilities tracked PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Experiment 1--Method • • • • 16 Ss, all pc and web-savvy, ages 18-60 Tree hierarchy and hyperbolic browser Within Ss design, 512 potential targets 12 searches per browser, browser order counterbalanced • RTs, subjective measures, lostness and spatial ability pretest DVs PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Materials • 512 lower-level entries from Encarta placed onto the web • Hierarchical structure built using same category headers as exist in Encarta today • 3 levels of eight items in hierarchy PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Experiment 1--Results • Lostness: – No difference in lostness – Both hyper and tree browsers scored .38 • Spatial ability – More predictive of fast hyperbolic searching (r=-.47 for hyper, -.39 for tree) PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Experiment 1--Results Avg. Search Times by Trial 120.00 Avg. Search Time (in Seconds) 100.00 80.00 Tree 60.00 Hyper 40.00 20.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 Trial Number PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research 7 8 9 10 Experiment 1--Results • Subjective Measures Hyper Tree Which browser did you like better? 9 7 I liked the browser. (Disagree=1, Agree=5) 3.5 3.62 Right when I started, I knew what I could do with the browser. 3.38 4.44** It was easy to get where I wanted to go with the browser. 3.8 4.1 The browser uses new technology. 3.06 1.5** The browser has appealing graphics. 3.94 2** The browser is easy to use. 3.94 4.19 PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Experiment 1 Discussion • No significant advantage for either browser • Tree hierarchy good for tracking traversal path if used systematically; overviews • Hyperbolic browser best for keeping global/local info in focus; category relatedness and size PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Experiment 2--Perspecta® • Hyperkinetic text and “fly-throughs” • Clients include CineMap, AllTheNews and others • Global and local information maintained, as well as “related topics” and cross-references • Previews of categories before committing PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Experiment 3---Perspecta® PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Experiment 2--Method • • • • • 9 Ss, all PC and web-savvy 18-60 years old, mode=25-35 Access web 4 or more times/week, on avg. 14 movie title searches in CineMap 1st search unassisted, tutorial before searches 2-14 • Same DVs as Exp. 1 (no lostness) PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Experiment 2--Results Subjective Questionnaire Rating Avg. I liked this software (1=disagree, 5=agree) When I started using the software, I knew what info was available. It was easy to get where I wanted to go using this software. This software is easy to use. This software feels familiar. 3.7 3.11 2.9 3.33 2.9 •Spatial pretest mildly related to search speed: r=-.28 PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Experiment 2--Usability Issues • 1 or 2 clicks? • Lack of control in time and space • Category header issues • Too many cross-refs • Related topics trap • Confusion: headers v. titles and links • Small text difficult to read • RSI PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Experiment 2--Good Features • User can “sniff” around without committing • Use size of category to guide search • Use related topics • Use popup titles and info without flying in • Cool! PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Experiments 1 & 2: Discussion • Better than Boolean! Users like visual UIs • Can see local/global focus, size and relatedness (hyperbolic browser) • Can keep track of where you’ve looked (hierarchical tree) • Search hints with little user effort (PerspectaView, hyperbolic browser) PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Discussion Continued • But problems remain: – Users not as overwhelmed with large sets but screen real estate challenges – User/system terminology mismatches & trust – Anchoring – Initial training investment is high – Issues with spatial reasoning abilities &/or age – Need multiple options for searching PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research Web Design: What’s Next? • Look at the trends – Social aspects of web usage (groupware, email, chat) – Technological (hw and sw) – Interaction styles--speech, adaptation, portability • Study human capabilities • Find the “sweet spot” in the design space PSHFES, May '98 Microsoft Research