Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:53:27.615Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An invited article Facilitating human–computer communication

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

John B. Black  and
Marc M. Sebrechts
John B. Black*
Affiliation:
Yale University
Marc M. Sebrechts
Affiliation:
Wesleyan university
*
John B. Black, Yale University, Department of Psychology, Box 11A Yale Station, New Haven, Conn. 06520
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Basic cognitive psychology can provide guidelines for how to design computer systems that are easy for people to use. Prior knowledge of the real world and natural language affect the way people use computers, so computer systems that are consistent with this prior knowledge are easier for people to use. Providing users with mental models for a computer system will allow them to solve more complex problems and understand sequences of commands better. Computer systems should be flexible to accommodate the individual differences between users, but the complexity of understandable computer systems is constrained by the limited information processing capacity of users. The domain of human–computer communication promises to be a fertile domain for applied tests of cognitive theories.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , May 1981 , pp. 149 - 177
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abbott, V., & Black, J. B. The representation of scripts in memory. Cognitive Science Technical Report, No. 5. New Haven, Conn: Yale University, 1980.Google Scholar
Adelson, B. Problem solving and the development of abstract categories in programming languages. Memory and Cognition, in press.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R.Language, memory and thought. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1976.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R., & Bower, G. H.Human associative memory. Washington, D.C.: Winston, 1973.Google Scholar
Baker, J. B., & Goldstein, I.Batch vs. sequential displays: Effects on human problem solving. Human Factors, 1966, 8, 225–235.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnard, P. J., Hammond, N. V., Morton, J., Long, J. B., & Clark, I. A. Consistency and compatibility in human/computer dialogue. International Journal of Man-machine Studies, in press.Google Scholar
Black, J. B., & Bern, H. Causal coherence and memory for events in narratives. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, in press.Google Scholar
Boehm, B. W.Software and its impact: A quantitative assessment. Datamation. 1973, 19, 44–59.Google Scholar
Bower, G. H., Black, J. B., & Turner, T. J.Scripts in memory for text. Cognitive Psychology, 1979, 11, 177–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bott, R. A. A study of computer learning: Theory and methodologies. Center for Human Information Processing Technical Report No. 82. University of California, San Diego, 1979.Google Scholar
Bransford, J. D., & Johnson, M. K. Consideration of some problems of comprehension. In Chase, W. G. (Ed.), Visual information processing. New York: Academic Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Broadbent, D. E. The magic number seven after fifteen years. In Kennedy, A. & Wilkes, A. (Eds.) Studies in long term memory. New York: Wiley, 1975.Google Scholar
Brooks, R.Towards a theory of the cognitive processes in computer programming. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 1977, 9, 737–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, S. K., Moran, T. P., & Newell, A.Computer text editing: An information-processing analysis of a routine cognitive skill. Cognitive Psychology, 1980a, 12, 32–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, S. K., Moran, T. P., & Newell, A.The keystroke-level model for user performance time with interactive systems. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 1980b, 23, 396–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. M. Learning, using, and designing command paradigms. IBM Research Report RC 8141, 1980.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Clark, E. V.Psychology and language. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1977.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Haviland, S. E. Comprehension and the given-new contract. In Freedle, R. O. (Ed.) Discourse production and comprehension. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing, 1977.Google Scholar
Crowder, R.G.Principles of learning and memory. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1976.Google Scholar
Curtis, B. In search of software complexity. Proceedings of the Workshop on Quantitative Models of Software Reliability, Complexity and Cost. New York: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 1979.Google Scholar
Dahl, O. T., Dijkstra, E. W., & Hoare, C. A. R.Structured programming. London: Academic Press, 1972.Google Scholar
de Villiers, P. A.Imagery and theme in recall of connected discourse. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974, 103, 263–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Digital Equipment Corporation. Getting started with DECSYSTEM-20. Maynard, Mass.: Digital Equipment Corporation, 1978.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, E. W.Letter to the editor. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 1968, 11, 147–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolotta, T. A.Data processing in 1980–1985. New York: Wiley, 1976.Google Scholar
Flesch, R. F.A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1948, 32, 221–223.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fromkin, V.Speech errors as linguistic evidence. The Hague: Mouton, 1973.Google Scholar
Garner, W. R.The acquisition and application of knowledge: A symbiotic relation. American Psychologist, 1972, 27, 941–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilman, L., & Rose, A. J.APL: An interactive approach. New York: Wiley, 1974.Google Scholar
Gould, J. D.Some psychological evidence on how people debug computer programs. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 1975, 7, 151–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, J. D. & Drongowski, P.An exploratory study of computer program debugging. Human Factors, 1974, 16, 258–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, T. R. G.Conditional program statements and their comprehensibility to professional programmers. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 1977, 50, 93–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, T. R. G. Programming as a cognitive activity. In Smith, H. T. & Green, T. R. G. (Eds.) Human interaction with computers. London: Academic Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Halstead, M. H.Elements of software science. New York: Elsevier North-Holland, 1977.Google Scholar
Haviland, S. E. & Clark, H. H.What’s new? Acquiring new information as a process in comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1974, 13, 512–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes-Roth, B., & Walker, C.Configural effects in human memory: The superiority of memory over external information sources as a basis for inference verification. Cognitive Science, 1979, 3, 119–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, W.The principles of psychology. New York: Holt, 1890.Google Scholar
Kemeny, J. G., & Kurtz, T. E.BASIC programming. New York: Wiley, 1971.Google Scholar
Kernigan, B. W., & Ritchie, D. M.The C programming language. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1978.Google Scholar
Ledgard, H., Whiteside, J. A., Singer, A., & Seymour, W.The natural language of interactive systems. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 1980, 10, 556–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E.Different problem-solving competencies established in learning computer programming with and without meaningful models. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975, 67, 725–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E.Can advance organizers influence meaningful learning? Review of Educational Research, 1979, 49, 371–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E.Elaboration techniques for technical text: An experimental test of the learning strategy hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1980, 72, 770–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. A psychology of computer programming for novices. Computing Surveys, in press.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., & Greeno, J. G.Effects of meaningfulness and organization on problem solving and computability judgments. Memory and Cognition, 1975, 3, 356–362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCabe, T. J.A complexity measure. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Transactions on Software Engineering, 1976, 2, 308–320.Google Scholar
McCracken, D. D.A guide to FORTRAN IV programming. New York: Wiley, 1972.Google Scholar
Milliman, P., & Curtis, B. An evaluation of modern programming practices in an aerospace environment. Proceedings of the Third Digital Avionics Conference. New York: IEEE, 1979.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A.The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity to process information. Psychological Review, 1956, 63, 81–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, L. A.Programming by non-programmers. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 1974, 6, 237–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, L. A. Behavioral studies of the programming process. IBM Research Report RC 7367, 1978.Google Scholar
Moran, T. P.Introduction to the command language grammar. Report SSL-78–3. Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, Palo Alto, Calif. 1978.Google Scholar
Norman, D. A.Categorization of action slips. Psychological Review, 1981, 88, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, D. A., & Bobrow, D. G.On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 1975, 7, 44–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramsey, H. R., & Atwood, M. E. Human factors in computer systems: A review of the literature. Technical Report SAI-79–11-BEN. Science Applications, Inc., Englewood, Colo., 1979Google Scholar
Roediger, H. L. III. Memory metaphors in cognitive psychology. Memory and Cognition, 1980, 8, 231–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, T. L.Evaluation of computer text editors. Report SSL–79–9. Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, Palo Alto, Calif., 1979.Google Scholar
Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B.Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 1975, 7, 573–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothkopf, E. Z. Structural features and the control of processes in learning from written materials. In Carroll, J. B. & Freedle, R. O. (Eds.) Language comprehension and the acquisition of knowledge. Washington, D.C.: Winston, 1972.Google Scholar
Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P.Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1977.Google Scholar
Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M.Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 1977, 84, 1–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W.Controlled and automatic information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review. 1977, 84, 127–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sime, M. E., Green, T. R. G., & Guest, D. J.Psychological evaluation of two conditional constructions used in computer languages. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies. 1973, 5, 105–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sime, M. E., Green, T. R. G., & Guest, D. J.Scope matching in computer conditionals – a psychological evaluation. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 1977, 9, 107–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Softech Microsystems. UCSD PASCAL user’s manual. San Diego, Calif.: Softech Microsystems, 1980.Google Scholar
Stroud, J. M.The fine structure of psychological time. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1966, 623–631.Google Scholar
Thompson, K., & Ritchie, D.The UNIX time-sharing system. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 1974, 9, 586–590.Google Scholar
Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M.Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review. 1973, 80, 352–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walther, G. H., & O’Neill, H. F.On-line user-computer interface: The effects of interface flexibility, terminal type, and experience on performance. AFIPS Conference Proceedings, 1974, 43, 379–384.Google Scholar
Winston, P. H.Artificial intelligence. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1977.Google Scholar
Young, R. M. The machine inside the machine. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, in press.Google Scholar