Abstract
Problem statement: To date, researchers have personalized graphical user interfaces for individual users to reduce visual search time. Little research, however, has been directed at understanding the factors which cause approaches to personalization to have positive effects at one time and negative ones at others. Approach: The study reported here investigated empirically the effects of content size on 5 different personalized menu types: Adaptable, adaptive split, adaptive/adaptable highlighted, adaptive/adaptable minimized and mixed-initiative menus. More specifically, it compared the usability of these five types with regard to task accomplishment time and frequency of error-occurrence. In order to carry out this comparative investigation, we conducted two independent experiments, on small menus (17 items) and large ones (29 items) respectively. These were tested dependently using 30 subjects each. Results: Results showed that the adaptable type was surprisingly the most efficient overall of the small menus and the least efficient of the large ones. Conclusion: Conversely, the minimized type was the slowest of the small menus and the fastest of the large ones. Finally, errors were reduced in adaptable and minimized small menus by 50 and 62% respectively, whilst being increased in the large adaptable one.
Highlights
Interface visual complexity is increasing rapidly with each new release of software, as the numbers of icons, menus and toolbars grow and sizes of the interface formats decrease
The results showed that the static menu was faster than the adaptive menu on the first group of tasks, while there was no difference in the second group of tasks between the static and dynamic menus, because subjects in both groups were able to increase their performance significantly
Comparisons revealed that adaptable menus were faster than adaptive split menus: F(1,59) = 5.41, r = 0.29
Summary
Interface visual complexity is increasing rapidly with each new release of software, as the numbers of icons, menus and toolbars grow and sizes of the interface formats decrease (e.g., mobile phones, PDAs). This visual complexity has become recognized as a phenomenon which some researchers call creeping featurism[1] and others bloatware[2,3]; it creates conditions where usability problems can arise[3] and where user performance and satisfaction are affected negatively. Circular menus have been developed so that all menu items are distant[5]. A number of researchers have suggested personalizing interfaces to individual users, since they have different needs, abilities and usage[6]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
