HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: atwoodj@storm.CS.ORST.EDU (John Atwood)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors,comp.groupware
Subject: Re: AT&T PicturePhone Failure Papers?
Date: 23 Jan 1993 09:59:18 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department, Oregon State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: storm.cs.orst.edu
Keywords: PicturePhone Failure

The PicturePhone failed because it altered the locus of control from callee
to caller, orso says a fanscinating paper I read a while back.  I'll try to
find the cite.


John
From: jxm@engin.umich.edu (John Murray)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: Participatory Design
Date: 23 Jan 1993 02:10:39 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: eieio.engin.umich.edu

In article <1993Jan19.170459.19623@VFL.Paramax.COM> garyp@rmtc.paramax.com (Gary Palangian [RMTC/ISP]) writes:
>
>    I'm performing a literture search for papers
>discussing participatory design.  Any references
>would be appreciated.
>
 
Take a look at "Computers and democracy : a Scandinavian challenge"
edited by Gro Bjerknes, Pelle Ehn, & Morten Kyng. Published in 1987,
by Avebury in the US I think. It has some interesting articles and 
sems to have been cited by a number of authors - in the CHI conf.
proceedings anyway! 

Regards, 

John Muray, UofM



Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
From: sfleming@cee.hw.ac.uk (Stewart T Fleming)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: Computer vs paper administered questionnaires
Date: 26 Jan 93 09:28:42 GMT
Reply-To: sfleming@cee.hw.ac.uk
Organization: Dept. Of Computing and Electrical Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh


In article <C17zLw.B9B@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca>, kruus@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Kaia Kruus) writes:

>I have heard that subjects would answer a
>questionnaire differently according to whether
>it was administered on paper or through a computer.
[...]
>papers.  Can anybody suggest where I might look
>to find relevant studies?

The only reference I found to motivation rates in "HCI literature" when
I was looking at electronic questionnaires was a single line in
David Meister's book :

	Meister, D., 1985.  Behavioural and Quantitative Data Analysis.
	Wiley, New York.

Chapter 10 : Self-Report Techniques.  He makes the suggestion that participants
MAY be more motivated to answer a questionnaire administered through
a computer.

The only other reference I found was :

	Sproull, L., 1986.  Using Electronic Mail for Data Collection in
	Organizational Research.  Academy of Management Journal 29(1). 159-169.

Several factors critical to the success of an electronic administration
scheme are detailed in this paper.  I'm not aware of any development in this
area since then, but I may not have looked hard enough :-)

I have implemented a system for distributing electronic questionnaires to
participants by e-mail and to provide Motif-based user interfaces for
filling in the questionnaires.  I have no evidence at the moment to suggest
that response rates are affected EITHER way.  This MAY be due to background
administration in setting up the system and making sure it is transparent
to participants - not an easy task on a large, diverse network.

Studies are on-going; we hope to foster a culture where such questionnaires
are commonplace and hence we would hope for a dramatic increase in
repsonse rates.  At the moment, I think that 25% of the original distribution
is about all you can expect, for either paper or electronic administered
questionnaires.

>   u   -  Kaia Kruus                                           

STF
--
sfleming@cee.hw.ac.uk, sfleming@icbl.hw.ac.uk
"...but if I'd known the roses/Wouldn't last until the winter/
   I would have been myself/Maybe I could have been somebody..."
     --Carol Laula, _Restless_
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
From: Peter.Gorny@arbi.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de (Peter Gorny)
Subject: Re: Studies of text readability in different typefaces
Organization: University of Oldenburg, Germany
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:27:45 GMT

gcm@world.std.com (Gretchen C Macdowall) writes:

>cfc@isr.harvard.edu (Christopher F. Chabris) writes:

>>  -- Serif text is easier to read as body text.

>>  -- Sans-serif type is better for titles, labels, signs, and other short
>>     pieces of text.

>>Does anyone have some citations on this issue, preferably to a review paper?
>   
>Of course not - just more rumors. I just went to a workshop run by a human
>factors/documentation "expert". Sorry, don't remember expert's name. He
>said that actually, at the point sizes we usually read at, and using the
>common fonts like Times and Helvetica the readability difference is almost
>nill according to studies (well he didn't site them). At smaller sizes the
>serif text wins. On screen, especially at the lower resolution 72dpi
>screens, some sans serif actually hold up better than serif because of
>their fatter stems.
>   He also explained the theory that underlies all this, which is that you
>read mostly by recognizing word shapes, not by putting the letters together
>and sounding it out. The serif fonts give you a more distinguishable, unique
>shape than non-serif. This is also why mixed case, rather than all caps,
>is easier to read. The caps words look like blocks, forcing you to read
>and identify every letter to recognize the word.

This is the state of the art in typography and graphics design. I have only
some German books at hand on this issue, but look into literature about
typesetting (typography) and graphics design....

BTW: As you may have noticed a sans serif font such as Helvetica takes much
more space for the same text as the same fontsize text in a serif font.
Try to compare Helvetica and Times. 
But: in Sans Serif you are alloewd to make the lines longer without enlarging
the line distance. (There is a tradeoff between these two factors - when the
line is long there has to be more space to the neighboring lines, otherwise
"looses" a reader the thread more easily. Newspaper layout people know, why
they use narrow columns!!! When the lines are too narrow you get an effect
the German typesetters call "milky way": you can see white "ways" going
from top to bottom through the text blocks, when you look at it with almost
closed eyes....)o

Peter Gorny
-- 
.     ________________________________________________________
      Snail-Mail:    P.O.Box 2503 - D-2900 Oldenburg - Germany 
      Voice:            +49-441-798-2901 or -4521 (Fax: -2155)
      E-Mail:          Peter.Gorny@Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.DE 
      ________________________________________________________
From: QWFK@MUSICT.MCGILL.CA (QWFK000)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Twiddler keyboard (and RSI)
Date: 22 Jan 93 04:28:51 GMT
Organization: McGill University

Has anyone heard of any reports on the Twiddler?  It's an
alternative to the standard keyboard.  The device is the size of
a small soap bar, with one button for each finger.  You enter info
by grasping it and pressing different chord patterns for each
character.  I'd like to know whether it works well, because
it has the potential to reduce some of the wrist injuries associated
with current keyboards.
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
From: michael@advtech.uswest.com (Michael Muller)
Subject: Re: Participatory Design
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:27:23 GMT

Here are several more participatory design references:

These two are available from Computer Professionals for Social 
Responsibility, P.O. Box 717, Palo Alto CA 94301:

  PDC'90:  Conference on Participatory Design.
  PDC'92:  Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference.

See also:  Greenbaum and Kyng (1991), "Design at Work."  
Hillside NJ: Erlbaum.

There was a session on participatory design at CHI'92, with
the papers printed in the Proceedings.  Also several relevant
tutorials:  

  Kyng and Greenbaum
  Monk and Wright
  Muller, Wildman, and White

Notes for these tutorials _may_ be available through the ACM
office in New York.

There are several relevant papers in Proceedings of CSCW'88
and Proceedings of CSCW'92.

If you have questions specifically about practices, let me 
know.  Danny Wildman, Ellen White, and I are working on a
taxonomy of participatory design techniques and practices.

Good luck,  Michael
--
Michael J. Muller
U S WEST Advanced Technologies
4001 Discovery Drive, Suite 280 / Boulder CO 80303 US
michael@advtech.uswest.com  +1-303-541-6564 (voice)  +1-303-541-6003 (fax)
-- 
Michael J. Muller
U S WEST Advanced Technologies
4001 Discovery Drive, Suite 280 / Boulder CO 80303 US
michael@advtech.uswest.com  +1-303-541-6564 (voice)  +1-303-541-6003 (fax)
From: schlotte@aero.org (Geof Schlotterbeck)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: NEED:human factors docs in ascii
Followup-To: comp.human-factors
Date: 21 Jan 1993 20:04:27 GMT
Organization: The Aerospace Corp.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: envtools.aero.org

I am looking for the following documents in electronic, ascii form:

MIL-STD-1472D Human Eng. Design Criteria for Mil. Systems, Equip., and Fac.
MIL-STD1801 (USAF) User Computer Interface.
Smith and Mosier.  _Guidelines for Designing User Interface Software_
   (ESD-TR-86-278).

and any others related to human computer interaction.

If you have these in electronic form or have any clue as to where I might
be able to locate these documents, please send me email.

Thanks.
GEOF

______________________________________________________________________________
Geoffrey D. Schlotterbeck  | We are all manufacturers: some make good,
others
The Aerospace Corporation  | make trouble, and still others make excuses.
schlotte@aero.org          |
From: klee@wsl.dec.com (Ken Lee)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: Info on UIL (User Interface Language)
Date: 22 Jan 1993 19:00:57 GMT
Organization: DEC Western Software Laboratory
Distribution: world
Reply-To: klee@wsl.dec.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: alhambra.pa.dec.com

In article <1jn5tiINNo7p@nic.umass.edu>, gbc@neural.hampshire.edu (Gary Cote) writes:
|> Can somebody give me some info about UIL (User Interface Language)?  I understand
|> that it was created by Digital, that it creates a textual representation of a
|> user interface, and that it is somewhat of a standard (?).

OSF/Motif uses UIL.  It comes with all Motif implementations.
Many Motif-based user interface builders read and write UIL.

-- 
Ken Lee
DEC Western Software Laboratory, Palo Alto, Calif.
Internet: klee@wsl.dec.com
uucp: uunet!decwrl!klee
From: XT.JGC@forsythe.stanford.edu (John Claudy)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Standards for software usability?
Date: 22 Jan 1993 09:24:28 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

Are there any existing, published standards, guidelines, or
rules for the usability of software?  I am thinking of things like:
"No more than N keystrokes or mouse clicks should be
required to carry out any action," or "No more than N options should
be presented on any drop down or pop up menu," or "Pressing the
ESCAPE key (or an equivalent key) should always take you back to
the previous screen," and the like.

I realize that some aspects of this issue are covered in some of the
interface design standards for various systems (Mac, Windows, Motif.
Open Look, etc.), but they relate more to look and feel of the
screens rather than directly to the usability of the software.

What I am looking for is a set of guidelines that could
be given to a software development team, or to an evaluator who
wanted to evaluate the usability of existing software without
having to conduct a full scale usability test.  I suppose it is
possible that such software usability standards that are being
developed by the European Community may address some of these
issues also, but I have not seen any of the actual standards they
are developing, I just know that are developing them.

On the other hand, if no such guidelines or standards exist, is it
time we start developing them?  If you have suggestions for what the
standards should be, please post them or e-mail them to me and I
will try to start compiling them.

Thanks for your input on this subject.

John Claudy
Center for Research on Technology/Usability Lab
American Institutes for Research
Palo Alto, CA
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
From: nightjob@well.sf.ca.us (Hank Roberts)
Subject: Re: Studies of text readability in different typefaces
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:14:27 GMT


I'm a proofreader and have watched readability research results show up
to little fanfare year after year (many paid for by IBM), all comparing
accuracy proofreading onscreen to proofreading from paper copy.  Can't
cite them, but suggest checking with a reference librarian.
From: glw@io.it.uswc.uswest.com (Glenn Williams)
Subject: Icons VS Labels
Organization: U S WEST Communications
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 14:19:27 GMT

Does anyone know of any studies done comparing graphic icons VS labels? Please send me any references your have.




Thanks.


glenn williams
US WEST
From: woodl@yvax.byu.edu
Newsgroups: utah.news,utah.misc,comp.human-factors
Subject: WPC usability tour
Date: 21 Jan 93 20:17:20 -0700
Organization: Brigham Young University

A tour of the WordPerfect Corporation usability laboratory will be offered
to the public Wednesday, January 27th at 7:00pm at WordPerfect
Corporation, Building J, in Orem,Utah. The tour is sponsored by the
nascent local chapter of the Association for Computing Machinery Special
Interest Group on Computer and Human Interaction (ACM/SIGCHI). There will
be a brief business meeting giving an overview of activities and then
the tour. Refreshments from WordPerfect's Disk Cafe will be served. There
is no charge for this activity or the refreshments. 
Call Bill Loggins at 801-596-0597 (email is william.loggins@m.cc.utah.edu)
for more information.
From: downey@stein.u.washington.edu (Tom Downey)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: High Tech Flight Deck
Date: 26 Jan 1993 17:50:03 GMT
Organization: University of Washington
NNTP-Posting-Host: stein.u.washington.edu
Summary: Request for help on current research in High Tech Flight Decks
Keywords: Flight Deck Automation, Glass Cockpits, High Technology Flight Decks

I am looking for any current (unpublished or soon to be) research in the areas 
of:
	*  Human Error and High Technology Flight Decks
	*  Criticisms of the High Technology Flight Deck
	*  High Technology Flight Deck and Workload
	*  Training for the High Technology Flight Deck
	*  Cognitive Workload in the HTFD
	*  Training for cognitive workload in the HTFD
	*  Complacency in the HTFD
	*  Vigilance and the HTFD
	*  Pilot "out of the loop"

Thanks for your help in this area.  A discussion in this area would be very 
appreciated as well.

Thanks

Tom
.
A


/


.help


./

A
s
q


A
A
A






A
A
A
From: jleade@micrognosis.co.uk (John Leadeham)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: Studies of text readability in different typefaces
Date: 21 Jan 93 10:08:30 GMT
Organization: Micrognosis, London, UK.

In article <1993Jan20.034434.24613@burrhus.harvard.edu>, cfc@isr.harvard.edu (Christopher F. Chabris) writes:
|>Warning -- this question may have been discussed before ...
|> 
|> I've often read injunctions in design books about the use of serif versus
|> sans-serif text in various situations: body text, headings, titles, outdoor
|> signs, computer displays, etc. Sometimes things like this are said:
|> 
|>   -- Serif text is easier to read as body text.
|> 
|>   -- Sans-serif type is better for titles, labels, signs, and other short
|>      pieces of text.
|> 
|> The kicker is that the author usually accompanies such recommendations with
|> "many studies have shown" but never offers citations to published articles.
|> 
|> Does anyone have some citations on this issue, preferably to a review paper?
|> 
|> I would appreciate hearing about them. Thanks in advance.
|> 
|> 
|> -- Christopher Chabris
|>    AI Program Manager
|>    Department of Psychology
|>    Harvard University
|> 
|>    cfc@isr.harvard.edu
|>    cfc@harvunxw.bitnet


Tinker MA (1963)
Legibility of Print
Ames: Iowa University Press

Hartley J, Fraser S and Burnhill P (1974)
A selected bibliography of typographical research relevant to
the production of instructional materials
AudioVisual Communication Review 22 181-190

Olkes C
Typography
In: DB Felker (Ed)
Document Design: A Review of the Relevant Research
Washington DC: Document Design Center, American Institutes for Research

Hartley J (1985)
Designing Instructional Text 2/e
London: Kogan Page
New York: Nichols

Hartley J (1981)
Eighty ways of improving instructional text
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
PC-24 1 17-27

Watts L and Nisbet J (1974)
Legibility in Children's Books: A Review of Research
London: NFER

Spencer H
The Visible Word (1969)
London: Lund Humphries

Twyman M (1982)
The graphic presentation of language
Information Design Journal 3 2-22

Poulton EC, Warren TR and Bond J (1970)
Ergonomics in journal design
Applied Ergonomics 13 207-209

Wright P (1977)
Presenting technical information: a survey of research findings
Instructional Science 6 93-134

-- 
 Phone: +44 71 815 5261  E-mail: jleadeham@micrognosis.co.uk
 Education is what remains after what has been learnt has been forgotten
 (BF Skinner, 1964)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
From: thom@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (thom kevin gillespie)
Subject: Icons, ansi or otherwise
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:01:55 GMT

I picked up a citation for 

ANSI X3V1.9 ( information systems/Text- and office-based
systems/User-system Interfaces and Symbols) works on Icon standards.

Has anyone been able to find this? I ask because the Comp Sci librarians
at IU can't seem to find it. Is the citation correct. Is there some
place special to look for this? On a related note are there other standards or
working groups also creating standards in other countries. I ask because
I do a lot of icon design and software translation in Indonesia and would
be curious about non-us-centric design decisions.

I'd also be curiouis if anyone knows what Yukio Ota is doing in Japan as
far as icon design. Pictogram Design by Ota by Kashiwashobo is the book
for icon consideration -- excellent but very difficult to find. It is
published in both english and japanese.

--Thanks, Thom
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
From: zakon@hicup.mitre.org (Robert H Zakon)
Subject: Information on CogSci and HCI Societies
Reply-To: zakon@hicup.mitre.org
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 23:01:20 GMT

I am looking for information on CogSci and HCI related societies. 
Specifically, I would like to get their names, e-mail address,
membership contact, and address.  If you can help, please e-mail
me at the address below.

Thank you,
  Robert H Zakon, rzakon@mitre.org
From: hugh@rschp1.anu.edu.au (Hugh Fisher)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: Studies of text readability in different typefaces
Date: 21 Jan 1993 22:02:12 GMT
Organization: Research School of Chemistry, ANU
Distribution: world
Reply-To: Hugh.Fisher@anu.edu.au
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.35.20


  A recent (late 80's) study: "Communicating, or Just Making
  Pretty Shapes?", Colin Wheildon. It's a survey of how readable
  various fonts and layouts are in newspapers and magazines.

  The guy had the same problem as the originator of this thread,
  in that while there is lots of accepted wisdom, there isn't
  much hard evidence. He ended up having to do the research
  himself.

  Unfortunately it is put out by the Newspaper Advertisers of
  Australia, not exactly a well known global publisher. I'll
  try and find out more if anyone is interested.

	Hugh Fisher
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
From: jambon@imag.fr (Francis Jambon)
Subject: Re: High Tech Flight Deck
Keywords: Flight Deck Automation, Glass Cockpits, High Technology Flight Decks
Organization: IMAG Institute, University of Grenoble, France
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:36:30 GMT

In article <1k3tkbINNh9e@shelley.u.washington.edu> downey@stein.u.washington.edu (Tom Downey) writes:
>I am looking for any current (unpublished or soon to be) research in the areas 
>of:
>	[ High Technology Flight Decks ]
>
>Thanks for your help in this area.  A discussion in this area would be very 
>appreciated as well.
>

Look at sci.aeronautics.airliners !
or E-mail to Robert Dorsett at rdd@rascal.ics.utexas.edu
He has written a good article about A320 Airbus.
I'm very found of these subjects
If tou find something interesting POST-IT !

Francis
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francis JAMBON  --=--  Research in Human-Computer Interaction for aeronautics
Laboratoire de Genie Informatique, BP 53 X, 38041 Grenoble cedex, France
E-mail: jambon@imag.fr, Phone: (33) 76 51 48 54, Fax: (33) 76 44 66 75
From: mike@isgtec.com (Mike Sellers)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: High Tech Flight Deck
Keywords: Flight Deck Automation, Glass Cockpits, High Technology Flight Decks
Date: 27 Jan 93 22:56:43 GMT
Organization: ISG Technologies Inc., Mississauga Ontario

downey@stein.u.washington.edu (Tom Downey) writes:
> I am looking for any current (unpublished or soon to be) research in 
> the areas of:
> 	*  Human Error and High Technology Flight Decks [...]

David Woods of the Cognitive Systems Engineering Laboratory at 
Ohio State (no email address, sorry) has some excellent information
on the kinds of situations you're asking about.  In particular, he has
an excellent understanding of the nature of the "keyhole problem" which
arises when you cram too much information and too many screens on one 
display -- as happens in many glass cockpits and other techno-wonders.

At the recent Intelligent UI conference in Orlando, David discussed 
many of these problems and the results they can have, up to and including
at least one passenger jet crash due to modality confusion in pilots.  
Bad UIs are not just an esthetic problem, folks.  

Hope this is what you're looking for.  Good luck.

--
              Mike Sellers      User Interface Team Leader
           mike@isgtec.com      ISG Technologies, Toronto, Canada
              "Actum ne agas" -- Do not do what has been done.
                         Furare tantum ab Optimis
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
From: winfia@sage4e.its.rpi.edu (Anthony Edward Winfield)
Subject: 3d interfaces
Keywords: 3d
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:44:43 GMT

	I am in the process of doing an article search for my undergrad. 
thesis.  Can anyone out ther give me some help on finding articles, thesises,
or previous studies done on 3d interfaces (any topic w/in that subjcet)?
	Thanks in advance.

-- 
                                         Tone
                                         winfia@rpi.edu
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
From: epusey@eng.clemson.edu (epusey)
Subject: cumulative trauma disorders (CTDs)
Keywords: CTDs
Reply-To: epusey@eng.clemson.edu
Organization: College of Engineering, Clemson Univ.
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:19:19 GMT


--------------------------------------------------------------

	I am currently working on a thesis in the field of human factors 
and need any information regarding cumulative trauma disorders (CDTs).  Sources of information (articles) regarding factors leading to CTDs such as occupational, environmental, operator related, and equipment related factors are very much needed.  Also needed are case studies and descriptions of what exactly this type of disorder is (eg. nerve compression, soft tissue disorder of the upper 
extremities, ect...)



	I am developing a software which will assess the level of risk an individual is subject to based on the aforementioned factors and any other that may arise.


	Help.





please send information to:

				epusey@eng.clemson.edu


Newsgroups: comp.human-factors