Navigating in a process landscape
User interfaces in process control systems are often organised as landscapes — usually a process chart — where the display is a window into the landscape. The window can move over the landscape and view different segments of the process. Normally there is no overlap between the views — they are discretely organised. Operators often claim they get lost in such interfaces. I suggest that the problem is a matter of how the operator moves in the landscape — how one changes ones view of the process. Two different interactive methods of movement — discrete vs. continuous — are tested. The results of the experiments are discussed.
KeywordsTask Category Discrete Method Control Room Interaction Technique Continuous Method
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.CardS., MoranT. & NewvellA., «The Psychology of human-computer interaction». Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum Ass. 1983.Google Scholar
- 2.Gibson J.J., The theory of affordances. In R.E. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), «Perceiving, acting and knowing». Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum Ass, 1977Google Scholar
- 3.Gibson J.J., «The ecologiocal approach to visual perception». Boston: Houghton, 1979.Google Scholar
- 4.Hollnagel E., «A survey of man-machine system evaluation methods» Halden, Norway: OECD Halde Reactor Project, 1985.Google Scholar
- 5.Norman D.A., «Some observations on mental models», In:Centner D., Stevens A.L., Mental Models. Hillsdale N.J: Erlbaum Ass., 1983.Google Scholar
- 6.Norman D.A., «The psycholgy of everyday things», Basic Books 1988.Google Scholar
- 7.Rasmussen J. & Vicente K.J., «A theoretical framework for ecological interface design». Risø National lab., Denmark, 1988.Google Scholar
- 8.Schneiderman B., «Designing the userinterface: Strategies for effective humancomputer interaction». MA: Addison-Wesley, 1987.Google Scholar