A Small Knowledge-Based System for Selecting Interaction Styles

  • Jean Vanderdonckt
Conference paper


SDISelect consists of a small knowledge-based system teaching and assisting designers of interactive applications in selecting appropriate interaction styles for a particular context of use. As any other tool for working with guidelines, five development milestones have been browsed. Guidelines for selecting interaction styles have been captured in a knowledge-base system as selections among an available set of possible interaction styles, a set of parameters characterizing the context of use, questions to provide the parameters’ values, and selection rules. Each rule selects a candidate interaction style candidate according to values assigned to parameters of the context of use according to a rule-based language, which basically consists of a first-order predicate logic formula. The values of these parameters are either stored or prompted to the designer through questions to form a final set of possible interaction styles.


Editing Metaphor 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Arens, Y., Miller, L., Sondheimer, N.: Presentation Design Using an Integrated Knowledge Base. Chapter 1. In Sullivan, J.W., Tyler, S.W. (eds.). Intelligent User Interfaces. ACM Press, New York (1991) 241-258Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Banks, W.W., Gilmore, W.E., Blackman, H.S., Gertman, D.I.: Human Engineering Design Considerations for Cathode Ray Tube-Generated Displays. Vol. Ii. Document CR3003/EGG-2230. U.S. Dept. of Energy, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho Falls, Idaho (July 1983).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beshers, C.M., Feiner, S.K.: SCOPE: automated generation of graphical interfaces. In Proc. of ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology UIST’89 (Williamsburg, November 13-15, 1989). ACM Press, New York (1989) 76-85Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bleser, T.W., Sibert, J.: TOTO: A Tool for Selecting Interaction Techniques Interaction Techniques. In Proc. of ACM Symp. on User Interface Software and Technology UIST’90 (Snowbird, 3-5 October, 1990). ACM Press, New York (1990) 135-142Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bono, G., Ficorelli, P.: Natural Language Restatement of Queries Expressed in a Graphi-cal Language. In Pemul, G., Jjoa, A.M. (eds.): Proc. of 11th International Conference on the Entity-Relationship Approach (Karlsruhe, October 7-9, 1992). Lecture Notes in Computer Sciences, Vol. 645. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1992) 357-373Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brown, C.M.: Human-Computer Interface Design Guidelines. Ablex Publishing Corpo- ration, Berkeley (1988)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cristiano, L.: Methodology for Comparative Selection of Informative Database Interface Styles. SIGCHI Bulletin. Vol. 21, No. 1 (July 1989) 29-36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Draper, S.W.: Interface Styles. (May 12, 1996). Accessible at http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/IntStvles.html/~steve/IntStvles.html
  9. 9.
    Dumas, J.: Designing User Interfaces for Software. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1988)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eberleh, E., Korfmacher, W., Streitz, N.A.: Thinking or Acting? Mental Workload and Subjective Preferences for a Command Code and a Direct Manipulation Interaction Style. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol.4 No. 2 (1992) 105-122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gaines, B.: The Technology of Interaction Dialogue Programming Rules. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies. Vol. 14 (1981) 13-150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hutchins, E., Hollan, J.D., Norman, D.A.: Direct Manipulation Interfaces. In Norman, D.A., Draper, S.W.: User Centered Design-New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Hillsdale (1986) 87-124.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jarke, M., Vassiliou, Y.: A Framework for Choosing a Database Query Language. ACM Computing Surveys. Vol. 17, No. 3 (September 1985) 313-370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Luo, P.: MIDAS: A Model-Based Approach to Managing Conceptual Design of User Interface Software. In Paternó, F. (ed.). Proceedings of 1S` Eurographics Workshop on Design, Specification, Verification of Interactive Systems DSV-IS’94 (Carrara, June 8-10 1994), Focus on Computer Graphics Series. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1995) 129-147Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rich, E.: Stereotype and User Modeling. In: Kobsa, A., Wahlster, W. (eds.): User Models in Dialog Systems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1988) 35-51Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shneiderman, B.: We Can Design Better User Interfaces: a Review of Human-Computer Interaction Styles. Ergonomics, Vol. 31, No. 5, 1988, pp. 699-710.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shneiderman, B.: A Taxonomy and Rule Base for the Selection of Interaction Styles. In Shackel, B., Richardson, S.: Human Factors for Informatics Usability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1991) 325-342Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shneiderman, B.: A Taxonomy and Rule Base for the Selection of Interaction Styles. In Baecker, R.M., Grudin, J., Buxton, W.A.S, Greenberg, S.: Readings in Human-Computer Interaction: Toward the Year 2000. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers (San Francisco) 1995 401-410Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shneiderman, B.: Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction (3`d ed.). Addison-Wesley, Reading (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Smith, S.L., Mosier, J.N.: Design guidelines for the user interface software. Technical Report ESD-TR-86-278 (NTIS No. AD A177198). U.S. Air Force Electronic Systems Division, Hanscom Air Force Base (1986)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sutcliffe, A.G.: Human-Computer Interface Design. MacMillan, London (1988)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vanderdonckt, J., Bodart, F.: Encapsulating Knowledge for Intelligent Interaction Objects Selection. In Proc. of ACM Conf. on Human Aspects in Computing Systems InterCHI’93 (Amsterdam, 24-29 April 1993). ACM Press, New York (1993) 424-429. Accessible athttp://www.gant.ucl.ac.be/membres/iv/publi/InterCHI93-Encaps.pdf/membres/iv/publi/InterCHI93-Encaps.pdfGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wexelblat, A.: An Approach to Natural Gesture in Virtual Environments Special Issue on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, Vol. 2 No. 3 (1995) 179-200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wiedenbeck, S., Davis, S.: The Influence of Interaction Style and Experience on User Perceptions of Software Packages. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 46 No. 5 (1997) 563-588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wilson, S., Johnson, P.: Bridging the Generation Gap: From Work Tasks to User Interface Designs. In: Vanderdonckt, J. (Ed.), Proc. of 2°a Workshop on Computer-Aided Design of User Interfaces CADUI’96 (Namur, June 5-7, 1996). Presses Universitaires de Namur, Namur (1996) 77-94Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean Vanderdonckt
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Université catholique de LouvainLouvain-la-NeuveBelgium
  2. 2.Stanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations