Special | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | ALL
A collection of informal and formal analysis techniques that focus on the differences and relationships among discrete event phenomena (e.g., a key press, a project deadline) and more continuous status phenomena (e.g., the current mouse position, the weather, the current screen display) See:http://www.hcibook.com/alan/topics/status/
See state transition network.
a graphical event-by-event enactment of all or part of a scenario, developed to communicate or analyze a user interface design; the enactment may be at a high level (e.g., major screen changes) or at a detailed level (e.g., mouse selections), depending on the usability issue being explored
A way of analyzing work that focuses on different ways that a particular control task might be carried out. An analytic phase of cognitive work analysis.
A goal that must be accomplished in service of a higher-level goal. Goals are often expressed as a hierarchy of goals and several levels of subgoals. The lowest level of subgoals are accomplished through operators, which are decomposed no further.
Originated in the social psychology of George Herbert Mead and the sociological methodology of Herbert Blumer, this places emphasis on the individual in explanations of the transactions of people and society.
syndetic modeling framework
A framework that looks at the interactions among different kinds of models—in particular, models of system behavior and models of human activity. See Barnard, May, Duke, and Duce (2000).
Any process that identifies and examines tasks that must be performed, either by users, other agents, or the system itself, to accomplish the goals of an interactive system.
All human artifacts both enable and constrain human activity. Human use of current artifacts thus suggests possibilities and requirements for the design of future artifacts, which in turn will ultimately both enable and constrain human activity.
An issue (often in design) that is understood to have competing arguments, usually positive and negative impacts of an option.