Towards a Comprehensive Framework for Display Compatibility

Abstract

In this paper, display design is considered in terms of representations and compatibility. We can view the various forms of compatibility (display, task, data type, stimulus-response, ecological, etc.) in terms of the correspondence between a pair of representations. Each type of compatibility is reviewed, with the representations specified in each case. In defining the various types, and considering the relation between them, some previous misinterpretations are clarified. A general compatibility framework is defined, and a model is proposed that could be validated through empirical means. Finally, a notional tool is described that could be used by a human factors engineer to guide design or acquisition choices for information display.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bennett

K. B.

Flach

J. M.

(2011). Display and interface design: Subtle science, exact art. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Bertin

(1983). Semiology of graphics. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

Burns

C. M.

Hajdukiewicz

J. R.

(2004). Ecological interface design. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Card

S. K.

Moran

T. P.

Newell

(1983). The psychology of human-computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Carswell

C. M.

(1992). Choosing specifiers: An evaluation of the basic tasks model of graphical perception. Human Factors, 34, 535-554.

Carswell

C. M.

Wickens

C. D.

(1987). Information integration and the object display: An interaction of task demands and display superiority. Ergonomics, 30, 511-527.

Fitts

P. M.

Seeger

C. M.

(1953) S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 199-210.

Hollands

J. G.

Merikle

P. M.

(1987). Menu organization and user expertise in information search tasks. Human Factors, 29, 577-586.

Lau

Veland

Kwok

Jamieson

G. A.

Burns

C. M.

Braseth

A. O.

Welch

(2008). Ecological interface design in the nuclear domain: An application to the secondary subsystems of a boiling water reactor plant simulator. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 55, 3579-3596.

10.

Norman

D. A.

(1992). The design of everyday things. New York: Harper & Row.

11.

Proctor

R. W.

K-P. L.

(2006). Stimulus-response compatibility principles : Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL : CRC Press.

12.

Roscoe

S. N.

(1968). Airborne displays for flight and navigation. Human Factors, 10, 321-332.

13.

Seidler

K. S.

Wickens

C. D.

(1992). Distance and organization in multifunction displays. Human Factors, 34, 555-569.

14.

Vicente

K. J.

(1990). Coherence- and correspondence-driven work domains: Implications for systems design. Behaviour & Information Technology, 9, 493-502.

15.

Vicente

K. J.

(1997). Should an interface always match the operator’s mental model? CSERIAC Gateway, 8, 1-5.

16.

Vicente

K. J.

(1999). Cognitive work analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

17.

Ware

(2012). Information visualization: Perception for design (3rd Ed.). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.

18.

Wickens

C. D.

Carswell

C. M.

(1995). The proximity compatibility principle: Its psychological foundation and relevance to display design. Human Factors, 37, 473-494.

19.

Wickens

C. D.

Hollands

J. G.

(2000). Engineering psychology and human performance (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

20.

Wickens

C. D.

Keller

J. W.

Small

R. L.

(2010). Left. No, right! Development of the frame of reference transformation tool (FORT). In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 54th Annual Meeting (pp. 1022-1026). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

21.

Wickens

C. D.

Vidulich

Sandry-Garza

(1984). Principles of S-CR compatibility with spatial and verbal tasks: The role of display-control location and voice-interactive display-control interfacing. Human Factors, 26, 533-543.

22.

Zhang

Norman

D. A.

(1994). Cognitive Science, 18, 87-122.