Communicative NGOMSL: An Extension of NGOMSL to Analyze a Text-based Communication System

Abstract

This study proposes Communicative NGOMSL, which is an extension of NGOMSL intended to accommodate modeling of text-based communication among two or more individuals. Besides the properties of GOMS techniques in evaluation, Communicative NGOMSL additionally considers two key concepts: common ground and communication time. Common ground means the mutual knowledge, belief and assumptions of participants in a conversation, and communication time refers to one individual's waiting time for the other's response. As a case example, Communicative NGOMSL is applied to a virtual text-based communication system for exchanging addresses between two individuals. The Communicative NGOMSL analysis makes some suggestions to better design a communication system: (1) focusing on the interface design that is directly related to grounding process in a conversation; (2) considering the relationship of communication time and execution time for each individual; and (3) balancing between participants for learning time and mental workload.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Antunes

Borges

M. R. S.

Pino

J. A.

Carrico

(2005). Analyzing groupware design by means of usability results. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, Conventry, UK.

Antunes

Borges

M. R. S.

Pino

J. A.

Carrico

(2006). Analytic evaluation of groupware design. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3865, 31.

Antunes

Ferreira

Pino

J. A.

(2006). Analyzing shared workspaces design with human-performance models. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4154, 62.

Card

S. K.

Moran

T. P.

Newell

(1983). The psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Clark

H. H.

Schaefer

E. F.

(1989). Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science, 13(2), 259–294.

Ferreira

Antunes

(2007). A technique for evaluating shared workspaces efficiency. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4402, 82.

Hartson

H. R.

Andre

T. S.

Williges

R. C.

(2003). Criteria for evaluating usability evaluation methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 15(1), 145–181.

Ivory

M. Y.

Hearst

M. A.

(2001). The state of the art in automating usability evaluation of user interfaces. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 33(4), 470–516.

Kieras

D. E.

(1988). Towards a practical GOMS model methodology for user interface design. In Helander

, Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 135–158). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

10.

Kieras

D. E.

(1996). A guide to GOMS model usability evaluation using NGOMSL. In Helander

Landauer

T. K.

Prabhu

, The handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 733–766). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science B. V.

11.

Kieras

D. E.

Santoro

T. P.

(2004). Computational GOMS modeling of a complex team task: Lessons learned. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vienna, Austria.

12.

Koschmann

Lebaron

C. D.

(2003). Reconsidering common ground: Examining Clark's contribution theory in the OR. Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Helsinki, Finland.

13.

McCarthy

J. C.

Miles

V. C.

Monk

A. F.

(1991). An experimental study of common ground in text-based communication. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New Orleans, Louisiana.

14.

Min

Koo

Chung

Y. H.

Kim

(1999). Distributed GOMS: An extension of GOMS to group task. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Tokyo, Japan.

15.

Rosson

M. B.

Carroll

J. M.

(2002). Usability engineering: scenario-based development of Human-Computer Interaction. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.