Discussion: Information-Processing Models

Abstract

The foregoing papers are joined, yet divided, by their approaches to the concept of interface, and express those differences in the choice of technique of measurement and the emphasis on distinct cognitive processes. The interface definitions include: (a) the characteristics at the machine surface and this is demonstrated in the Bennett study on accessing data bases and Boebm-Davis' work with programming methodologies; (b) the medium or task environment between the operator and the machine such as Parasuraman's focus on signal detection models; (c) a software module that is adaptable or responsive to the operator that is introduced by Howard et al. in the image processing study; and (d) the processing elements embedded within the operator as is characterized in Robertson's research on text-editing. It is evident that each of these approaches is a facet of human-computer interaction and integrative models are required before adequate understanding of human performance on this task can be realized. Computer architecture has been highly influential in suggesting structural elements that underlie the information-processing models which are often invoked to explain the results of human-computer interaction studies. It would appear that those models have run their course. Another perspective, derived from software programming concepts, has had a fresh impact on the interpretation of human-computer performance; in the main, those concepts that have been adopted are related to applications software and these notions are present in some of the foregoing reports. The next step in programming concepts is the emergence of modules of user-interface systems that will link hardware and application-software systems. At least one theorist (J.A. Fodor) has developed an argument that that suggests the characteristics of the human-processing elements that would comprise such a module; however, this development is not clearly anticipated in these papers.