Differences in Performance and Preference for Object-Oriented vs. Bit-Mapped Graphics Interfaces

Abstract

This study used a standardized evaluation to compare two direct manipulation graphics interfaces: (1) object-oriented (vector) graphics and (2) bit-mapped graphics (object-oriented graphics interfaces are not to be confused with object-oriented programming or object-oriented data bases). Experienced and novice subjects performed objectively derived benchmark tasks appropriate for two-dimensional graphics packages. Both performance and preference data were collected. Task completion time, aborted attempts, learning effects, and errors constituted the performance measures. For the preference data, subjects completed questionnaires to rate the interfaces on both an absolute and a relative basis. Results indicate the superiority of the object-oriented graphics interface to the bit-mapped interface for most tasks, especially manipulation (e.g., scaling, moving, etc.) of graphics. The implications of these results for the use of direct manipulation graphics interfaces are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Foley

J. D.

Van Dam

(1982). Fundamentals of interactive computer graphics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Foley

J. D.

Wallace

V. L.

Chan

(1984). The human factors of computer graphics interaction techniques. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 4 (11), 13–48.

Gaylin

K. B.

(1986). How are windows used? Some notes on creating an empirically-based windowing benchmark task. In CHI ′86 Human Factors in Computing Systems, (pp. 96–100). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.

Roberts

T. L

Moran

T. P.

(1983). The evaluation of text editors: Methodology and empirical results. Communications of the ACM, 26 (4), 265–283.

Scott

J. E.

(1982). Introduction to interactive computer graphics. New York: Wiley-Interscience).