Modelling Product-User Interaction for Inclusive Design

  • Anna Mieczakowski
  • Patrick Langdon
  • P. John Clarkson
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5614)


Despite continuing technological advances, there are still many daily living products that are unusable for broad sections of the population, including older and impaired users. Therefore, in order to design more accessible and usable products, designers need better models that can predict how people with varying levels of capability interpret and use different features on product interfaces. The aim of this paper is to survey the background of modelling product-user interaction, discuss strengths and weaknesses of various approaches and focus on appropriate methodology to investigate inclusive interaction with everyday products. This paper concludes that a model of product-user interaction should include three representations of specific information: (1) what people want to do when operating a product (goals); (2) what people actually do while operating a product (actions); and (3) what happens to the functional parts of the product during the operation (objects). Further research is necessary in order to identify methods for combining goal, action and object approaches and developing a usable and inclusive model of product-user interaction.


Inclusive Design Product-User Interaction Mental Models Cognitive Representations Prior Experience 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bichard, J.A., Coleman, R., Langdon, P.: Does My Stigma Look Big in This? Considering Acceptability and Desirability in the Inclusive Design of Technology Products. Universal Access in HCI 1, 622–631 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cañas, J.J., Antolí, A., Quesada, J.F.: The Role of Working Memory on Measuring Mental Models of Physical Systems. Psicologica 22, 25–42 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carroll, J.M., Thomas, J.C.: Metaphor and the Cognitive Representation of Computing Systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 12, 107–116 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gordon, S.E., Schmierer, K.A., Gill, R.T.: Conceptual Graph Analysis: Knowledge Acquisition for Instructional System Design. Human Factors 35, 459–481 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harel, D.: Statecharts: A Visual Formalism for Complex Systems. Science of Computer Programming 8, 231–274 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Krippendorff, K.: On the Essential Contexts of Artifacts or On the Proposition that Design is Making Sense (of Things). Design Issues 5, 9–39 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kwahk, J., Han, S.H.: A Methodology for Evaluating the Usability of Audiovisual Consumer Electronic Products. Applied Ergonomics 33, 419–431 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Langdon, P.M., Lewis, T., Clarkson, P.J.: The Effects of Prior Experience on the Use of Consumer Products. Universal Access in the Information Society, Special Issue on Designing Accessible Technology (Ibid) (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miller, G.A.: The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information. The Psychological Review 63, 81–97 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Monk, A.: Cyclic Interaction: A Unitary Approach to Intention, Action and the Environment. Cognition 68, 95–110 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Persad, U., Langdon, P., Clarkson, J.: Characterising User Capabilities to Support Inclusive Design Evaluation. Universal Access in the Information Society, Special Issue on Designing Accessible Technology (Ibid) (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rouse, W.B., Morris, N.M.: On Looking into the Black Box: Prospects and Limits in the Search for Mental Models. Psychological Bulletin 100, 349–363 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Norman, D.A.: Some Observations on Mental Models. In: Gentner, D., Stevens, A. (eds.) Mental Models, ch. 1. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, London (1983)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rutherford, A., Wilson, J.R.: Models of Mental Models: An Ergonomist-Psychologist Dialogue. In: Trauber, M.J., Ackermann, D. (eds.) Mental Models and Human-Computer Interaction. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., North Holland (1991)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Blackler, A.: Intuitive Interaction with Complex Artefacts. PhD Thesis. School of Design, Queensland University of Technology (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Braisby, N., Gellatly, A.: Cognitive Psychology. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Budgen, D.: Software Design. Pearson Addison Wesley, London (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Coad, P., Yourdon, E.: Object-Oriented Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1990)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Freudenthal, A.: The Design of Home Appliances for Young and Old Consumers. PhD Thesis. Delft University Press, The Netherlands (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Humphreys, G.W., Bruce, V.: Visual Cognition: Computational, Experimental and Neuropsychological Perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd., Hove (1989)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Keates, S., Clarkson, J.: Countering Design Exclusion: An Introduction to Inclusive Design. Springer, London (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Norman, D.A.: The Design of Everyday Things. Basic Books, London (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sloman, A.: The Computer Revolution in Philosophy: Philosophy, Science and Models of Mind. The Harvester Press (1978)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thimbleby, H.: Press On: Principles of Interaction Programming. MIT Press, Cambridge (2007)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wickens, C.D., Gordon, S.E., Liu, Y.: An Introduction to Human Factors Engineering. Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., New York (1998)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Winograd, T., Flores, F.: Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design. ABLEX Publishing Company Co., Norwood (1985)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yourdon, E.: Modern Structured Analysis. Prentice Hall, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bellerby, F., Davis, G.: Defining the Limits of Inclusive Design. In: Proceedings of Include, pp. 1:00–1:17. Royal College of Art, London (2003)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dray, S.M.: Structured Observation: Techniques for Gathering Information about Users in Their Own World. In: CHI, April 13-18, pp. 334–335 (1996)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Persad, U., Langdon, P., Clarkson, P.J., Brown, D.: Cognitive Scales and Mental Models for Inclusive Design. In: Proceedings of HCI International 2007, 12th International Conference, HCI International 2007, Beijing, China (2007)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    British Standards Institute, British Standard 7000-6:2005: Design Management Systems: Managing Inclusive Design. Guide (2005),
  32. 32.
    Ricability: Easier Living: A Guide for Older and Disabled People Living in London (2001),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anna Mieczakowski
    • 1
  • Patrick Langdon
    • 1
  • P. John Clarkson
    • 1
  1. 1.Engineering Design Centre, Department of EngineeringUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations