Abstract
Developers of interactive software are confronted by an increasing variety of software tools to help engineer the interactive aspects of software applications. Typically resorting to ad hoc means of tool selection, developers are often dissatisfied with their chosen tool on account of the fact that the tool lacks required functionality or does not fit seamlessly within the context in which it is to be used. This paper describes a system for evaluating the suitability of user interface development tools for use in software development organisations and projects such that the selected tool appears ‘invisible’ within its anticipated context of use. The paper also outlines and presents the results of an informal empirical study and a series of observational case studies of the system.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Albers, M. J. (1996), Decision Making: A Missing Facet of Effective Documentation, in Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual International Conference on Computer Documentation (SIGDOC’96) — Marshalling New Technological Forces: Building a Corporate, Academic and User-oriented Triangle, ACM Press, pp.57–65.
Bass, L., Abowd, G. & Kazman, R. (1994), Issues in the Evaluation of User Interface Tools, in R. Taylor & J. Coutaz (eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Software Engineering & Computer-Human Interaction, Vol. 896 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, pp. 17–27.
Clarke, S. (1997), Encourage the Effective use of Contextual Information in Design, PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Glasgow.
Harris, R. (1998), Introduction to Decision Making, Technical Report, University of Southern California.
Hart, S. & Staveland, L. (1988), Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research, in P. Hancock & N. Meshkati (eds.), Human Mental Workload, North-Holland, pp. 139–83.
Hart, S. G & Wickens, C. (1990), Workload Assessment and Prediction, in H. R. Booher (ed.), MANPRINT: An Approach to Systems Integration, Van Nostrand Reinhold, pp.257–96.
Hix, D. (1991), An Evaluation Procedure for User Interface Development Tools Version 2.0, Technical Report, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University.
Hix, D. & Ryan, T. (1992), Evaluating User Interface Development Tools, in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 36th Annual Meeting, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, pp.374–8.
Hix, D. & Schulman, R. S. (1991), “Human-Computer Interface Development Tools: A Methodology for Their Evaluation”, Communications of the ACM 34(3), 74–87.
Humphrey, W. S. (1989), Managing the Software Process, Addison-Wesley.
Jacobs, S. & Holten, R. (1995), Goal Driven Business Modelling — Supporting Decision Making within Information Systems Development, in Proceedings of Conference on Organisational Computing Systems (COCS), ACM Press, pp.96–105.
Kemerer, C. F. (1992), “How the Learning Curve Affects CASE Tool Adoption”, IEEE Software 9(3), 23–8.
Lumsden, J. & Gray, P. (2000), SUIT — Context Sensitive Evaluation of User Interface Development Tools, in P. Palanque & F. Paternò (eds.), Proceedings of Design, Specification and Verification of Interactive Systems, Springer-Verlag, pp.91–108.
Lumsden, J. M. (2001), SUIT — A Methodology and Framework for Selection of User Interface Development Tools, PhD thesis, Department of Computing Science, University of Glasgow.
McKirdy, J. (1998), An Empirical Study of the Relationships Between User Interface Development Tools & User Interface Development, Technical Report TR-1998-06, University of Glasgow.
McKirdy, J. (1999), SUIT — A Framework & Methodology for the Selection of User Interface Development Tools Based on Fitness Criteria, Technical Report TR-1999-34, University of Glasgow.
Myers, B. A. (1996), UIMSs, Toolkits, Interface Builders, Technical Report, Human Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University. Was at http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/bam/www/toolnames.html but now no longer available.
O’Neill, E. J. (1998), User-developer Cooperation in Software Development: Building Common Ground and Usable Systems, PhD thesis, Department of Computing Science, Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London.
Paulk, M. C, Curtis, B., Chrissis, M. B. & Weber, C. V. (1993), “The Capability Maturity Model for Software”, IEEE Software 10(4), 18–27.
Rumble, C. D. (1991), The Human Element Approach to Decision Making... Let’s Try Reorganisation, in Proceedings of 19th ACM SIGUCCS Conference on User Services, ACM Press, pp.345–50.
Sauter, V. L. (1999), “Intuitive Decision-making”, Communications of the ACM 42(6), 109–15.
Simon, H. (1986), Research Briefings 1986: Report of the Research Briefing Panel on Decision Making and Problem Solving, Technical Report, National Academy of Sciences.
Sundaram, S. & Ramamurthy, K. (1996), “A Measurement Methodology for Evaluating User Interface Management Systems”, Journal of Computer Information Systems 37(2), 54–61.
Valaer, L. A. & Babb, R. G. (1997), “Choosing a User Interface Development Tool”, IEEE Software 14(4), 29–39.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag London Limited
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lumsden, J. (2002). Selecting the ‘Invisible’ User Interface Development Tool. In: Faulkner, X., Finlay, J., Détienne, F. (eds) People and Computers XVI - Memorable Yet Invisible. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0105-5_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0105-5_22
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-659-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-0105-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive