Use of Query Language Boolean Operators by Professionals
This study looks at the use of Boolean operators in query languages as a specific aspect of the human/machine interface. The difficulties casual users have with Boolean operators are often explained by the assumption that those users simply do not understand Boolean logic, and the difficulties would not be so prevalent if users applied themselves to understanding this logical system. We investigate the possibility that the issue is not simply misunderstanding on the user’s part, but perhaps a deeper, fundamental difference caused by the contextual and structural semantics of the user’s logic, which Boolean operators, functioning basically as keywords, fail to address.
We present the results of a study of professional programmers, who do have training and experience in the use of Boolean operators, comparing their use of natural language vs. formal logic in the phrasing of database queries. These programmers displayed significantly different uses of the words AND, OR, and NOT in a natural language setting as opposed to a more formal Boolean setting. And, despite concerns about natural language’s ambiguities, there exist more consistencies in the English use of AND, OR, and NOT than we might have believed.
These consistencies, and their contradictions with formal logic, strongly suggest that people have ‘deep structure’ groupings which are not adequately or easily supported by Boolean operators. By studying professional programmers and database users, we look at the question of whether these deeper logical structures in natural language maintain a stronger hold than Boolean operators, and whether or not use of Boolean operators is an external and ‘unnatural’ task.
We recommend that further studies in defining these natural language logical structures will contribute in the long run to a more effective human/computer interface than will maintaining the use of Boolean logic.
KeywordsMigration Assure Stein Folk
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Badre, A., and Shneiderman, B., 1983, Directions in Human/Computer Interactions, Ablex Publ. Co., Norwood, NJ.Google Scholar
- Bayman, P. and Mayer, R. E., 1983, “A Diagnosis of Beginning Programmers’ Misconceptions of BASIC Programming Statements”, Communications of the ACM, 26, (9), September 1983.Google Scholar
- Braine, M. D., 1978, “On the Relation Between the Natural Logic of Reasoning and Standard Logic”, Psychological Review, 85, (1), January 1978.Google Scholar
- Ferns, B., 1985, Boolean Operators in Query Languages - A Study of the Contradictions Between Formal Logic and Natural Language, Master’s Thesis, Baruch College, City University of New York, May 1985.Google Scholar
- Harris, L. R., 1983, “The Advantages of Natural Language Processing”, Designing for Human-Computer Communication, Sime, M. E., and Coombs, M. J., eds., Academic Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Hill, I. D., 1983, “Natural Language vs. Computer Language”, Designing for Human-Computer Communication, Sime, M. E., and Coombs, M. J., eds., Academic Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Lochovski, F. H., and Tsichritsis, D. C., 1982, “Querying External Databases”, Human Factors and Interactive Computer Systems, Vassiliou, Y., ed., Ablex Publ. Co., Norwood, NJ.Google Scholar
- Padin, M. E., 1979, “At Ease With Boolean Operators in Online Searching”, Online, 3, (2), April 1979.Google Scholar
- Palme, J., 1981, “Interactive Software for Humans”, Man-Computer Interaction: Human Aspects of Computers and People, Shackle, B., ed., Sijthoff & Noordhoff, Rockville, MD.Google Scholar
- Reisner, P., 1977, “Use of Psychological Experimentation as an Aid to Development of a Query Language”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-3.Google Scholar
- Reisner, P., 1984, “Formal Grammar as a Tool for Analyzing Ease of Use: Some Fundamental Concepts”, Human Factors in Computer Systems, Thomas, J. C., and Schneider, M. L., eds., Ablex Publ. Co., Norwood, NJ.Google Scholar
- Rips, L. J., 1983, “Cognitive Processes in Propositional Reasoning”, Psychological Review, 90, (1), January 1983Google Scholar
- Sager, N., 1981, Natural Language Information Processing, Addison-Wesley Pubi. Co., Inc., Reading, MA.Google Scholar
- Schneider, L. M., 1982, “Ergonomie Considerations in the Design of Command Languages”, Human Factors and Interactive Computer Systems, Vassiliou, Y., ed., Ablex Pubi. Co., Norwood, NJ.Google Scholar
- Shackle, B., 1981, Man-Computer Interaction: Human Aspects of Computers and People, Sijthoff and Noordhoff, Rockville, MD.Google Scholar
- Shneiderman, B., 1976, “Applying the Results of Human Factors Experimentation: Programming Languages and Data Base Query Languages”, The Role of Human Factors in Computers, Proceedings of a Symposium co-sponsored by the Metropolitan Chapter of the Human Factors Society and Baruch College, Cuny, NY, November 18, 1976.Google Scholar
- Sime, M. E., and Coombs, M. J., 1983, Designing for Human-Computer Communication, Academic Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Spohrer, J. C., and Soloway, E., 1986, “Novice Mistakes Are Folk Wisdoms Correct?”, Communications of the ACM, 29, (7), July 1986.Google Scholar
- Thomas, J. C., and Schneider, M. L., eds., 1984, Human Factors in Computer Systems, Ablex Pubi. Co., Norwood, NJ.Google Scholar
- Vassiliou, Y., 1982, Human Factors and Interactive Computer Systems, Ablex Pubi. Co., Norwood, NJ.Google Scholar