Design and Evaluation of User-System Interfaces or of User-Task Interaction: A Discussion of Interface Design Approach in Different Domains for Application of Modern Information Technology

  • Annelise Mark Pejtersen
  • Jens Rasmussen


The application of modern information technology is now considered for man-machine systems design in a wide variety of application domains. In general, two aspects of the impact of this new technology are considered separately. One is the potential for new user interfaces, another is the transfer of human activities to “intelligent” computer functions, for instance in “expert systems”. There is, however, a need for a more integrated system design considering the basic user-task interaction in advanced systems. In this paper, the approaches taken to models of the work content and user performance in different professional domains are discussed, such as industrial process control, emergency management, office systems, and library systems.

It is concluded that design and evaluation of user interfaces should be explicitly based on models of the task domain and the actual requirements of the user-task interaction, not only on the interface communication language. It is also concluded that development of a common framework for design and evaluation of interfaces in different work domains will be feasible, in spite of the great differences in the characteristics of the application domains.


Decision Task Emergency Management Cognitive Style Problem Space Office Work 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alexander, C., 1964, Notes on the Synthesis of Form, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  2. Alting, L., 1978, “A Systematic Theory of Manufacturing”, Environment and Planning B, 5, pp. 131–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barber, G. R., 1983, “Supporting Organizational Problem Solving with a Work Station”, ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 1, (1), pp. 45–67.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barber, G. R., 1984, “An Office Study: Its Implications on the Understanding of Organizations”, SIGOA Newsletter, 5, (1–2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barber, G. R., De Jong, P., and Hewitt, C., 1983, “Semantic Support for Work in Organizations”, Information Processing 83, Mason, R. E. A., ed., Elsevier Science Publishers, Mason, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., and Austin, G. A., 1956, A Study of Thinking, John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Checkland, P. B., 1981, Systems Thinking. Systems Practice, Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  8. Cyert, R. M., and March, J. G., 1963, A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
  9. Eastman, C. M., 1978, “The Representation of Design Problems and Maintenance of Their Structure”, Artificial Intelligence and Pattern Recognition in Computer-Aided Design, Latombe, J.-C., ed., North-Holland, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Hammer, M., 1984, “The OA Mirage”, Datamation, 30, (2), pp. 36–46.Google Scholar
  11. Morehead, D. R., Pejtersen, A. M., and Rouse, W. B., 1984, “The Value of Information and Computer-Aided Information Seeking: Problem Formulation and Application to Fiction Retrieval”, Information Processing and Management, 20, (5/6), pp. 583–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pejtersen, A. M., 1979, “Investigation of Search Strategies Based on an Analysis of 134 User-Librarian Conversations”, Third International Research Forum in Information Science, Henriksen, T., ed., Oslo.Google Scholar
  13. Pejtersen, A. M., 1980, “Design of a Classification Scheme for Fiction Based on an Analysis of Actual User-Librarian Communications; and Use of the Scheme for Control of Librarians’ Search Strategies”, Theory and Application of Information Research, Harboe, O., and Kajberg, L., eds., Mansell, London, pp. 146–159.Google Scholar
  14. Pejtersen, A. M., 1981, “The Librarian’s Role as a Mediator in Fictional Literature”, The 4th International Research Forum in Information Science, Friberg, I., ed., Bibliotekshogskolan, Boras, pp. 178–207.Google Scholar
  15. Pejtersen, A. M., 1984, “Design of Computer-Aided User-System Dialogue Based on an Analysis Users’ Search Behavior”, Social Science Information Studies, 4, pp. 167–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pejtersen, A. M., 1986, “Design and Test of a Database for Fiction Based on an Analysis of Children’s Search Behavior”, Information Technology and Information Use, Ingwersen, Kajberg, and Pejtersen, eds., Taylor Graham, London.Google Scholar
  17. Rasmussen, J., 1984, “Strategies for State Identification and Diagnosis”, Advances in Man-Machine Systems Research, Rouse, W. B., ed., J. A. I. Press, Greenwich, CT.Google Scholar
  18. Rasmussen, J., 1985, “The Role of Hierarchical Knowledge Representation in Decision Making and Systems Management”, IEEE Transaction on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-15, (2), pp. 234–243.Google Scholar
  19. Rasmussen, J., 1985, A Framework for Cognitive Task Analysis, Riso-M-2519. Also in, Intelligent Decision Support Systems in Process Environment, Hollnagel, E., Mancini, G., and Woods, D., eds., Springer Verlag, Berlin, in press.Google Scholar
  20. Rasmussen, J., 1986, Development and Testing of a Model for Simulation of Process Operators’ Responses During Emergencies in Nuclear Power Plants, ANE/ENS Topical Meeting on Human Factors in Nuclear Power, April 1986, Knoxville, USA.Google Scholar
  21. Rasmussen, J., and Jensen, A., 1974, “Mental Procedures in Real Life Tasks: A Case Study of Electronic Trouble Shooting”, Ergonomics, 17, (3), pp. 293–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rasmussen, J., Pedersen, O. N., and Grinberg, C., 1986, Evaluation of the Use of Advanced Information Technology (Expert Systems) for Data Base System Development and Emergency Management in Non-Nuclear Industries, to be published.Google Scholar
  23. Rouse, W. B., 1984, Computer-Generated Display System Guidelines: Volume 2, Developing an Evaluation Plan, NP-3701, Search Technology, Atlanta under ORNL Contract No. W-7405-eng-26 for Electrical Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA.Google Scholar
  24. Rouse, W. B., Frey, P. R., and Rouse, S. H., 1984, Classification and Evaluation of Decision Aids for Nuclear Power Plant Operators, Report No. 8303–1, Search Technology, Atlanta under ORNL Contract No. 62X-43185V for Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  25. Suchman, L. A., 1982, Systematics of Office Work: Office Studies for Knowledge-Based Systems, Office Automation Conference, Moscone Center, San Francisco, April 5–7.Google Scholar
  26. Suchman, L. A., 1983, “Office Procedures as Practical Action: Models of Work and Systems Design”, ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems,1, (4), pp. 320–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sutherland, J. W., 1983, “Normative Predicates of Next Generation Management Support Systems”, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern., SMC-13, (3), pp. 279–297.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annelise Mark Pejtersen
    • 1
  • Jens Rasmussen
    • 1
  1. 1.Risø National LaboratoryRoskildeDenmark

Personalised recommendations