Cited by 54Usability and User Interface DesignRecommender Systems and TechniquesAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies

Design and evaluation of an adaptive icon toolbar

Debevc, Matjaz, Meyer, Beth, Donlagic, Dali, Svecko, Rajko·1996·User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf00126652

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • User testing comparing the adaptive toolbar to a 'fixed toolbar' to which users could somehow add/delete functions showed that the adaptive bar improved performance for certain tasks and that users were generally satisfied with the adaptive bar.

    “User testing comparing the adaptive toolbar to a 'fixed toolbar' to which users could somehow add/delete functions showed that the adaptive bar improved performance for certain tasks and that users were generally satisfied with the adaptive bar.”

    From A field evaluation of an adaptable two-interface design for feature-rich software (2007) · cites this paper as Debevc, Meyer, Donlagic, & Svecko, 1996

  • There has been relatively little empirical comparison between adaptive and adaptable interfaces, and to date all investigations have been relatively short laboratory experiments.

    “there has been relatively little empirical comparison between adaptive and adaptable interfaces, and to date all investigations have been relatively short laboratory experiments (e.g., [Debevc et al., 1996]).”

    From A field evaluation of an adaptable two-interface design for feature-rich software (2007) · cites this paper as Debevc et al., 1996

  • This approach has been investigated by others, for example, in Flexcel and the adaptive toolbar, both with mixed user testing results.

    “This approach has been investigated by others, for example, in Flexcel [Krogsoeter et al., 1994] and the adaptive toolbar [Debevc et al., 1996], both with mixed user testing results.”

    From A field evaluation of an adaptable two-interface design for feature-rich software (2007) · cites this paper as Debevc et al., 1996

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 22 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Debevc, M., Meyer, B., Donlagic, D., & Svecko, R.
Affiliations
Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Meyer, Beth
Venue
User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction
Published
1996
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
1-21
ISSN
  • 0924-1868 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-1391
OpenAlex
W1971576895
Cited by
54
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Berry College
  • Univerza v Mariboru
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Keywords
adaptive user interfaces, decision-making algorithm, user modeling, user evaluation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review