Computer display menus
Abstract
Whereas menu selection remains as one of the most popular forms of computer-initiated dialogue, very little is known about the effects of menu structure on selection performance. Menu hierarchies can be arranged with many items on a menu and a minimum number of menus (breadth) or with few options on a menu and several levels (depth). In the present study, subjects searched through one of four verbal hierarchies developed by Miller (1981), each with 64 words at the lowest level. The deepest hierarchy consisted of binary choices at six levels (26) while in the broadest array (641) all target words were presented in a single menu. Intermediate levels of breadth and depth were eight choices at two levels (82) and four choices at three levels (43). Two arrays were used in the 641 condition, one in which categorical relationships between words were maintained by presenting all members of a category in the same area of the display (CAT64), and one in which location of words was randomly determined (RAN64). Trend analyses on menu structures 26, 43,82 and CAT64 indicated that search speed and accuracy improved as a function of menu breadth.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
The Depth/Breadth Tradeoff in Hierarchical Computer Menus
Miller, D. P. (1981) · Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/107118138102500179 · Cited by 275 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Larson, K., & Czerwinski, M. (1998) · CHI 98 Conference Proceedings · doi:10.1145/274644.274649 · Cited by 276 · see citing works
Selection from alphabetic and numeric menu trees using a touch screen: breadth, depth, and width
Landauer, T. K., & Nachbar, D. W. (1985) · ACM SIGCHI Bulletin · doi:10.1145/1165385.317470 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Bailly, G., Lecolinet, E., & Nigay, L. (2017) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3002171 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
Zaphiris, P., Kurniawan, S. H., & Darin Ellis, R. (2003) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/3-540-36572-9_2 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Revisiting breadth vs. depth in menu structures for blind users of screen readers
Hochheiser, H., & Lazar, J. (2010) · Interacting with Computers · doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2010.02.003 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
A comparison of broad versus deep auditory menu structures
Commarford, P. M., Lewis, J. R., Smither, J. A.-A., & Gentzler, M. D. (2008) · Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872008x250665 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
- Authors
- SNOWBERRY, K., PARKINSON, S. R., & SISSON, N.
- Affiliations
- Arizona State University (US)
- Venue
- Ergonomics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1983-07
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 699-712
- ISSN
- 0014-0139 (ISSN-L)
- 1366-5847
- OpenAlex
- W2084378200
- Cited by
- 159
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 6.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Ergonomics (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Interactive and Immersive Displays
- Keywords
- menu selection, menu hierarchy, menu depth, search speed, search accuracy, human-computer interaction
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