Model-based evaluation of expert cell phone menu interaction
Abstract
We describe concepts to support the analysis of cell phone menu hierarchies, based on cognitive models of users and easy-to-use optimization techniques. We present an empirical study of user performance on five simple tasks of menu traversal on an example cell phone. Two of the models applied to these tasks, based on GOMS and ACT-R, give good predictions of behavior. We use the empirically supported models to create an effective evaluation and improvement process for menu hierarchies. Our work makes three main contributions: a novel and timely study of a new, very common HCI task; new versions of existing models for accurately predicting performance; and a search procedure to generate menu hierarchies that reduce traversal time, in simulation studies, by about a third.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement.
Fitts, P. M. (1954) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0055392 · Cited by 6,466 · see citing works
The GOMS family of user interface analysis techniques: comparison and contrast
John, B. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1996) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/235833.236054 · Cited by 687 · see citing works
Predicting the effects of in-car interface use on driver performance: an integrated model approach
SALVUCCI, D. D. (2001) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1006/ijhc.2001.0472 · Cited by 195 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Motion marking menus: An eyes-free approach to motion input for handheld devices
Oakley, I., & Park, J. (2009) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.02.002 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Determining the Accessibility of Mobile Screen Readers for Blind Users
Kuber, R., Hastings, A., Tretter, M., & Fitzpatrick, D. (2012) · Imaging and Signal Processing in Health Care and Technology / 772: Human-Computer Interaction / 773: Communication, Internet and Information Technology · doi:10.2316/p.2012.772-003 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Context-dependent awareness support in open collaboration environments
Ardissono, L., & Bosio, G. (2012) · User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction · doi:10.1007/s11257-011-9100-1 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Modeling Touch-based Menu Selection Performance of Blind Users via Reinforcement Learning
Li, Z., Ko, Y.-J., Putkonen, A., Feiz, S., Ashok, V., Ramakrishnan, IV, Oulasvirta, A., & Bi, X. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3580640 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
- Authors
- Amant, R. S., Horton, T. E., & Ritter, F. E.
- Affiliations
- North Carolina State University (US)
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- Venue
- ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
- Published
- 2007-05
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1
- ISSN
- 1073-0516 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7325
- OpenAlex
- W2120163135
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 21
- FWCI
- 36.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Interactive and Immersive Displays
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Keywords
- GOMS, ACT-R, cognitive models, user performance prediction, usability evaluation, traversal time
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
