Improving command selection with CommandMaps
Abstract
Designers of GUI applications typically arrange commands in hierarchical structures, such as menus, due to screen space limitations. However, hierarchical organisations are known to slow down expert users. This paper proposes the use of spatial memory in combination with hierarchy flattening as a means of improving GUI performance. We demonstrate these concepts through the design of a command selection interface, called CommandMaps, and analyse its theoretical performance characteristics. We then describe two studies evaluating CommandMaps against menus and Microsoft's Ribbon interface for both novice and experienced users. Results show that for novice users, there is no significant performance difference between CommandMaps and traditional interfaces -- but for experienced users, CommandMaps are significantly faster than both menus and the Ribbon.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Navigating through interface partitions takes time, and there are potential performance benefits in flattening the command structure to make more items accessible at once.
“Navigating through these partitions takes time, and, consequently, there are potential performance benefits in flattening the command structure to make more items accessible at once [Scarr et al. 2012].”
From Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces (2015) · cites this paper as Scarr et al. 2012
Cites
Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research
(1988) · Advances in Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0166-4115(08)62386-9 · Cited by 15,003 · see citing works
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
Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time.
Hyman, R. (1953) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0056940 · Cited by 1,443 · see citing works
A predictive model of menu performance
Cockburn, A., Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (2007) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1240624.1240723 · Cited by 306 · cited 6× · see citing works
“Predictions are calculated in a simple spreadsheet using previously published calibration parameters [9].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationA comparison of static, adaptive, and adaptable menus
Findlater, L., & McGrenere, J. (2004) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/985692.985704 · Cited by 291 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Work on adaptive interfaces has examined using past user behaviour to either spatially promote likely commands [13, 16, 25] or to visually highlight them [14, 16].”
BackgroundThe 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
Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces
Cockburn, A., Gutwin, C., Scarr, J., & Malacria, S. (2015) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/2659796 · Cited by 193 · see citing works
Self-citationTesting the robustness and performance of spatially consistent interfaces
Scarr, J., Cockburn, A., Gutwin, C., & Malacria, S. (2013) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2470654.2466430 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Scarr, J., Cockburn, A., Gutwin, C., & Bunt, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Canterbury (NZ)
- University of Saskatchewan (CA)
- University of Manitoba (CA)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2012-05-05
- Pages
- 257-266
- OpenAlex
- W2060696172
- Cited by
- 128
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 4.49
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (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
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Data Visualization and Analytics
- Keywords
- command selection, spatial memory, menu interface, ribbon interface, user performance, novice and expert users, graphical user interface design
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
