The DOI matches its Crossref record; 174 of the 174 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 7 of the 128 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces
Open accessAbstract
Interface design guidelines encourage designers to provide high-performance mechanisms for expert users. However, research shows that many expert interface components are seldom used and that there is a tendency for users to persistently fail to adopt faster methods for completing their work. This article summarizes and organizes research relevant to supporting users in making successful transitions to expert levels of performance. First, we provide a brief introduction to the underlying human factors of skill acquisition relevant to interaction with computer systems. We then present our focus, which is a review of the state of the art in user interfaces that promote expertise development. The review of interface research is based around four domains of performance improvement: intramodal improvement that occurs as a factor of repetition and practice with a single method of interaction; intermodal improvement that occurs when users switch from one method to another that has a higher performance ceiling; vocabulary extension , in which the user broadens his or her knowledge of the range of functions available; and task mapping , which examines the ways in which users perform their tasks. The review emphasizes the relationship between interface techniques and the human factors that explain their relative success.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
7 of 128 cited sources checked · 6 supported · 1 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“Carroll and Carrithers [1984] exploited this effect with their Training Wheels interfaces, which intentionally reduced the number of commands displayed.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.1. Initial Performance
What the sources say
- Disputedcites Carroll and Carrithers [1984] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Training Wheels Interface section says the authors made only basic menu choices accessible; selecting an advanced choice displayed a message that the function was unavailable. The Discussion says menus were kept identical between the training-wheels and complete interfaces. The paper therefore describes restricting which commands worked, not reducing the number displayed. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Disputed
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Wulf and Shea [2002] found that principles derived from the study of simple tasks do not generalize to more complex skills.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.10.3. Interaction with Skill Complexity.
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Wulf and Shea [2002] source
In “A Case Against the Utilization of Primarily Simple Tasks in the Study of Motor Skills,” Wulf and Shea state that principles based on simple skills are not always generalizable to complex skills. The citing sentence paraphrases the paper’s central conclusion; the paper clarifies that this applies to some principles, not necessarily all of them. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Cepeda et al. [2006] present a review of 184 papers studying verbal recall tasks, demonstrating that spaced (versus continuous) practice sessions improve recall performance.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.6. Distribution of Practice
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Cepeda et al. 2006 source
The paper reports a review of 184 articles (p. 2). Its Spacing Effects section (p. 7) finds markedly better final-test performance for spaced than massed presentations, supporting the claimed recall benefit. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Several studies have shown important interactions between the effectiveness of training interventions, the participants' skill level, and the complexity of the skill conducted.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.10.3. Interaction with Skill Complexity.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Perkins-Ceccato et al. [2003] source
- Supportedcites Wulf and Shea [2002] source
In “Do Complex Skills Late in Practice Operate Similarly to Simple Skills Early in Practice?” (page not available in our copy), the review describes practice schedules having different effects early and late in learning and explicitly says that the effectiveness of practice variables depends on the task and the learner’s experience. This supports the claim about interactions among training interventions, skill level, and skill complexity. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesEvery source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Scarr et al. [2013] examined the robustness of users' spatial memory to various forms of spatial transformation (including scaling) and found that users were able to quickly locate items in spatially stable views that had undergone a uniform spatial transformation.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.3.4. Spatial Predictability.
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Scarr et al. [2013] source
The Abstract reports that the authors tested translation, rotation, scaling, and perspective changes to a spatial interface and found performance was not strongly affected, except by large rotations. It also reports that a spatially stable presentation using scaling dramatically outperformed a reflowing presentation, supporting the claim about quickly locating items after a uniform transformation. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Supported
In the paper
“a production bias, which encourages reuse of known methods in preference to finding better methods that may improve throughput in the long run”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Carroll and Rossen 1987
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“log studies have shown surprisingly limited command vocabularies among experienced users [Matejka et al. 2009]”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Matejka et al. 2009 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesNone of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similar findings have been shown for text editing [Rosson 1983], operating systems [Draper 1984;Doane et al. 1990], and spreadsheets [Nilsen et al. 1993].”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the very characteristics that make GUIs effective for novices also cause them to fail in their goal of supporting experts”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“an assimilation bias, in which people apply existing knowledge to interpret and solve new problems”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Carroll and Rossen 1987
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
- Probably not a substantial claim. 54
- It may state two separate claims as one. 61
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“They explained this effect with reference to the learner's total cognitive load: When task demands are low, learners benefit from practice conditions that increase total load, whereas when task demands are high, practice conditions with more manageable workload are beneficial.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.10.3. Interaction with Skill Complexity.
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Wulf and Shea [2002] source
The section “Do Complex Skills Late in Practice Operate Similarly to Simple Skills Early in Practice?” (page unavailable) explicitly says low-demand motor skills benefit from practice that increases load, while skills placing extremely high loads on the learner benefit from reducing that load to manageable levels. It frames difficulty in terms of demands on the learner’s cognitive-motor resources. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Many interfaces allow access to extensive functionality, often including hundreds or thousands of commands [Hsi and Potts 2000;McGrenere et al. 2007], yet users typically know only a small subset.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 6. DOMAIN 3: VOCABULARY EXTENSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hsi and Potts 2000 source
- Supportedcites McGrenere et al. 2007 source
The H1 Usage Hypothesis section reports approximately 203 functions available in MS Word 2000, supporting the cited point that an interface can offer hundreds of commands. The Introduction also describes expanding feature lists, menus, and toolbars. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Naturally, learning and skill acquisition have been the focus of substantial research in the psychology literature.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“interfaces explicitly designed for experts (e.g., keyboard shortcuts or command-line interaction) allow high levels of performance but only after extensive training”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“often the user's source of last resort [Randall and Pedersen 1998]”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Randall and Pedersen 1998 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“spatial and proprioceptive memory strongly influence the user's ability to rapidly acquire interface targets”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2. HUMAN FACTORS OF LEARNING AND SKILL ACQUISITION
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The tendency for users to asymptote at mediocre performance has serious and enduring implications for the productivity of millions of office workers.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Both biases lead users to continue with known methods of interaction, causing an associated tendency to miss opportunities for improvement.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Carroll and Rossen 1987
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The problem of users failing to achieve expertise has been shown in many studies across a wide range of interactive tasks and contexts.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the productivity loss associated with each command selection is relatively small, these losses are multiplied across dozens of selections of each command per day”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“It describes how skills are developed through cognitive, associative, and autonomous phases”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.1. Stages of Psychomotor Skill Development: Cognitive, Associative, Autonomous
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fitts and Posner 1967
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During the cognitive phase, initial conceptions of the activity are formed, predominantly learning what activities are to be done.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.1.1. Cognitive Phase.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“with Fitts and Posner's [1967] three-stage model being particularly influential”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.1. Stages of Psychomotor Skill Development: Cognitive, Associative, Autonomous
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fitts and Posner 1967
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The associative phase is enduring, with many tasks requiring years or decades of practice before transitioning from the associative phase to automaticity.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.1.2. Associative Phase.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The autonomous phase represents the ultimate level of psychomotor learning, one that is attained after prolonged and extensive practice.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.1.3. Autonomous Phase.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The typical design of GUIs, therefore, allows users to quickly learn suboptimal methods for task completion (e.g., by pointing and clicking), which users tend to maintain for months, years, and decades of subsequent interaction.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“standard GUI mechanisms such as visual search and direct manipulation, which are easy to understand but that force the experienced user into relatively slow and laborious action”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“human memory is the repository for human experiences and understanding, so anything that has been learned is encoded in some form of memory”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2. HUMAN FACTORS OF LEARNING AND SKILL ACQUISITION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schmidt and Lee 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Schneider and Shiffrin [1977] identified the following characteristics of controlled interaction: (1) It is slow; (2) it is attention-demanding, in that other similar tasks interfere with its execution; (3) it is serial in nature; and (4) it is strongly volitional, in that the activities can be avoided or immediately stopped.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.1.1. Cognitive Phase.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schneider and Shiffrin 1977
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recently, however, there has been an increase in literature explicitly addressing the problem of how interfaces can be designed to promote and assist expert levels of performance.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 1. INTRODUCTION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Schneider and Shiffrin [1977] identified the following characteristics of autonomous actions: (1) They are fast; (2) they are not attention demanding, in that other verbal or cognitive operations do not interfere with their execution; (3) they are parallel in nature, with various operations possibly occurring together; and (4) they are not volitional, in that processing is often unavoidable.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.1.3. Autonomous Phase.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schneider and Shiffrin 1977
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite this variance, task performance improvements are largest during the cognitive phase.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.1.1. Cognitive Phase.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“once a suboptimal strategy has been learned and reproduced several times, it is likely to become habit, further reducing the likelihood of changing to faster alternative methods”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.10.1. Satisficing.
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the need for different movements to a target dependent on varied initial cursor location may impair the ultimate performance ceiling and ability to attain autonomous levels of performance with mouse and cursor interaction”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.7. Spatial and Proprioceptive Memory
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the guidance hypothesis [Schmidt 1991] suggests that augmented feedback that improves early performance through guidance may impair retention of the performed skills once the guidance is removed.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.9. Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schmidt 1991 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The efficacy of certain training interventions has been demonstrated to interact with individual and environmental factors, which greatly complicates the process of determining which training methods are likely to be most effective for different people in different settings.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.10.2. Arousal and Personality.
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In an experiment on learning letter locations, the frost brushing condition was rated as more engaging and less frustrating than the normal interface; but an experiment involving the harder task of learning gesture shapes for entire words showed the frost brushing interface to be less engaging and more frustrating than normal.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.2.1. Effortful Learning.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cockburn et al. [2007]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“there is evidence that personality differences such as introversion and extroversion result in different baselines of arousal, and, consequently, the same stimulus effect may increase performance for an extrovert while decreasing performance for an introvert [Revelle et al. 1980;Bullock and Gilliland 1993].”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.10.2. Arousal and Personality.
What the sources say
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The notion that controls should be visible to be learned is also well expressed in most usability guidelines, but the corollary of making novice functionality visible is that expert functions are often suppressed, thus reducing the likelihood that they will be discovered.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.1. Initial Performance
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Two key strategies for improving motivation are to make the task seem important and to use goal setting [Schmidt and Lee 2011].”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.8. Motivation and Feedback
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schmidt and Lee 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Each method has associated performance characteristics, including a performance floor and ceiling, and each user will have attained performance ability somewhere between the floor and ceiling.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 3. FOUR DOMAINS OF INTERFACE PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Deliberate practice facilitates two kinds of learning: improving skills already attained and extending the reach and range of skills; it is further assisted through expert mediation, such as skilled coaching.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.3. Type of Practice
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A related concept is that appropriate interface controls should be”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.1. Initial Performance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Karat et al. 2000 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Positive motivation to learn and improve is a key determinant in whether a learner chooses to participate in practice.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.8. Motivation and Feedback
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Perkins-Ceccato et al. [2003] showed that low-skill golfers benefited more from instruction that focused attention on internal motor aspects of actions when compared to instructions that focused on external effects on the ball; conversely, highly skilled golfers benefited more from externally focused instructions.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.10.3. Interaction with Skill Complexity.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Perkins-Ceccato et al. [2003] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“When an interface is spatially stable, users can make rapid decisions about the location of target items, but when stability is compromised users must resort to comparatively slow visual search [Cockburn et al. 2007;Cockburn and Gutwin 2009].”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.7. Spatial and Proprioceptive Memory
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cockburn et al. 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Cockburn and Gutwin 2009 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Without prior experience to draw on, novice users are heavily reliant on visual search, and the time for visual search is a linear function of the number of candidate items that must be considered [Hornof and Kieras 1997;Wolfe 1998;Cockburn et al. 2007;Cockburn and Gutwin 2009].”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.1. Initial Performance
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Dyck et al. [2003] observe that many computer games achieve the dual objectives of availability without obstruction through”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.1. Initial Performance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Dyck et al. [2003] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“rest periods between sessions improve learning, with longer rest periods being more beneficial than short ones”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.6. Distribution of Practice
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“although it is known that performance generally follows an inverted U shape with level of arousal (i.e., performance deteriorates when a person is under-or overexcited)”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.10.2. Arousal and Personality.
What the sources say
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results suggest that there is a fine balance between engaging and frustrating users and that training interfaces should be neither too mundane nor too difficult.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.2.1. Effortful Learning.
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Importantly, automaticity allows the performer to think about higher level tasks during the execution of the skill.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.11. Summary of Human Factors of Skill Acquisition
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Highly skilled task performance is characterized by automaticity, where the physical actions required for the task are executed quickly, efficiently, and with minimal conscious deliberation.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.11. Summary of Human Factors of Skill Acquisition
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“he contends that elite performance require deliberate practice to counteract automaticity during practice, with performers using various forms of mental representations to maintain the cognitive and associative phases [Ericsson 2004]”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.3. Type of Practice
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ericsson 2004 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“including the observation that some factors assisting performance at one stage can impair performance at another.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4. DOMAIN 1: INTRAMODAL PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Armstrong [1970] showed that for learning complex elbow movements, mechanical limb control resulted in precise movements during training but inaccurate reproduction once the controls were released.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.9. Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Armstrong 1970 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They postulated that the strength of a memory is a positive function of the depth to which the stimulus is analyzed.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 2.4. Depth of Processing and Effort
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Craik and Lockhart 1972 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Several factors influence the rate at which performance increases after initial familiarization, including the effort required during training and the use of guidance to assist performance.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.2. Extended Learning
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, by presenting different interfaces to novice and expert users, there are risks of confusing users when making a transition to the more advanced UI (introducing a”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.1. Initial Performance
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“brushing condition improved users' memory of letter locations and of gesture shapes better compared to the traditional keyboard display (memory for gesture shapes was measured by asking users to create word gestures on a blank keyboard, with gesture quality reported by a recognition engine score function).”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.2.1. Effortful Learning.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cockburn et al. [2007]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Typically, gamification is used to increase the user's motivation to engage in an activity and to improve his or her performance at it, although other benefits such as increased collaboration and creative leadership may also occur [Reeves and Read 2009].”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 7.1. Task Training: Manuals, Online Help, and Tutorials
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Reeves and Read 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“An initial user study showed that users could locate unfamiliar commands in an interface much faster when using ShowMeHow”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 7.1. Task Training: Manuals, Online Help, and Tutorials
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ramesh et al. 2011 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“their lab studies showed that users found gamified calibration procedures to be significantly more enjoyable without compromising the calibration outcomes.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 7.1. Task Training: Manuals, Online Help, and Tutorials
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Flatla et al. 2011 source
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Marking menus were designed to adhere to a set of design guidelines, including revelation, guidance, and rehearsal [Kurtenbach et al. 1994], as follows:”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.2.1. Effortful Learning.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kurtenbach et al. 1994
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Their findings showed that users are biased toward procedures that are (1) well-practiced and generic and (2) composed of interactive components that are fast and incremental.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 5.1.2. Perception of the New Modality.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fu and Gray [2004]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, the methods used for explicit task instruction (described in Section 7) could also be used to extend the user's vocabulary.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 6. DOMAIN 3: VOCABULARY EXTENSION
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results have important implications for the design of training systems because designers must understand whether their goal is to assist users in rapidly attaining high performance or whether learned outcomes and the ability to transfer the learning to related interactions are primary objectives.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.2.1. Effortful Learning.
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The conceptual deterrents and barriers to vocabulary extension are similar to those described for intermodal improvement: Users need to be aware of commands before using them, and they need to understand the magnitude of improvement that they will enable.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 6. DOMAIN 3: VOCABULARY EXTENSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly, studies have consistently shown that keyboard shortcuts offer a higher performance ceiling than does mouse selection [Odell et al. 2004;Lane et al. 2005;Malacria et al. 2013], yet Tak et al. [2013] found that some participants did not use known hotkeys because they believed toolbar selections were faster.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 5.1.2. Perception of the New Modality.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Odell et al. 2004
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lane et al. 2005 source
- Not matchedcites Malacria et al. 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“OctoPocus was evaluated in comparison to traditional Help menus and marking menus and showed positive results.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.2.1. Effortful Learning.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bau and Mackay 2008 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Their results showed that forced use and audio feedback worked well, with 72.8% and 66.6% respectively of experimental selections completed with hotkeys, and no adverse subjective response.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 5.1.1. Awareness of the New Modality.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Grossman et al. [2007] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Adar et al. [2013] provide a general discussion of the role of”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 5.1.2. Perception of the New Modality.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Adar et al. [2013] source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Task completion rates were higher and frustration lower when using FollowUs.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 7.1. Task Training: Manuals, Online Help, and Tutorials
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lafreniere et al. 2013 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Importantly, though, several studies have demonstrated that predicted and actual experience differ (e.g., Czerwinski et al. [2001]) and that users can mistrust their abilities, leading to underestimates of potential benefit with the new modality.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 5.1.2. Perception of the New Modality.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Czerwinski et al. [2001]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although experiments showed these methods to be successful in increasing hotkey use, forced use of hotkeys and audio feedback may be unacceptable to users outside lab settings.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 5.1.1. Awareness of the New Modality.
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although empirical results for CLI benefits over GUIs have been mixed (e.g., Whiteside et al. [1985]), it is widely accepted that CLIs enable higher efficiency, and power users are strong advocates (e.g., Barrett et al. [2004]).”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.3.1. Flat Command Structures.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Whiteside et al. [1985]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Barrett et al. [2004] source
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Their results confirmed the guidance hypothesis: The conditions that maximized performance during training (static-and dynamic-tracing conditions) performed the worst in the retention tests and vice versa.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.2.1. Effortful Learning.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Anderson and Bischof [2013] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“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].”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.3.1. Flat Command Structures.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Scarr et al. 2012 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The existence of this performance dip is likely to deter users from switching to new methods for interaction, even though doing so may offer long-term productivity gains-the prospect of encountering a short-term productivity loss may cause users to postpone switching to the new method, possibly forever.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 5. DOMAIN 2: INTERMODAL PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Users' interactive behavior is often repetitive (e.g., command use [Greenberg and Witten 1993] and web navigation [Tauscher and Greenberg 1997]), and interfaces can aid efficiency by explicitly supporting command repetition.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.3.3. Revisitation/History Support.
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Spatial audio was included to assist memorization of place, and their results showed a 56% increase in object memory compared to standard desktop systems.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.3.4. Spatial Predictability.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tan et al. [2001] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“These results reflect those generated by Cockburn et al.'s [2007] frost-brushing experiments, in which the frost-brushing condition slowed user performance during training but resulted in better results during subsequent testing conditions.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 4.2.1. Effortful Learning.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cockburn et al. [2007]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Evaluation results of their Com-munityCommands system suggest that an item-based collaborative filtering algorithm performs best, generating the highest number of useful recommendations, as well as the fewest number of unuseful ones.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 6. DOMAIN 3: VOCABULARY EXTENSION
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Human factors literature, summarized in Section 2, shows that many factors influence skill acquisition.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 9.7. Generalizability of Previous Results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Open source systems permit modifications that enable the longitudinal analysis of expert use (e.g., Murphy et al.'s [2006] analysis of Java developers using the Eclipse IDE), but, for productivity applications, the user base is often smaller than for major commercial systems.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 9.1. From Lab Studies to Field Studies
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Murphy et al. 2006 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Interaction with computing systems introduces new and important factors that have not been extensively studied.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 9.7. Generalizability of Previous Results
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Focus-shifts cause only a brief attention switch and cause less disruption.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 7.3. Task Disruption and Locus of Control
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bødker 1995
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, these techniques have several limitations, including access to only a subset of controls, reduced system responsiveness, and increased frequency of software crashes, which make them impractical for studies of real use.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 9.1. From Lab Studies to Field Studies
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Research by Bødker [1995] suggests that there are two types of task interruption: breakdowns and focus-shifts.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 7.3. Task Disruption and Locus of Control
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bødker 1995
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Typically, these APIs form part of the accessibility framework that assists development of software for users with special needs.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 9.1. From Lab Studies to Field Studies
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unlike buttons, scrollbars, and other graphical widgets that afford a particular method for activation (clicking, dragging, etc.), gestural interactions need not be conducted with reference to specific graphical entities.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 10. CONCLUSION
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Generation mechanisms should produce recommendations that are both new to the user and useful given his or her current context and task.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 8. SUMMARY OF RESULTS FROM THE FOUR DOMAINS
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Marking menus were designed to adhere to a set of design guidelines, including revelation, guidance, and rehearsal[Kurtenbach et al. 1994], as follows:”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 10. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kurtenbach et al. 1994
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Encouraging users to reflect on their performance may assist in reducing the tendency to persistently maintain suboptimal methods.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 8. SUMMARY OF RESULTS FROM THE FOUR DOMAINS
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Current interface guidelines attempt to account for novice learning and expertise by advocating for shortcut facilities, but this strategy is known to fail because few users make the transition to expert methods-instead, users maintain the adequate but inefficient strategies they learned first.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 10. CONCLUSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In other words, the novice's motor actions should rehearse the expert's motor actions to assist the development of automaticity and muscle memory.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 10. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kurtenbach et al. 1994
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most of this review has focused on task performance time, but accuracy and the cost of errors are often critical to successful interaction, and they can vary substantially between interaction techniques.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 9.5. Speed/Accuracy/Quality Tradeoffs across Expertise
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“GUIs have become the primary medium through which office work is conducted.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 10. CONCLUSION
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For example, Olson and Nilsen [1988] showed that users who knew two methods for entering formulae into a spreadsheet were significantly slower than users who knew only one, and they attributed the time cost to the additional cognition required to plan and decide between methods.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 9.2. Understanding the Costs and Benefits of Intermodal Methods
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Olson and Nilsen 1988
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Kurtenbach et al.'s marking menu research was conducted in the early 1990s, with a focus on stylusbased input.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 10. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kurtenbach 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, developing systems that can be used in field studies of real work is extremely difficult.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 9.1. From Lab Studies to Field Studies
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The presentation of training information should fit within the user's current context and should avoid interruptions that break the flow of work.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 8. SUMMARY OF RESULTS FROM THE FOUR DOMAINS
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Methods for intermodal improvement, such as keyboard accelerators, are already commonly used in state-of-the-art interfaces.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 9.2. Understanding the Costs and Benefits of Intermodal Methods
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Initially (left), three alternative gesture commands are possible, but as the user gestures upward and rightward, guidance for Paste is removed and Cut fades, leaving only the remaining guidance for Copy.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 10. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bau and Mackay 2008 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“gamification can increase engagement and performance”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 8. SUMMARY OF RESULTS FROM THE FOUR DOMAINS
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A primary factor contributing to their success is the ease with which they can be learnednewcomers can quickly attain sufficient competence to adequately complete their work.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 10. CONCLUSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The software that people use for everyday office work is often proprietary, and the lack of access to source code constrains researchers' ability to modify system behavior and monitor its use.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 9.1. From Lab Studies to Field Studies
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Presentation should be dynamically updated to the user's context, should be continuously available to the user, and should be presented in an ambient manner that allows quick access without interrupting task execution.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 8. SUMMARY OF RESULTS FROM THE FOUR DOMAINS
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When source code is unavailable, there are often Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) that allow limited control of software systems running on a particular platform.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 9.1. From Lab Studies to Field Studies
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Patina uses a colored heatmap to recommend commands to users.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 10. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Matejka et al. 2013 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although ease of learning is highly desirable, it is common for office workers to continue using substantially similar interfaces for months, years, and decades, so that optimizing designs for initial learnability rather than long-term efficiency can be counterproductive.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 10. CONCLUSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two important parts of vocabulary extension are the generation of good recommendations and the presentation of those recommendations in the interface.”
§ Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces > 8. SUMMARY OF RESULTS FROM THE FOUR DOMAINS
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
The design of interfaces that facilitate a transition from novice to expert performance is less well understood than the design of interfaces for novices or for experts.
“Although the design of interfaces for novices or for experts has been well investigated, the design of interfaces that facilitate a transition from novice to expert performance is less well understood.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Until recently, there has been relatively little research into interface methods that can promote and assist the transition to expertise.
“until recently there has been relatively little research into interface methods that can promote and assist the transition to expertise”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is a lack of clarity on how findings from the skill development literature can be applied in UIs to assist the development of user expertise.
“there is a lack of clarity on how the findings can be applied in UIs to assist the development of user expertise”
The paper relies on this without support.
Recent interface releases have tended to reduce the visibility of expert methods for interaction.
“recent interface releases have tended to reduce the visibility of expert methods for interaction”
The paper relies on this without support.
The extra effort required to discover a hotkey may deter users from doing so.
“the extra effort required to discover the hotkey (e.g., a web search) may deter users from doing so”
The paper relies on this without support.
The recent surge in popularity of finger-based gestural interaction on mobile devices has renewed interest in advanced techniques for easily learned and high-performance gestural interaction techniques.
“The recent surge in popularity of finger-based gestural interaction on mobile devices has renewed interest in advanced techniques for easily learned and high-performance gestural interaction techniques.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Alternative methods are assigned to the wrong figure
MinorThe text points to Figure 2(b) for alternative methods of accessing a function, but it elsewhere identifies Figure 1(b) as showing those methods. The Figure 2 caption describes performance over time for a single method.
“Most interfaces support more than one interaction method for accessing the same function (Figure 2(b)).”
“Figure 1(b) depicts a range of alternative methods for one function, emphasizing that different methods have different performance characteristics.”
URL type-ahead is cross-referenced to the wrong section
MinorThe discussion directs readers to Section 4.2 for URL type-ahead, but the description of that feature appears under Section 4.3.3.
“such as URL type-ahead, Section 4.2”
“## 4.3.3. Revisitation/History Support. Users' interactive behavior is often repetitive (e.g., command use [Greenberg and Witten 1993] and web navigation [Tauscher and Greenberg 1997]), and interfaces can aid efficiency by explicitly supporting command repetition.For example, web browser URL address bars and the Google search box memorize previous activities and offer type-ahead shortcuts for them:”
Citations
Cites
(1993) · Cited by 9,879
Levels of processing: A framework for memory research
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(72)80001-x · Cited by 9,566
From game design elements to gamefulness: defining "gamification"
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011) · Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments · doi:10.1145/2181037.2181040 · Cited by 8,402
Egeth, H. E., & Kahneman, D. J. (1975) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421603 · Cited by 6,976
Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention.
Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.1.1 · Cited by 5,902
Carayannis, E. G. (2013) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3858-8_100431 · Cited by 4,819
Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis
Schmidt, R. A. (1982) · Cited by 4,770
Depth of Processing and the Retention of Words in Episodic Memory
Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. (1975) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268 · Cited by 4,121
Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications
Anderson, J. R. (2014) · Cited by 4,121
The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction
Card, S. K., Moran, T. P., & Newell, A. (2018) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9780203736166 · Cited by 4,103
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- M. Czerwinski , E. Horvitz , and E. Cuttrell . 2001. Subjective duration assessment: An impicit probe for software usability . In Proceedings of IHM-HCI. 167--170 . M. Czerwinski, E. Horvitz, and E. Cuttrell. 2001. Subjective duration assessment: An impicit probe for software usability. In Proceedings of IHM-HCI. 167--170.
- 10.1145/800045.801571 · DOI
- A. Rothstein and R. Arnold . 1976 . Bridging the gap: Application of research on videotape feedback and bowling . Motor Skills: Theory into Practice 1 , 35 -- 62 . A. Rothstein and R. Arnold. 1976. Bridging the gap: Application of research on videotape feedback and bowling. Motor Skills: Theory into Practice 1, 35--62.
- H. Simon . 1959 . Theories of decision-making in economics and behavioral science . The American Economic Review 49 , 3, 252 -- 283 . H. Simon. 1959. Theories of decision-making in economics and behavioral science. The American Economic Review 49, 3, 252--283.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–190 of 190
Introduction to user interfaces
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0023 · Cited by 1
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0018 · Cited by 2
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0046 · Cited by 1
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0003 · Cited by 1
Are You, You? Seamlessly Fighting Identity Fraud with Keystroke Dynamics
Kim, D., Valacich, J. S., Jenkins, J. L., Wilson, D. W., Kumar, M. N. V. R., & Weisgarber, P. (2026) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2023.0088 · Cited by 1
Enhancing Spatial Learning of Large Command Sets in Two FastTap Menus with Artificial Landmarks
Abdullah, S. M., & Uddin, M. S. (2025) · Graphics Interface · doi:10.1145/3769872.3769882 · Cited by 2
“Spatial memory has been exploited in GUIs to enable rapid selection [13, 37, 40], ultimately helping the users to become experts [9, 54].”
Commands composition user interface pattern
Chodarev, S. (2015) · IEEE International Scientific Conference on Informatics (Informatics) · doi:10.1109/informatics.2015.7377819 · Cited by 1
“For example if a user presses Delete key, should an application delete current character, whole word, or a sentence.”
BackgroundMobile app prototype to showcase proper lumbar-spine exercising
Valdivia, S., Blanco, R., Uribe-Quevedo, Á., Peñuela, L., Rojas, D., & Kapralos, B. (2017) · IEEE Global Conference on Consumer Electronics (GCCE) · doi:10.1109/gcce.2017.8229374 · Cited by 1
“However, the complexity of some solutions may deter some potential users [12][13], while usability challenges which may be present can negatively affect the user’s acceptance of the app or solution [14].”
BackgroundUser learning can affect software system's response time
Das, A., & Das, O. (2021) · Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory · doi:10.1016/j.simpat.2021.102437 · Cited by 1
Examining the Influence of Cognitive Ability on Situating to a Video Game: Expanded Discussion
McCreery, M. P., Head, D. L., Leif, S. A., Fiorentini, J. P., Bacos, C. A., Laferriere, J. R., Krach, S. K., & Cole, L. Q. L. (2022) · Cognition and exploratory learning in the digital age · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-90944-4_6 · Cited by 1
Bailly, G., & Malacria, S. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-27648-9_19-1 · Cited by 1
Self-citationEmond, B., Torbati, R. Z., Smith, J., et al. (2023) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-34735-1_9 · Cited by 1
Ether-Mark: An Off-Screen Marking Menu For Mobile Devices
Rateau, H., Rekik, Y., & Lank, E. (2023) · INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MULTIMODAL INTERACTION · doi:10.1145/3577190.3614150 · Cited by 1
“In terms of spatial input, several researchers have also provided useful insights and guidelines on what can be done to support users transitioning from one mode to the other [10, 27].”
BackgroundIntroduction to human–computer interaction
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0001 · Cited by 2
Usability for novices and experts: A layered design in a case study in Malawi
Tronerud, K. A., Vasbotten, M., Kaasbøll, J., et al. (2017) · IST-Africa Week Conference · doi:10.23919/istafrica.2017.8102298 · Cited by 1
“[13] discourage this solution, since users may get confused when a new level is opened.”
BackgroundParsoya, A., & Rajamanickam, V. (2019) · doi:10.1145/3364183.3364186 · Cited by 1
“These shortcuts eliminate the homing time between the key-board and the mouse but they remain underutilized [8].”
BackgroundNovice to Expert Real-time Knowledge Transition in the Context of X-ray Airport Security
Hoghooghi, S., Popović, V., & Swann, L. (2020) · Proceedings of DRS · doi:10.21606/drs.2020.315 · Cited by 1
“As screeners’ performance is correlated with their knowledge, interface and equipment, security interfaces can assist the screeners, but extensive training and experience are required to achieve high performance (Cockburn et al., 2015).”
BackgroundInfluentialCOMPARING BREAK TYPES FOR SPACED PRACTICE IN A PLATFORMER GAME
Piller, B. (2021) · HARVEST (University of Saskatchewan) · Cited by 1
CountMarks: Multi-Finger Marking Menus for Mobile Interaction with Head-Mounted Displays
Pollock, J. (2019) · doi:10.22215/etd/2019-13614 · Cited by 1
“The psychology and learning theories behind how users move from Novices to Experts in selection is out of the scope of this thesis but is detailed elsewhere [30].”
BackgroundNovice-to-expert knowledge transition in airport x-ray security screening
Hoghooghi, S. (2022) · Queensland University of Technology · doi:10.5204/thesis.eprints.235384 · Cited by 1
Interacting with signifier-less designs : the case of swhidgets
Pong, N. K. C. (2020) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/12ba449bz6040z41a2zb6a7z24d4fe2a7c7b · Cited by 1
Nayak, A. K., Prakash, Y., Jayarathna, S., Lee, H.-N., & Ashok, V. G. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791509 · Cited by 2
“Prior work on technology adoption among disabled digital novices highlights ‘learnability’, arguing for multi-layered interfaces that progressively reveal functionality as users gain experience [32, 32, 51, 95].”
Perraud, R., & Malacria, S. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3790718
“They directly influence how quickly users understand the software [15], which elements they recognize, and how effectively they transfer skill between GUIs [60].”
Self-citationMurray, T., Hekler, E. B., Spruijt‐Metz, D., Rivera, D. E., & Raij, A. B. (2016) · Advances in intelligent systems and computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-41627-4_25
An Analysis for Difficult Tasks in e-Learning Course Design
Lai, L., & Lin, S. (2017) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-58481-2_14
Presenting the Relevance of Suggested Information
Inbar, O., & Meyer, J. (2019) · Conference proceedings/Conference proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/smc.2019.8914441
“These users are trapped in a “beginner mode” of operation [3].”
BackgroundIntermodal Improvement: Nudging Users to Use Keyboard Shortcuts
Raursø, N. E., Persson, M. K., Garðarsson, K. B., Mazáň, D., Andreasen, S., Avotiņa, E., Ventegodt, A., & Triantafyllou, E. (2020) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-49713-2_30
“[8] put forth concerns making the user aware of the unused functionality.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialBoess, S. U., Cheung, Y. M., & Cain, R. L. (2020) · Proceedings of DRS · doi:10.21606/drs.2020.4
Effects of Interpretation Error on User Learning in Novel Input Mechanisms
Lam, K. C. (2021) · HARVEST (University of Saskatchewan)
Revisiting Menu Design Through the Lens of Implicit Statistical Learning
Giannisakis, E., Dimara, E., Goujon, A., et al. (2022) · International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI) · doi:10.1145/3531073.3531113
“Still, understanding and capturing underline processes of skill acquisition and visual search [19] can be of tremendous importance for effective user interface design.”
BackgroundMusical Gesture through the Human Computer Interface: An Investigation using Information Theory
Blandino, M. (2021) · Louisiana State University · doi:10.31390/gradschool_dissertations.5535
Reinforcement Learning for Exploring Pedagogical Strategies in Virtual Reality Training
Aziz, R. S., & Emond, B. (2022) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-19679-9_63
Understanding Human-Computer Interactions in Restricted Clinical Environments
Kraus, K., Trübe, L., & Gundler, C. (2023) · Studies in health technology and informatics · doi:10.3233/shti230703
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0005
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0014
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0024
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0019
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0032
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0044
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0041
Representations of user research
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0015
Computational representations and models
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0039
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0034
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0013 · Cited by 1
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0022
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0027
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0009
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0035
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0036 · Cited by 1
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0040
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0031
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0029
Growing into the HCI discipline
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0045
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0010
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0016
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0007
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0026
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0038
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.002.0003
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0042
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0043
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0011
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0008 · Cited by 1
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0020
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0006
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0028 · Cited by 3
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0004
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0030
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0033
Introduction to understanding people
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0002
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0025
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0012
Hornbæk, K., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192864543.003.0021
The Postdiction as an approch to recommand commands based on interface state evolution
Bailly, G., Ali, N. A., Zhuang, C., Xia, A., & Gori, J. (2025) · Conference on l'Interaction Homme-Machine (IHM) · doi:10.1145/3765712.3765732
“Pourtant de nombreux utilisateurs, même experts, ne les utilisent pas [3, 20].”
InfluentialDrum Menu: Bimanual Controller Command Access Techniques in Virtual Reality
Zhang, F., Kokhanov, P., Lank, E., et al. (2025) · doi:10.1145/3769872.3769884
“It supports both novice (GUI) and expert (gestures) users with a mechanism of transitioning from novice to expert [7].”
Techniques d'interaction exploitant la mémoire pour faciliter l'activation de commandes
Fruchard, B. (2018) · doi:10.70675/0f513acazc195z430fzb761z6aaecc594778
“Les utilisateurs doivent donc avoir conscience de cette nouvelle modalité et faire l’effort de l’utiliser pour améliorer leur performance, ce qui peut entraîner une perte de performance dans un premier temps [32, 130].”
BackgroundDesigning With Machine Learning for Interactive Music Dispositifs
Scurto, H. (2019) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/1bf87ea2z8d0cz4c5eza982zdb110f9744bb
Retroactive Transfer Phenomena in Alternating Interfaces
Raissi, R. (2021) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/2bd07f51z1e47z4e76za5cbz5bd6efab8b1c
Theoretical bases of human tool use in digital environments
Renom, M. A. (2022) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/a73ad38dz130az4fe4z9373z24ab982c4ff5
L’influence des caractéristiques du menu des sites web marchand sur les réactions de l’internaute
Sender, T. (2024) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/8fa58352zfbbcz4a39zb697z19e6f5d57d8b
ExNovo: A User Interface that Supports Novices without Encumbering Experts
Blair, M. R., Klassen, A. D., O'Camb, J., et al. (2026) · Games Research and Practice · doi:10.1145/3786596
“The goal of every user interface ( UI ) is to facilitate communication between two very different information processing systems—humans and computers [Dunsmore 1980 ; Cockburn et al. 2014 ].”
Understanding and Designing Technology to Support Mentoring Functions in Chinese Design Teams
Shen, L., Zhang, Z., Wei, Q., Lee, L., Hui, P., & Fan, M. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2651347
Exploring One-Handed Thumb-to-Finger Text Composition Systems for Head Mounted Displays
Banerjee, R., Faleel, S. A., & Irani, P. (2026) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3800645.3812913
“This lack of clear affor-dances can hinder novice use and slow progression from basic entry to fluent text composition [10].”
Human and AI Design Elements for a Virtual Instructor in Lifeboat Simulation Training
Smith, J., Karimi, E., Barnes, J. G., et al. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-30015-7_25
Lee, S., Park, D.-H., Lee, J., Kim, J., Ko, S., Kim, E., Jeon, K., & Kim, Y. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2737580
Mid-air Hand Gesture Sequences: Evaluation and Design Recommendations Towards Gestural-Interfaces
Lewis, B., Abtahi, P., Collins, C. M., Grossman, T., & Glueck, M. (2026) · ACM Symposium on Spatial User Interaction (SUI) · doi:10.1145/3822518.3830070
Metadata
- Authors
- Cockburn, A., Gutwin, C., Scarr, J., & Malacria, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Canterbury (NZ)
- University of Saskatchewan (CA)
- Venue
- ACM Computing Surveys
- Published
- 2014-11-12
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1-36
- ISSN
- 0360-0300 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7341
- OpenAlex
- W1986841213
- Cited by
- 193
- References
- 164
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 4
- FWCI
- 18.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- ACM Computing Surveys (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Royal Society of New Zealand (10-UOC-020)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › Data Visualization and Analytics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Interactive and Immersive Displays
- Keywords
- novice to expert transition, user interface design, skill acquisition, expertise development, interface performance, human factors, vocabulary enrichment, task mapping
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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