Cited by 193Usability and User Interface DesignData Visualization and AnalyticsInteractive and Immersive Displays

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 access

Abstract

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

Crossref · 10.1145/2659796

Cites

174 of 174 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

7 of 128 cited sources checked · 6 supported · 1 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 77 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 54
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 61
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2
102 of 102
  • 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.”
6 of 6

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

    Minor

    The 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.

  • URL type-ahead is cross-referenced to the wrong section

    Minor

    The discussion directs readers to Section 4.2 for URL type-ahead, but the description of that feature appears under Section 4.3.3.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. 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.
  2. 10.1145/800045.801571 · DOI
  3. 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.
  4. 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

See all 193

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
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