The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 73 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Creating creativity: user interfaces for supporting innovation
Open accessAbstract
A challenge for human-computer interaction researchers and user interf ace designers is to construct information technologies that support creativity. This ambitious goal can be attained by building on an adequate understanding of creative processes. This article offers a four-phase framework for creativity that might assist designers in providing effective tools for users: (1)Collect: learn from provious works stored in libraries, the Web, etc.; (2)Relate: consult with peers and mentors at early, middle, and late stages, (3)Create: explore, compose, evaluate possible solutions; and (4)Donate: disseminate the results and contribute to the libraries. Within this integrated framework, this article proposes eight activities that require human-computer interaction research and advanced user interface design. A scenario about an architect illustrates the process of creative work within such an environment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“While clearly intended to augment creativity, this puts mixed-initiative interfaces at odds with the traditional design patterns of creativity support systems, which include being maximally unobtrusive in order to promote and sustain user engagement [51].”
From When is a Tool a Tool? User Perceptions of System Agency in Human–AI Co-Creative Drawing (2023) · cites this paper as [51]
In the citing paper
“Almost by defnition, mixed-initiative systems violate the principle of maximal unobtrusiveness that has long been a hallmark design principle for creativity support systems [51].”
From When is a Tool a Tool? User Perceptions of System Agency in Human–AI Co-Creative Drawing (2023) · cites this paper as [51]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Kuhn, T. S., & Schlegel, R. (1963) · Physics Today · doi:10.1063/1.3050879 · Cited by 35,538
Baeza-Yates, R. A., & Ribeiro-Neto, B. A. (1999) · Cited by 11,505
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Hall, M. B., & Kuhn, T. S. (1963) · The American Historical Review · doi:10.2307/1847040 · Cited by 7,755
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Kuhn, T. S. (1996) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226458106.001.0001 · Cited by 7,281
Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction
(1993) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/0003-6870(93)90471-k · Cited by 5,592
Designing the user interface strategies for effective human-computer interaction
Shneiderman, B. (1998) · SIGB · doi:10.1145/25065.950626 · Cited by 4,680
Self-citationReadings in Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think
Card, S. K., Mackinlay, J. D., & Shneiderman, B. (1999) · Cited by 3,935
Self-citationBush, V. (1945) · Cited by 2,998
Boden, M. A. (2004) · doi:10.4324/9780203508527 · Cited by 2,775
Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction
(1988) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-12113-x · Cited by 2,057
Flagged first, then by citations
6 of the 73 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- DORCEY , T. 1995 . Cu-SeeMe deskotp videoconferencing software . Connexions 9 , 3 (Mar.). DORCEY, T. 1995. Cu-SeeMe deskotp videoconferencing software. Connexions 9, 3 (Mar.).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Börner, K., Chen, C., & Boyack, K. W. (2003) · Annual Review of Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/aris.1440370106 · Cited by 1,930
Current practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research
Hornbæk, K. (2006) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.06.002 · Cited by 1,123
“The grand goals of user interfaces that stimulate creativity (Shneiderman, 2000), support sociability on the internet (Preece, 2000), enables personal fulfillment, and so forth, seem unlikely to be evaluated, let alone achieved, if we focus on micro measures, as these goals seem to involve…”
BackgroundLeveraging Crowdsourcing: Activation-Supporting Components for IT-Based Ideas Competition
Leimeister, J. M., Huber, M., Bretschneider, U., & Krcmar, H. (2009) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.2753/mis0742-1222260108 · Cited by 745
“supporting creativity is the “Genex framework” for developing user interfaces for supporting creativity [32, 33, 34].”
BackgroundHoward, T. J., Culley, S. J., & Dekoninck, E. A. (2008) · Design Studies · doi:10.1016/j.destud.2008.01.001 · Cited by 734
“More recent descriptions, coined by Shneiderman (2000) as ‘structuralist’, attempt to offer an explanation to emergence, describing conscious idea-generation as the deliberate connection of matrices of thought (Koestler 1964).”
Mapping the Landscape of Creativity Support Tools in HCI
Frich, J., MacDonald Vermeulen, L., Remy, C., Biskjaer, M. M., & Dalsgaard, P. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3290605.3300619 · Cited by 410
Metadata
- Authors
- Shneiderman, B.
- Affiliations
- University of Maryland, College Park (US)
- Corresponding author
- Shneiderman, Ben
- ORCID
- Shneiderman, Ben
- Venue
- ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
- Published
- 2000-03
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 114-138
- ISSN
- 1073-0516 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7325
- OpenAlex
- W2136525681
- Cited by
- 432
- References
- 73
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 34.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Keywords
- creativity support, creative process, user interface design, knowledge sharing, design framework
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
