Module:7

Cognitive Models

1
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• GOMS Model
Goals, Operators,
Methods, and Selection

• A specialized human information

processor model for human-
computer interaction observation
that describes a user's cognitive
structure on four components.

• GOMS is a widely used method by

usability specialists for computer
system designers because it
produces quantitative and
qualitative predictions of how
people will use a proposed system.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• GOMS Model
• Goals are symbolic structures
that define a state of affairs to
be achieved and determinate a
set of possible methods by
which it may be accomplished.

• Operators are elementary

perceptual, motor or cognitive
acts, whose execution is
necessary to change any aspect
of the user's mental state or to
affect the task environment
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• GOMS Model
• Methods describe a procedure
for accomplishing a goal.

• Selection Rules are needed

when a goal is attempted, there
may be more than one method
available to the user to
accomplish it.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• Variations of GOMS Model
1. KLM – Keystroke-Level Model - predicts how long it
will take an expert user to accomplish a routine task
without errors using an interactive computer system.

• The Keystroke-Level Model (KLM) is the first and

simplest GOMS technique Stuart Card, Thomas P.
Moran and Allen Newell created.

• Estimating an execution time for a task is done by

listing the sequence of operators and then totaling the
execution times for the individual operators.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
KLM - Keystroke-Level Model
KLM's execution part is described in four physical-motor
operators:
• K keystroking/ key pressing
• P pointing with a mouse to a target
• H homing the hand on the keyboard
• D drawing a line segment on a grid
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• Variations of GOMS Model
2. TLM – Touch Level Model

• Andrew D. Rice and Jonathan W. Lartigue propose

this model for the used to model human task
performance on a constrained input touchscreen
device and, with proper benchmarking, accurately
predict actual user performance.

• The goal is to provide an instrument for quantitative

analysis of touchscreen interfaces.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
TLM - Touch Level Model
• Distraction (X)
A multiplicative operator that is applied to other
operators to model real world distractions.

• Gesture (G)
Gestures are conceptualized as specialized
combinations of finger movements across the device's
screen.

• Pinch (P)
Refers to the common two-finger gesture.

• Swipe (S)
Usually a horizontally or vertically swipe like changing the
page in a book. value in MS = 70 Ms.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
TLM - Touch Level Model
• Zoom (Z)
The reverse application of the Pinch operator. value
in MS = 200 Ms.

• Initial Act (I)

KLM assumed the user is prepared to begin an
action, touchscreen devices require users to prepare
them for use (home button or password).

• Tap (T)
Operator refers to the physical action of tapping an
area on the touchscreen device in order to initiate
some change or action.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
TLM - Touch Level Model
• Tilt (L(d))
Used with an interacting with a devices equipped with
accelerometers.

• Rotate (O(d))
Gesture in which two or more fingers are placed on the
screen and then rotated about a central point.

• Drag (D)
Similar to Swipe, Drag also involves tapping a location
on the screen and then moving one or more fingers in
specific direction.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• Variations of GOMS Model
3. CMN-GOMS - Card, Moran and Newell GOMS

• CMN-GOMS is the original GOMS model proposed by Stuart

Card, Thomas P. Moran and Allen Newell.

• This model can predict operator sequence as well as execution

time. A CMN-GOMS model can be represented in program form,
making it amenable to analysis as well as execution.

• CMN-GOMS has been used to model word processors and CAD

systems for ergonomic design.

• The CMN method can predict the operator sequence and the
execution time of a task on a quantitative level and can focus its
attention on methods to accomplish goals on a qualitative level.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• Variations of GOMS Model
4. NGOMSL - Natural GOMS Language

• A structured natural language notation for

representing GOMS models and a procedure for
constructing them.

• This program form provides predictions of operator

sequences, execution time and time to learn methods.

• This model explicitly represents the goal structure just

like the CMN-GOMS and can so represent high-level
goals.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• Variations of GOMS Model
5. CPM-GOMS - Cognitive Perceptual Motor GOMS

• CPM-GOMS being the fourth method uses operators

at the level of Model Human Processor which
assumes that operators of the cognitive processor,
perceptual processor, and the motor processor can
work in parallel to each other.

• The most important point of CPM-GOMS is the ability

to predict skilled behavior from its ability to model
overlapping actions.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• Variations of GOMS Model
6. SGOMS - Sociotechnical GOMS

• Created to allow GOMS to model work in complex

sociotechnical systems.

• SGOMS is meant to expand the applicability of GOMS

to the macro cognitive level of analysis. To do this,
SGOMS adds a high level control structure to GOMS,
called the planning unit.

• This allows GOMS to deal with unexpected

interruptions.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• HTA – Hierarchical Task Analysis

• A structured approach to mapping and

understanding a user's steps to complete a task
within a system, product, or service.

• It works by identifying the main task or use case

you want to analyze before breaking it down
into smaller subtasks and visualizing it in a way
that’s structured and easy to understand.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• HTA – Hierarchical Task Analysis

• This gives us a detailed and comprehensive

view of all the steps involved in completing a
task, the opportunity to identify opportunities for
improvement, and a nice clear way of sharing
our findings.
I. GOAL & TASK HIERARCHIES:
• CCT - Cognitive Complexity Theory

• Introduced by Kieras and Polson, begins with

the basic premises of goal decomposition from
GOMS and enriches the model to provide more
predictive power.

• CCT has two parallel descriptions: one of the

user’s goals and the other of the computer
system (called the device in CCT). The
description of the user’s goals is based on a
GOMS-like goal hierarchy, but is expressed
primarily using production rules.
II. LINGUISTIC HIERARCHIES:
• Backus–Normal Form (BNF)

• Backus Normal Form (BNF) is a metasyntactic notation

procedure used to specify the syntax of computer
programming languages, command/instruction sets,
document formatting and communication protocols. BNF
is applied when language descriptions are required.

• BNF is also known as Backus-Naur form.

• A syntax for describing a context-free grammar. It was

invented for describing the syntax of programming
languages, and is still commonly used in documentation
and language parsers.
II. LINGUISTIC HIERARCHIES:
• Backus–Normal Form (BNF)

The <symbol>::_expression_where <symbol> is a non

terminal
The _expression_consists of one or more symbol
sequences.
A vertical bar (|) delineates other sequence options.

Symbols not appearing on the left side are terminals.

Symbols appearing on the left side are located within the

symbol-expression pair and are non-terminals.
II. LINGUISTIC HIERARCHIES:
• Task- Action Grammar

• The model is a metalanguage for defining task-action

grammars (TAG): generative grammars that rewrite
simple tasks into action specifications. Important
features of the model are

(a) Identification of the "simple-tasks" that users can

perform routinely and that require no control structure.

(b) Representation of simple-tasks by collections of

semantic components reflecting a categorization of the
task world
II. LINGUISTIC HIERARCHIES:
• Task- Action Grammar

(c) Marking of tokens in rewrite rules with the semantic

features of the task world to supply selection
restrictions on the rewriting of simple-tasks into action
specifications.

• This device allows the representation of family

resemblances between individual task-action
mappings.

• Task-action grammars also provide designers with an

analytic tool for exposing the configural properties of
task languages.
END OF MODULE

22