Human-Action Cycle

Dr. Robert Atkinson

Objectives

By the end of this lecture, you will be ready to:

• Describe the human-action cycle and its components
• Define the model’s three stages
• Define the model’s seven steps
• Identify the two main gulfs users most overcome to
successfully interact with technology
• Use the model to improve UI design
Intro to Human-Action Cycle
Introduction to Human-Action Cycle

• The human action cycle, also known as the Seven

Stages of Action, is a psychological model which
describes the steps humans take when they interact
with computer systems.
• The model can be used to help evaluate the
efficiency of a user interface (UI).
• Understanding the cycle requires understanding the
user interface design principles of affordance,
feedback, visibility and tolerance.
Principles of Good Design: Affordance
and Feedback
• An affordance is a quality of an object, or an
environment, that allows an individual to act.
• Feedback describes situation when output from (or
information about result of) an event or phenomenon
in the past will influence an occurrence or occurrences
of the same event/phenomenon (or
continuation/development of original phenomenon) in
the present or future.
• When an event is part of a chain of cause-and-
effect that forms a circuit or loop, then the event is
said to “feedback” into itself.
Principles of Good Design: Visibility and
Tolerance
• The design should make all needed options and
materials for a given task visible without distracting
the user with extraneous or redundant information.
• Good designs don’t overwhelm users with
alternatives or confuse with unneeded information.
• The design should be flexible and tolerant, reducing
cost of mistakes and misuse by allowing undoing and
redoing, while also preventing errors wherever
possible by tolerating varied inputs and sequences
and by interpreting all reasonable actions reasonable.
The Model
The Model

• The human action cycle describes how humans may

form goals and then develop a series of steps required
to achieve that goal, using the computer system.
• The user then executes the actions, thus the model
includes both cognitive activities and physical
activities
• Model is divided into three stages (7 steps total):
• Goal Formation (1 step)
• Execution (3 steps)
• Evaluation (3 steps)
Goal Formation and Execution Stages

• Goal formation stage

1. Goal formation.
• Execution stage
2. Translation of goals into a set of unordered tasks
required to achieve goals.
3. Sequencing the tasks to create an action
sequence.
4. Executing the action sequence.
Evaluation Stage

• Evaluation stage
5. Perceiving the results after having executed the
action sequence.
6. Interpreting the actual outcomes based on the
expected outcomes.
7. Comparing what happened with what the user
wished to happen.
Diagram of Cycle
Using Model in Evaluation of UI
Diagram of Cycle
Step 1 (Goal Formation Stage)

• Typically, an evaluator of the user interface will pose a

series of questions for each step.
• An evaluation of the answer provides useful
information about where the user interface may be
inadequate or unsuitable.

• These questions might be:

• Step 1: Forming a goal
• Do the users have sufficient domain and task
knowledge and sufficient understanding of their
work to form goals?
• Does the UI help the users form these goals?
Steps 2 and 3 (Execution Stage)

• Step 2: Translating goal into task or a set of tasks

• Do the users have sufficient domain and task
knowledge and sufficient understanding of their
work to formulate the tasks?
• Does the UI help the users formulate these tasks?
• Step 3: Planning an action sequence
• Do the users have sufficient domain and task
knowledge and sufficient understanding of their
work to formulate the action sequence?
• Does the UI help the users formulate the action
sequence?
Step 4 (Execution Stage)

• Step 4: Executing the action sequence

• Can typical users easily learn and use the UI?
• Do the actions provided by the system match
those required by the users?
• Are the affordance and visibility of the actions
good?
• Do the users have an accurate mental model of
the system?
• Does the system support the development of an
accurate mental model?
Steps 5 and 6 (Evaluation Stage)

• Step 5: Perceiving what happened

• Can users perceive system’s state?
• Does UI provide the users with sufficient feedback
about effects of their actions?
• Step 6: Interpreting outcome according to users’
expectations
• Are users able to make sense of the feedback?
• Does UI provide enough feedback for this
interpretation?
Step 7 (Evaluation)

• Step 7: Evaluating what happened against what

was intended
• Can the users compare what happened with what
they were hoping to achieve?

• The desired outcome for a well-designed product or

service is for the user to complete the action cycle
once for a single action.
• If the user needs to repeat the cycle multiple times for
the same action, the result is frustration at best and
harm at worst.
The Gulfs
The Gulfs
The Gulfs Defined

• Two of the many challenges people must overcome to

successfully interact with technology are:
• Evaluation: Understanding the state of the system
• Execution: Taking action to accomplish a specific
goal
• These challenges are described as the “gulf of
evaluation” and the “gulf of execution” because,
without effective design elements to support users,
they can become insurmountable barriers between
users and their goals.
The Gulf of Evaluation

• The Gulf of Evaluation occurs when a user has trouble assessing

state of the system.
• It reflects amount of effort that person must exert to interpret state
of the system and to determine how well expectations and
intentions have been met.
• Simply put, user is expecting feedback from an action and not
receiving (at best) what they expected or (at worst) nothing at all.
• Determining whether something is on or off is a classic example
of the gulf of evaluation.
Gulf of Execution

• Difference between a user’s intentions and allowable

actions
Imagine a user would like to record a show on a VCR.
• They see the solution to this problem as simply
pressing the ‘Record’ button.
• However, to record a show on a VCR, several actions
must be taken:
• Press the record button.
• Specify time of recording, usually involving several steps to
change the hour and minute settings.
• Select channel to record on - either by entering the channel’s
number or selecting it with up/down buttons.
• Save the recording settings, perhaps by pressing an “OK” or
“menu” or “enter” button.
Using Model to Guide UI Design
Bridging Gulfs with Mental Models

• Interpreting the system state requires effort.

• Users try to minimize effort by using mental models
they hold about world around them to understand
system.
• A mental model is a representation of how something
works.
• Designers can leverage mental models by deliberately
including design elements that help users build
effective mental models.
Mental Models

• Mental models
• shape what we think and how we understand
world.
• are a representation of world, relationships
between its various parts and a person’s intuitive
perception about their own acts and their
consequences.
• can help shape behavior and set an approach to
solving problems (similar to a personal algorithm)
and doing tasks.
Mental Models

• A Mental Model is the

perception or
representation that a
person has in his mind of
the product he is
interacting with.
Example of Mental Model

• People in the middle

east write from right to
left, whereas people in
the west write from left
to right.
• Developers need to
understand this in order
to build a usable
website.
Mental Models and Expectations

• People have these sets of

experiences built up, and
they take those
experience into this new
thing that you’re making.
• And that’s how they
expect it to work based on
their previous
expectations.
Problems Arise from Violating a User’s
Mental Model
• In early 2016 Fiat
Chrysler automobiles
recall over 1 million
vehicles due to a new
shifter design, called the
Rocker Switch Gearshift.
Skeuomorphism

• Design concept of making items represented

resemble their real-world counterparts.
• If you are creating something in the unfamiliar, base it
on the familiar.
Principles of Good Design
Principles of Good Design

• The seven-stage structure is referenced as design aid

to act as a basic checklist for designers’ questions to
ensure that Gulfs of Execution and Evaluation are
answered.

• Seven Stages of Action can be broken down into 4

main principles of good design:
• Visibility - By looking, user can tell state of device
and alternatives for action.
• Feedback - User receives full and continuous
feedback about results of the actions.
Principles of Good Design

• A Good Conceptual Model - Designer provides a

good conceptual model for user, with consistency in
presentation of operations and results and a coherent,
consistent system image.
• Good mappings - It is possible to determine
relationships between actions and results, between
controls and their effects, and between system state
and what is visible.
ICAP Framework
Objectives

By the end of this lecture, you will be ready to:

• Differentiate between the four levels of the
ICAP framework
• Describe user engagement and how the ICAP
framework supports it through design
• Describe how the framework explains the
varying levels of engagement across a range
of HCI interactions
ICAP Framework

• A framework seeking to depict the process of

user engagement by Chi and Wylie’s
(2014) ICAP Hypothesis.
• The Framework is a guide to understanding how
to structure interactive environments that
cognitively and meaningfuly engage users.
• A user’s engaged behaviors can be categorized
and differentiated into one of four modes.
• ICAP = Interactive > Constructive > Active >
Passive
1. The Passive Level

• Focuses on passive engagement.

• On the passive level, activities promote a
transactional notion of user interaction,
where users receive information with no
expectation of interaction.
• At this stage, envision users passively
watching a video or receiving content.
2. The Active Level

• Focuses on active engagement.

• Chi and Wylie characterize an activity as “active”
if users directly manipulate an interface or
environment.
• These behaviors certainly appear more active
than the first stage, although users have yet to
create original thought or wording of concepts in
their own terms. At this stage, the US designers
would observe users highlighting text or perhaps
rewinding or pausing a video.
3. The Constructive Level

• Focuses on constructive engagement.

• Environment supports users creating novel
ideas informed by personal experience and prior
knowledge
• Users become creators, generating unique
responses from personal reflection based on
their interactions
• Users at this stage may take create metaphors,
compare experiences with outside sources, and
integrate previous thinking with current
conversation (Chi & Wylie, 2014).
4. The Interactive Level

• Centers on interactive engagement.

• At this final level, users build on their
previous “constructive” thinking and emerge
as a community of users.
• The interactive environment sees users
taking turns as active contributors to the
broader understanding, and original thinking
builds as multiple users contribute over time.
• This may include debates, justifying a
position in pairs or small groups, or having
users gage each other’s understanding
Passive Level: Strategies and Examples

• At the passive (receiving) level, a number of

traditional classroom activities come to
mind—e.g.,
• listening to a lecture,
• reading an article,
• or viewing a video.
• Online
• reading articles,
• viewing a YouTube video,
• listening to an audio lecture or podcast.

• Of all the levels in the framework, passive

represents the easiest to implement
Active Level: Strategies and Examples

• At the active (manipulating) level, the teacher is

challenged to envision deeper interactions than
traditional instructional approaches typically
afford.
• In the classroom, the teacher can
• ask students to underline or highlight portions of an
article that they believe are most important to
remember.
• Class discussions
• Online, a source in Microsoft Word or Google
Doc format
• “mark-up” via the highlighting and underlining
features, etc
Constructive Level: Strategies and Examples

• The constructive (generating) level offers a number of wonderful

opportunities for learners in the online or traditional classroom.
• In the traditional classroom,
• students can create and present their own metaphors for a relationship or
concept, draw mind-maps, and engage in reflective writing experiences
(journaling, quick-writing, ticket out the door, etc.).

• Online, the use of

• e-portfolios, blogging, discussion forums, brief analysis papers, or mind-
mapping -constructing understanding informed by their unique experiences.

• In both settings, it is vital to note that the constructive and

interactive modes require extensive framing of instructor
expectations. Such activities often draw students out of their
comfort zone and represent more difficult thinking, so exemplars
and clear descriptions prove crucial for success of such activities.
Interactive Level: Strategies and Examples

• The interactive (dialoguing) mode builds on the previous

levels.
• Online
• Discussion forums - opportunities for interactive activities.
Framing discussion forum expectations is to ask students to
exhibit different types of thinking in their posts and interactions
• Peer review via a clearly defined structure for interaction.
• Group projects or class discussions
• allow students to contribute and dialogue by curating digital
content for consideration of their peers.
• In the traditional classroom, a variety of structured class
discussions offer similar opportunities.
• Peer review and small group projects or discussions serve the
interactive mode well.
Technology Acceptance and Adoption
Models
Dr. Robert Atkinson
Objectives

By the end of this lecture series, you will be able to:

• Describe the basic components of the Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM), including perceived
usefulness, perceived ease of use, and their impact
on user acceptance.
• Describe the Technology Adoption Model including
the various categories of technology adopters
(Innovators, Early Adopters, Early Majority, Late
Majority, Laggards) and explain strategies to facilitate
adoption across these groups
Technology-Acceptance Model (TAM)
Overview of TAM Model

• The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) is a

theoretical model that helps explain how users come
to accept and use a technology.
• The model has evolved over time, leading to several
iterations: TAM 1, TAM 2, and TAM 3
• Developed by Fred Davis in 1989, TAM 1 was based
on the Theory of Reasoned Action. It was designed
to explain computer-usage behavior.
• It primarily focused on understanding user
acceptance of information technology.
Components of TAM 1 Model

1. Perceived Usefulness: This is the degree to which

a person believes that using a particular system
would enhance their job performance. In HCI, this
translates to how users perceive the usefulness of
a computer system or software in achieving their
goals.
Components of TAM 1 Model

2. Perceived Ease of Use: This refers to the degree

to which a person believes that using a system
would be free of effort. In HCI, it's about how user-
friendly and accessible a computer system or
interface is perceived to be.
3. Attitude Towards Using Technology: This
component is influenced by perceived usefulness
and ease of use, which reflects the user's overall
affective reaction to using a system. A positive
attitude towards a technology in HCI is crucial for its
acceptance and continual use.
Components of TAM 1 Model

4. Behavioral Intention to Use the System: This is

the degree to which a person has formulated
conscious plans to either use or not use a
technology. In HCI, this could manifest as a user's
intention to continue using an interface or a piece of
software.
5. Actual System Use: This is the final aspect, where
the user's intention is put into action. The
frequency, duration, and nature of use of the
system in HCI contexts are considered here.
TAM 1
TAM 2 and 3
TAM 2

• Extension of TAM 1: TAM 2, introduced by

Venkatesh and Davis in 2000
• New Variables Added: It incorporated additional
theoretical constructs to explain perceived
usefulness and usage intentions.
• Subjective Norm: The influence of what people
believe others think they should do.
• Image: The degree to which use of an innovation is
perceived to enhance one's status in one's social
system.
TAM 2

• Job Relevance: An individual’s perception

regarding the degree to which the technology is
relevant to their job.
• Output Quality: The degree to which a person
believes that the system performs their job tasks
well.
• Result Demonstrability: The tangibility of the
results of using the technology.
• Overall: Focus on Social Influence and Cognitive
Instrumental Processes. These were added to better
understand how social influence and cognitive
instrumental processes affect users’ acceptance of
technology.
TAM 2
TAM 3

• AM 3, introduced by Venkatesh and Bala in 2008,

further refined the model.
• Adjustments in Existing Constructs: Refinement
of subjective norm, image, job relevance, and output
quality.
• New constructs were added to provide a more
comprehensive view.
• Anchoring and Adjustment: Focusing on how prior
experience with related systems influences current
technology acceptance.
TAM 3

• Experience: Incorporating the effect of user

experience over time on perceived ease of use and
usefulness.
• Voluntariness: The degree to which use of the
technology is perceived as being voluntary.
• Focus: It aimed to provide a more integrated view of
the determinants of technology acceptance,
including the role of external variables.
TAM 3
Relevance to HCI

• Design Insights: TAM provides valuable insights

into designing user interfaces and systems that are
both useful and easy to use, enhancing the
likelihood of their acceptance.
• User-Centered Approach: It emphasizes the
importance of considering the users' perspectives in
design, which is a central tenet of HCI.
• Predicting User Acceptance: TAM can help in
predicting whether a new technology or interface will
be accepted by users, which is crucial for the
success of HCI products.
Relevance to HCI

• Facilitating Adoption: By focusing on ease of use

and usefulness, HCI professionals can devise
strategies to facilitate quicker and more efficient
adoption of new technologies.
• Evaluating User Experience: TAM offers a
framework for evaluating user experience, which is a
key aspect of HCI research and practice.
Summary

• Each version of the TAM built upon its predecessor,

adding more complexity and depth to understand the
factors influencing technology acceptance better.
• TAM 3, being the most comprehensive,
encompasses a broader range of factors that affect
both the initial adoption and the continued usage of
technology systems.
Technology Adoption Lifecycle
Technology Adoption Lifecycle

• Is a sociological model that describes the adoption

or acceptance of a new product or innovation,
according to the demographic and psychological
characteristics of defined adopter groups.
• The model divides adopters into five categories and
highlights a chasm between early and mainstream
adopters.
Technology Adoption Life Cycle

• XX
Innovators (2.5%)

• They are willing to take risks and are enthusiastic

about new technology.
• They are not concerned about the idea of failure.
• They are often the initiators of change and enjoy
going against the grain.
• They are motivated by exciting opportunities
presented by new technology and the potential for
personal and professional growth.
• Innovators thrive on challenges and seek new
opportunities to learn and improve their skills
Early Adopters (13.5%)

• Trendsetters who want to form a solid opinion of

technology before recommending it to others.
• They are quick to sign up for new technology and
willing to work through early bugs and setbacks.
• They are concerned about their reputation and want
to appear knowledgeable and trendy.
• They are motivated by exciting opportunities
presented by new technology and the potential for
personal and professional growth.
Early Adopters (13.5%)

• To motivate early adopters, provide guides and

training to help them hit the ground running and
become internal champions for organizational
change.
• Early adopters can be used as a test group to work
out kinks in implementation and are quick to spread
the word to others once they feel comfortable with a
new tool.
The Chasm

• This is the gap between the early adopters and the

early majority. Many technologies fail to bridge this
gap.
• The chasm represents the biggest hurdle in the
adoption lifecycle.
• Bridging this chasm is critical for HCI technologies to
transition from a niche audience to a broader user
base.
• Understanding user needs and refining the
technology to appeal to a wider audience is
essential here.
Early Majority (34%)

• Traits: Logical, practical, data-driven

• Motivated by demonstrations of how new technology
solves a problem.
• Provide them with evidence through case studies
and success stories.
• Presenting a clear rationale for the new technology.
• Use data-driven arguments to support your solution.
• Show why your solution is the most logical choice.
Technology Adoption Lifecycle
Late Majority (34%)

• Traits: Cautious, logical, avoids risks

• They can be motivated by
• Seeing the new technology in action
• Extensive research and proof of effectiveness
• Specific uses/benefits demonstrated with data
• Benefit from seeing innovators and early adopters
demonstrate
• how the technology serves the organization.
• specific uses and benefits
Laggards (16%)

• Laggards are resistant to change and wary of new

technology
• Address WIIFM questions to show personal benefits
and improvement in work
• Provide documented success stories from
coworkers and emphasize user benefits.
• Appeal to emotions by addressing fears and
concerns and providing support and training.
• Involve laggards in the change process and seek
their input and feedback
Laggards (16%)

• Consider offering incentives or rewards for

successful adoption
• Overall, focus on demonstrating how the new
technology has helped others succeed while
providing personalized support and addressing
concerns.
Relationship to Gartner’s Hype Cycle
Implications

• Design and Development: Understanding this

lifecycle helps HCI professionals design and develop
products that cater to each group's specific needs
and expectations.
• User Research: It informs user research by
highlighting different user attitudes towards
technology, guiding more effective user-centric
design strategies.
• Iterative Improvement: It underlines the importance
of iterative improvements based on the feedback
from each adopter group, especially the early ones.
GOMS and KLA
Dr. Robert Atkinson
Objectives

• By the end of this lecture series, you will be able to:

• Understand and Explain the GOMS Model: Clearly
describe the components of the GOMS model and
their applications in HCI.
• Apply Keystroke-Level Analysis: Apply the
Keystroke-Level Model to predict task execution times
in user interfaces.
Objectives

• Compare and Contrast GOMS and KLM: Critically

compare and contrast the GOMS model with the
Keystroke-Level Analysis, discussing their respective
strengths and limitations in HCI.
• Develop HCI Solutions: Apply GOMS and KLM
models to propose improvements or solutions for user
interface design problems.
• Evaluate User Task Performance: Conduct
evaluations of user task performance using the
methods taught, interpreting results to inform design
decisions.
GOMS Model
Goals, Operators, Methods, Selection
(GOMS) Model

• Cognitive modeling method for task analysis

• Description of the knowledge that a user must have
in order to carry out tasks on a device or system
• “How to do it” knowledge that is required by system
to get intended tasks accomplished.
• Each user task is described by a goal and a method
• A method is a sequence of steps, each consisting of
one or more operators
• Can have more than one method for a task, in which
case need a selection rule
GOMS vs Human Processor Model

• Scope: The GOMS model is task-specific and

focused on user interaction with computer systems,
while the Human Processor Model (HPM) is a
general model of human cognitive architecture.
• Application: GOMS is more practical and applied,
especially in user interface design and usability
testing while HPM is more theoretical and used for
understanding basic cognitive processes.
• Detail and Complexity: GOMS provides a detailed
method for analyzing specific user tasks, whereas
HPM offers high-level view of cognitive processing.
Goals

• Description: Goals are the objectives that a user

wants to achieve. They represent the desired end
state that the user is working towards.
• Example: In word processing app, a goal could be
"format the document" or "correct spelling errors".
Operators

• Description: Operators are elementary actions or

steps that users take to achieve their goals. They
can be mental or physical actions.
• Example: Clicking mouse, pressing key, dragging
file, or recalling command from memory.
Methods

• Description: Methods are sequences or procedures

of operators that are used to achieve a goal. A
method is essentially a way of doing something.
• Example: In the context of a word processor, a
method for the goal "format the document" could
include selecting text and applying a specific style.
Selection Rules

• Description: Selection rules are guidelines or

criteria that users follow to choose among different
methods when a goal can be achieved in multiple
ways.
• Example: If a user wants to save a document, they
might have methods like clicking the save icon,
using a keyboard shortcut, or going through the file
menu. The selection rule would determine which
method to use based on efficiency, user preference,
or situational context.
GOMS Example
Example Scenario: Composing and
Sending an Email

• Goal: To "Send an email to a colleague with a

project update."
• Operators: These are the basic actions the
user can perform:
1. Move the Cursor: Using a mouse or touchpad.
2. Click: To interact with buttons and fields.
3. Type Text: Using a keyboard.
4. Scroll: To navigate through the user interface.
5. Drag-and-Drop: For attaching files, if necessary.
Example Scenario: Composing and
Sending an Email

• Methods: A method to achieve this goal could be:

1. Open Email Client: Click the Gmail icon on the
desktop or open it from a web browser.
2. Start a New Email: Click the “Compose” button.
3. Enter Recipient's Email Address: Click in the
“To” field and type the colleague’s email
address.
4. Enter the Subject of the Email: Click in the
“Subject” field and type “Project Update.”
5. Compose the Email: Click in the body field and
type the message.
6. Send the Email: Click the “Send” button
Example Scenario: Composing and
Sending an Email

• Selection rules: Help the user decide among

multiple methods:
1. Choosing how to open Gmail:
• If the user prefers desktop applications, they
might click the Gmail icon on the desktop.
• If they prefer web applications, they might open it
from a browser bookmark.
2. Entering the recipient’s email address:
• If they remember address, they type it directly.
• If not, they might start typing name and select the
correct address from the auto-suggestions.
GOMS: Applications, Advantages, and
Limitations
Applications

• Cognitive Analysis: GOMS is primarily used for

cognitive analysis in HCI. It helps in understanding
the user's thought process and actions when
interacting with a system.
• User Interface Design: By predicting and
quantifying user performance, GOMS can guide the
design of more efficient, user-friendly interfaces.
• Usability Testing: It can be used to evaluate the
usability of a system by identifying and quantifying
the cognitive load and effort required to perform
tasks.
Advantages

• Provides structured approach to analyzing user

interaction.
• Helps in predicting how changes to a user interface
will affect user performance.
• Useful in identifying and eliminating unnecessary or
redundant steps in a user interface.
Limitations

• It tends to focus more on expert users who are well

acquainted with the system.
• Less effective in predicting the behavior of users in
scenarios that involve a high degree of problem-
solving or creativity.
• Assumes that user behavior is always logical and
goal-directed, which may not always be the case.
Keystroke-Level Model (KLM)
Keystroke-Level (KLM) Overview

• The Keystroke-Level Model (KLM) is a simple tool

that predicts or estimates how long it will take an
experienced user to complete a routine task.
• KLM was developed in the early ‘80s and is still
widely used today.
• It has been updated and adapted to account for
newer form factors such as smartphones and
touchscreens.
• Calculates task execution time using pre-established
keystroke-level primitive operators
KLM Overview

• Most appropriate for:

• Goal-directed interactions (e.g. not browsing)
• Routine skill performance (e.g. not discovery)
• Sequential instructional interactions
• Capturing internal procedural knowledge
• Can use to validate hypotheses about interaction
processes (e.g., when searching a menu, is each
item considered before eyes move to next, or do
eyes keep scanning ahead of decision process?)
Model Operators

• K - keystroke or button press. This operator

counts number of times keyboard buttons are
pressed as well as mouse clicks. It counts keys
rather than characters. Some experts will classify
mouse button clicks as B for greater clarity.
• P - pointing with a mouse. It is important to note
that moving the mouse (P) is a separate action from
clicking the mouse, which would be counted as K. .
Model Operators

• H - homing the hands on the keyboard or other

device. Homing or positioning can be moving from
one device to another, such as from mouse to
keyboard, or can be more finely positioning the
hands on the same device, such as moving from
letter keys to a numpad on same keyboard.
• D - manually drawing. This is used when drawing a
straight line with a mouse. It is not frequently used.
Model Operators

• M - mental preparation. This is the time needed for

thinking or planning an action or decision making.
• R - system response time. This element is only
used when the user must wait for the system, such
as processing or loading time. Some experts
recommend calling it W or waiting time. If response
or waiting time overlaps with M thinking time, only
the waiting time that extends past the thinking time
needs to be entered.
Operator Times

• XX
Example

• Task: Enter a street address into a text field.

• We break that task down into its component parts:
• Initiate the entry (M)
• Find the correct text field (M)
• Point to the correct field (P)
• Press mouse button (B)
• Release mouse button (B)
• Move hands from mouse to keyboard (H)
• Type “123 Main St.” (14K) remember, it’s key
presses, not characters.
• Total time = 2M + 1P + 2B + 1H + 14K
KLM: Applications
Applications

• User Interface Design: KLM is particularly useful in

the design phase of user interfaces. Designers can
use it to estimate how long it will take users to
complete tasks with different design options. This
helps in creating more efficient and user-friendly
interfaces.
• Comparative Analysis of User Interfaces: KLM
allows for a quantitative comparison between
different user interface designs or between different
versions of the same interface. It provides a way to
objectively measure the efficiency improvements or
setbacks in different design iterations.
Applications

• Usability Testing: While KLM is a predictive model,

it can also be used in conjunction with usability
testing. It helps in setting benchmarks and
expectations against which actual user performance
can be measured.
Applications

• Task Optimization: KLM can be used to identify

and minimize the time-consuming parts of a task. By
breaking down tasks into their basic components
(keystrokes, mouse movements, etc.), designers
can pinpoint areas for optimization.
• Instructional Design and Documentation: For
creating instructional material and user manuals,
KLM helps in understanding the complexity of tasks
and in designing better instructions and training
programs that align with the users' capabilities.
Applications

• Accessibility Evaluation: The model can be

adapted to assess how accessible a user interface is
for people with disabilities. It can help in identifying
tasks that might be particularly challenging and
require alternative design solutions.
• Estimating Learning Curves: KLM can be used to
estimate the time it will take for users to become
proficient with a new system or interface, aiding in
planning training and support needs.
Applications

• Performance Benchmarking: In software

development and testing, KLM provides a way to set
performance benchmarks for routine tasks, which
can be a part of quality assurance and user
acceptance testing.
• Ergonomic Analysis: By understanding the
frequency and complexity of user actions, KLM can
contribute to ergonomic analysis, helping to reduce
strain and improve user comfort.
KLM: Advantages and Limitations
Advantages

• Efficiency Analysis: KLM is useful for quantifying

and comparing the efficiency of different interface
designs in terms of task completion time.
• Simple and Quantitative: The model provides a
straightforward and quantitative approach to
measure user interaction, making it easy to apply
and interpret.
• Identifying Bottlenecks: By breaking down tasks
into basic components, KLM can help identify where
the most time-consuming parts of a task lie, pointing
towards potential areas for improvement.
Advantages

• Cost-Effective Evaluation: It allows for the

evaluation of interface designs without the need for
extensive user testing, as it relies on established
average times for basic actions.
• Benchmarking: KLM can be used to benchmark
efficiency across different versions of an interface or
between different systems performing similar tasks.
Limitations

• Oversimplification: KLM simplifies user interaction

into basic actions and does not account for cognitive
processes or more complex user behaviors such as
learning, problem-solving, and error recovery.
• Assumes Expert Users: The model is most
accurate for expert users who are familiar with the
system and are performing routine tasks without
errors. It is less effective for modeling behavior of
novice users.
• Limited to Routine Tasks: KLM is most effective for
straightforward, routine tasks. It is less applicable for
tasks that require significant thinking, decision-
making, or creativity.
Limitations

• Does Not Account for User Satisfaction: Model

focuses purely on task completion time and does not
consider user satisfaction, engagement, or other
subjective measures of usability.
• Inaccuracy in Complex Interactions: For
interactions that involve a mix of mouse, keyboard,
and other input methods, or where system response
times are highly variable, KLM predictions may
become less accurate.
• Requires Detailed Task Analysis: A detailed
analysis of task is required, including each action a
user must perform, which can be time-consuming
and may require in-depth knowledge of the system.