Be Quiet? Evaluating Proactive and Reactive User Interface Assistants
Be Quiet? Evaluating Proactive and Reactive User Interface Assistants
复制标题
安静？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2003
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Stasko
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jun Xiao;R. Catrambone;J. Stasko
本研究考察了拟人化界面助手帮助人们学习和使用不熟悉的文本编辑工具的能力，并特别关注于评估主动助手的行为。研究人员向参与者介绍了一个文本编辑系统，该系统使用按键组合来调用不同的编辑操作。然后，参与者被指示在纸质手册的帮助下对文件进行一系列规定的更改，或者是一个口头听取并回答问题的界面助手，或者是一个回答问题并提出积极建议的助手。轶事证据表明，主动的助手行为不会提高绩效，而且会被视为侵入性的。我们的结果表明，这三种情况在客观编辑表现（完成时间、发出的命令和命令回忆）上表现相似，而后两种情况下的参与者强烈地感觉到助手的帮助是有价值的。
This research examined the ability of an anthropomorphic interface assistant to help people learn and use an unfamiliar text-editing tool, with a specific focus on as sessing proactive assistant behavior. Participants in the study were introduced to a text editing system that used keypress combinations for invoking the different editing operations. Participants then were directed to make a set of prescribed changes to a document with the aid either of a paper manual, an interface assistant that would hear and respond to questions orally, or an assistant that responded to questions and additionally made proactive suggestions. Anecdotal evidence suggested that proactive assistant behavior would not enhance performance and would be viewed as intrusive. Our results showed that all three conditions performed similarly on objective editing performance (completion time, commands issued, and command recall), while the participants in the latter two conditions strongly felt that the assistant’s help was valuable.