Date post: | 05-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | elijah-harvey |
View: | 224 times |
Download: | 2 times |
An Empirical Evaluation of Undo Mechanisms
Aaron G. CassChris S.T. Fernandes
Andrew Polidore
Computer Science Dept.Union College
Schenectady, NY, USA
2 of 18
Talk Outline
• Types of undo
• Problem statement
• Empirical evaluation design– Pilot study– Broad evaluation
• Results
• Future Work
• Conclusion
3 of 18
Linear Undo
4 of 18
Selective Undo
• Undo arbitrary action without requiring the undoing of subsequent steps [Berlage ’94]
5 of 18
Selective Undo
• Script model [Archer, et al ’84]
– Removing action Ai results in state:
– A1, A2, …, Ai-1, Ai+1, …, An
• Cascading model [Cass, Fernandes ’05]
– Accounts for dependencies between actions
– If Aj dependent on existence or result of Ai
(j > i), Aj also undone
Differing semantics:
Problem Statement• Selective undo is believed to be superior
to linear undo
But…
Will it be easier for users to use?
Is this a natural model for undo?
Does it match users’ mental models?
7 of 18
Goal
• Compare three different models of undo– Linear– Script selective– Cascade selective
Conduct a user study to find out!
8 of 18
The Study
• Want to determine users’ mental model of undo
• Design a task that elicits their mental model in the performance of that task
9 of 18
The Instrument
• Paper-based instrument– Not associated with a
computer application– User freedom– Selective undo not
widely implemented
10 of 18
The InstrumentSteps taken to create this picture:
1. Draw Circle2. Draw Square3. Draw Triangle4. Color Circle
Assume you have already done the steps above. Draw what you think the outcome should be if you were to undo step 4 (step 1).
11 of 18
Two Tasks
1. Draw Circle2. Draw Square3. Draw Triangle4. Color Circle
Undo Step 1
Linear ScriptCascade
Undo Step 4
All models
12 of 18
Pilot Study
• Concern that word “undo” may trigger response based on past experience
• Compare with “reverse the effects of”• 4 subjects
• Result: kept “undo” in instrument wording
13 of 18
Evaluation Methods
• 29 subjects– Undergraduate population– Experience with widespread applications– Little experience with specialized applications
• Within-subjects design
• Post-task questionnaire
• Single dependent variable2 analysis
14 of 18
Results (N=28)
linear script cascade other
1 (4%)
7 (25%)
18 (64%)
2 (7%)
15 of 18
2 Analysis
• Expected one model to be preferred
p<0.05 linear script cascade other
linear script cascade other
• Expected cascade to be preferred over linear
p<0.05
16 of 18
2 Analysis• Expected script to be
preferred over linear
2 not applicable
• Expected either script or cascade to be preferred over the other
p<0.05
linear script cascade other
linear script cascade other
17 of 18
Conclusions
• In familiar applications– Cascading selective is more natural than
script selective– Cascading selective is more natural than
linear– Script is more natural than linear
(the data suggests)
18 of 18
Future Work
• Use a more complete application– Pilot study with presentation software already
complete
• Use a richer set of dependencies
• Implement selective undo in a representative application