Direct manipulation vs. Agents

Ben Shneidermann vs. Pattie Maes

The communicative approach

Esther WoltingS1396080

Computer Mediated Communication A25 - 09 - 2006

Benefits of agents

It requires less work from the user and application developer

The agent can easily adapt to the user over time and become customized to individual and organizational preferences and habits

Direct Manipulation

Goal: To create environments where users comprehend the display, where they feel control, where the system is predictable, and where they are willing to take responsibility for their actions

Discussion

Shneiderman: ‘Users want to have the feeling they did the job – not some magical agent’

Maes: ‘..not because you can’t deal with those tasks yourself, but because you are overloaded with work and information’

Compromise

Maes:‘Agents are not an alternative for direct manipulation. They are actually complementary metaphors. An agent is not a substitute for an interface.’

Shneiderman:‘The agents take care of the processes below the table, and there is a nice direct manipulation interface that the user sees.’

Question – what do you think?

It would be hard to program an agent to anticipate all of the possibilities that your eye can pick up in 1/10th of a second.

20 – 30 years ago we mostly dealt with professional users. Today’s users do not even know how to program their VCR’s. How are they going to deal with user interfaces?