Regular Article
Comparison of visual and textual languages via task modeling

https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1999.0270Get rights and content

Abstract

In order for comparative studies of programming languages to be meaningful, differences between the languages need to be carefully studied and well understood. Languages that appear to differ only in syntax (for example, visual vs. textual syntax) may in fact differ greatly in usability. Such differences can confound comparative studies unless they are controlled for. In this paper, we examine the usefulness of fine-grained task modeling for studying the usability of programming languages. We focus on program entry, and demonstrate how to create models of program entry tasks for both visual and textual languages. We also demonstrate how to derive performance time estimates from the models using keystroke-level analysis. A by-product of the model building is a collection of functional-level models that can serve as building blocks for modeling higher-level visual programming tasks. We then report on a comparative study of languages with the same semantics but different syntax (visual and textual). Model-based time predictions of program entry tasks were compared to observed times from an empirical study. The time estimates for the visual condition greatly overestimated the observed times. The primary source of the overestimates appeared to be the time estimate for pointing with the mouse. We then look at three different approaches to improving program entry models. We report on a separate study to calibrate the mouse-pointing time estimate, and demonstrate improved correlation between predicted and observed times with the new estimate. We also apply task modeling to program editing activities, in order to model error recovery behavior during program entry. Finally, we discuss language-specific customization of the keystroke-level operator for mental preparation. We conclude that task modeling is a useful technique for studying differences in the usability of programming languages at the keystroke level.

References (32)

  • T.R.G. GREEN et al.

    Usability analysis of visual programming environments: a ‘cognitive dimensions’ framework

    Journal of Visual Languages and Computing

    (1996)
  • D. KIERAS et al.

    An approach to the formal analysis of user complexity

    International Journal of Man-Machine Studies

    (1985)
  • P.G. POLSON et al.

    Cognitive walkthroughs: method for theory-based evaluation of user interfaces

    International Journal of Man-Machine Studies

    (1992)
  • M. BOHAN et al.

    The effects of selection technique on target acquisition movements made with a mouse

    (1998)
  • J.T. CANNING et al.

    Visual programming in a workstation environment

    (1991)
  • S.K. CARD et al.

    The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction

    (1983)
  • P. CHEN

    The entity–relationship model: toward a unified view of data

    ACM Transactions on Database Systems

    (1976)
  • M.C. CHUAH et al.

    Analyzing graphic and textual layouts with GOMS: results of a preliminary analysis

    Conference Companion of the ACM SIGCHI 1994 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’94)

    (1994)
  • W.D. GRAY et al.

    The precis of Project Ernestine or an overview of a validation of GOMS

    (1992)
  • T.R.G. GREEN

    Cognitive dimensions of notations

  • T.R.G. GREEN et al.

    Comprehensibility of visual and textual programs: a test of superlativism against the ‘match–mismatch’ conjecture

    Empirical Studies of Programmers: Fourth Workshop

    (1991)
  • P. HAUNOLD et al.

    Keystroke level analysis of a graphics application: manual map digitizing

    (1994)
  • B.E. JOHN et al.

    Using GOMS for user interface design and evaluation: which technique?

    ACM Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction

    (1996)
  • B.E. JOHN et al.

    The GOMS family of user interface analysis techniques: comparison and contrast

    ACM Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction

    (1996)
  • B.E. JOHN et al.

    A GOMS analysis of a graphic, machine-paced, highly interactive task

    (1992)
  • Cited by (6)

    • Introduction to the special issue `Best of Empirical Studies of Programmers 7'

      1999, International Journal of Human Computer Studies
    • Modeling languages study and evaluation techniques

      2008, Proceedings - 2nd Asia International Conference on Modelling and Simulation, AMS 2008
    f1

    {williams, nbuehler}@cs.uml.edu

    View full text