Abstract
It will be demonstrated that the perceived attributes or characteristics of information artefacts can act as constraints on the ways in which people use and interact with them. This is particularly true when the information artefacts behave as boundary objects within organisations. Yet despite the different uses to which these information artefacts are put the user interfaces to them are typically uniform. The proposed approach brings together insights from activity theory, affordances and personal construct theory, and adopts repertory grids as its principle means of investigation. Finally, the consequences of this approach to design of local user interfaces to information artefacts is considered.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anderson, B. (1993), Metaphor, Affordances and Interface Design, Poster presentation at HCI’93.
Benyon, D. (1992), “Task Analysis and Systems Design — The Discipline of Data”,Interacting with Computers 4 (2), 246–59.
Beyer, H. & Holtzblatt, K. (1998),Contextual Design: Defining Customer-centered Systems, Morgan-Kaufmann.
Bucciarelli, L. L. (1994),Designing Engineers, MIT Press.
Carroll, J. M. & Mack, R. L. (1985), “Metaphor, Computing Systems, and Active Learning”,International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 22(1), 39–57.
Dillon, A. & McKnight, C. (1990), “Towards a Classification of Text Types: A Repertory Grid Approach”,International Journal of Man Machine Studies 33(6), 623–36.
Dillon, A. & Watson, C. (1996), “User Analysis in HCI — The Historical Lessons from Individual Differences Research”,International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 45(6), 619–63.
Fransella, F. & Bannister, D. (1977),A Manual for Repertory Grid Technique, Academic Press.
Gaver, W. (1991), Technological Affordances,inS. P. Robertson, G. M. Olson & J. S. Olson (eds.),Proceedings of CHI’91: Human Factors in Computing Systems (Reaching through Technology), ACM Press, pp. 79–84.
Gaver, W. (1995), Oh What a Tangled Web We Weave: Metaphor and Mapping in Graphical Interfaces,in I. Katz, R. Mack & L. Marks (eds.),Companion Proceedings of CHI’95: Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’95 Conference Companion), ACM Press.
Gibson, J. J. (1986),The Ecological Approach To Visual Perception, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Goodwin, C. & Goodwin, M. H. (1998), Seeing as a Situated Activity: Formulating Planes, in Y. Engestrom & D. Middleton (eds.),Cognition and Communication at Work, Cambridge University Press, pp. 61–95.
Green, T. R. G. (1989), Cognitive Dimensions of Notations,inA. Sutcliffe & L. Macaulay (eds.),People and Computers V (Proceedings of HCI’89), Cambridge University Press, pp 443–460.
Green, T. R. G. & Benyon, D. R. (1996), “The Skull Beneath the Skin; Entity-relationship Modelling of Information Artefacts”,International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 44(6), 801–28.
Hassard, J. (1987), “FOCUS As a Phenomenological Technique for Job Analysis: Its Use in Multiple Paradigm Research”,International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 27(6), 251–80.
Hughes, J., King, V., Rodden, T. & Anderson, H. (1994), Moving Out of the Control Room: Ethnography in Systems Design,inR. Furuta & C. Neuwirth (eds.),Proceedings of CSCW’94: ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, ACM Press, pp. 429–39.
Kelly, G. A. (1955),The Psychology of Personal Constructs, Norton.
Mambrey, P. & Robinson, M. (1997), Understanding the Role of Documents in the Hierarchical Flow of Work,inS. C. Hayne & W. Prinz (eds.),Proceedings of ACM Group’,97ACM Press, pp. 119–127.
Mark, G. (1997), Merging Multiple Perspectives in Groupware Use: Intra-and Inter-group Conventions,inS. C. Hayne & W. Prinz (eds.),Proceedings of ACM Group’,97ACM Press, pp. 19–28.
McCarthy, J. C. & O’Connor, B. (1999), “The Context of Information Use in a Hospital as Simultaneous Similarity—Difference Relations”,Cognition,Technology and Work 1(1), 25–36.
Norman, D. A. (1988),The Psychology of Everyday Things, Basic Books.
Robertson, S. & Robertson, J. (1999),Mastering the Requirements Process, Addison-Wesley.
Shaw, M. L. G. & Gaines, B. (1987), “KITTEN: Knowledge Elicitation and Transfer Tool for Experts and Novices”,International Journal of Man—Machine Studies 27, 251–80.
Shaw, M. L. G. & Gaines, B. (1992), “Kelly’s ”Geometry of Psychological Space“ and its Significance for Cognitive Modelling”,The New Psychologistpp. 23–31.
Star, S. L. (1989), The Structure of Ill-structured Solutions: Boundary Objects and Heterogeneous Distributed Problem Solving,inL. Grasser & M. Huhns (eds.),Distributed Artificial Intelligence, Pitman, pp. 37–54.
Star, S. L. & Ruhleder, K. (1994), Steps Towards an Ecology of Infrastructure: Complex Problems in Design and Access for Large-scale Collaborative Systems,inR. Furuta & C. Neuwirth (eds.),Proceedings of CSCW’94: ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, ACM Press, pp. 253–64.
Vicente, K. J. (1999),Cognitive Work Analysis: Towards Safe,Productive,and Healthy Computer-based Work, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer-Verlag London
About this paper
Cite this paper
Turner, P. (2000). Requirements are in the Eyes of the Beholders. In: McDonald, S., Waern, Y., Cockton, G. (eds) People and Computers XIV — Usability or Else!. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0515-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0515-2_3
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-318-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-0515-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive