Jon Stuart
ABSTRACT
This paper takes a pragmatic approach to the design of a task analysis support tool. Instead of proposing a new approach to analysis, it looks at the common requirements for providing support to a wide range of task analysis practitioners, each applying their own style of analysis. The paper describes the range of activities undertaken when practicing what is commonly referred to as "task analysis". It is proposed that users will only tolerate a level of syntactical complexity in a tool that is sufficient to meet their task analysis needs. Further complexity becomes a barrier to use. Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA) is selected as the method to be supported because it is a widely used, generic approach that is also the basis of a number of more specialized methods. A commercial tool supporting these requirements is described along with the benefits that may be accrued through its use.
- Ainsworth, L. and Marshall, E. (1998) Issues of quality in task analysis: preliminary results from two surveys, Ergonomics Vol. 41, No. 11, 1607--1717.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Annett, J. (2000) Theoretical and Pragmatic influences on task analysis, In Schraagen, J. M. C, Chipman, S. F. & Shalin V. L., (Eds.), Cognitive task analysis Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp 3--23.Google Scholar
- Annett, J. (2003) Hierarchical Task Analysis, In Holnagel, E. (2003), Handbook of Cognitive Task Design, Chapter 2, pp 17--35. Mawhah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Annett, J., and Duncan, K. D. (1967). Task analysis and training design. Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 41, 211--221.Google Scholar
- Annett, J., Duncan, K. D., Stammers, R. B., & Gray, M. J. (1971). Task analysis. Department of Employment Training Information Paper No. 6. London, UK: Her Majesty's Stationary Office (HMSO).Google Scholar
- Annett, J. and Stanton, N. (Eds.) (2000) Task Analysis, London, Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
- Bass, A., Aspinall, J., Walters, N. & Stanton, N. (1995), Applied Ergonomics Vol. 26, No. 2, 147--151.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Baumeister, L/K., John, B. E. & Byrne, M. D. (2000) A Comparison of Tools for Building GOMS models, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, The Hague, The Netherlands, pp 502--509 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Beard, D. V., Smith, D. K. & Denelsbeck, K. M. (1996) QGOMS: A direct-manipulation tool for simple GOMS models. In Proceedings of ACM conference on Human Factors in Computting Systems (CHI'96) Vol 2, pp 25--26, New York: ACM Press Google ScholarDigital Library
- Beevis, D. (2003) Ergonomics -- Costs and Benefits Revisited, Applied Ergonomics Vol. 34, 491--496Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bomsdorf, B. and Szwillus, G. (1999) Tool support for task-based user interface design. A CHI'99 workshop. SIGCHI bulletin, 31(4), 40--42 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bonnie, B. E. and Kieras, D. E. (1996?????????) The GOMS Family of User Interface Analysis Techniques: Comparison and Contrast, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) Vol. 3, Issue 4 p 320--351 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bonnie, E. J., Prevas, K., Salvucci, D. & Koedinger, K. (2004) Predictive Human Performance Modeling Made Easy, Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2004 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Card, S., Moran, T. & Newell, A. (1983) The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Diaper, D. (1989) Task Observation for Human-Computer Interaction. In D. Diaper (Ed.), Task Analysis for human computer interaction (pp 210--237). Ellis Horwood, Chichester, England.Google Scholar
- Diaper, D. (2001) Task analysis for knowledge descriptions (TAKD): a requiem for a method, Behaviour & Information Technology Vol. 20 No.3, 199--212.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Diaper, D. and Johnson, P. (1989) Task analysis for knowledge descriptions: theory and applications in training. In J. Long and A. Whitefield (Eds.) Cognitive ergonomics and human-computer interaction. Cambridge University Press, 1989.Google Scholar
- Diaper, D. & Stanton, N. (Eds.) (2004) The Handbook of Task Analysis for Human-Computer Interaction, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Google ScholarDigital Library
- Green, T. R. G. (1989) Cognitive dimensions of notations. In A. Sutcliffe and L. Macaulay (Eds.) People and Computers V. Cambridge University Press, pp 443--460. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kirwan, B. and Ainsworth, L. K. (Eds.) (1992) A Guide to Task Analysis, Taylor and Francis, London.Google Scholar
- Lee, Y. (2004) Review of the Tools for the Cognitive Task Analysis, Journal of Educational Technology & Society, Vol. 7, No. 1, 130--139.Google Scholar
- Limbourg, Q. and Vanderdonckt, J. (2004) Comparing Task Models for User Interface Design In D. Diaper (Ed.), Task Analysis for human computer interaction (pp 210--237). Ellis Horwood, Chichester, England.Google Scholar
- Mori, G., Paternò, F. & Santoro, C. (2002) CTTE: Support for Developing and Analyzing Task Models for Interactive System Design, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 28, No. 9 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ormerod, T. C, Richardson, J., Shepherd, A. (1998) Enhancing the usability of a task analysis method: a notation and environment for requirements specification Ergonomics 1998 Vol. 41, No. 11, 1642--1663.Google Scholar
- Rigney, J. W., Towne, D. M. (1969) Computer techniques for analysing the microstructure of serial-action work in industry, Human Factors, 11, 113--122.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sebillotte, S. (1988) Hierarchical planning as a method for task analysis: The example of office task analysis, Behavior and Information Technology, 7, 275--293Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shepherd, A. (1998). HTA as a framework for task analysis, Ergonomics, 41(11), 1537--1552.Google Scholar
- Shepherd, A. (2001), Hierarchical Task Analysis, Taylor and Frances, London.Google Scholar
- Stammers, R. B. (1995) Factors limiting the development of task analysis Ergonomics Vol. 38, No. 3, 588--594.Google Scholar
- Stammers, R. & Shepherd, A. (1990), Task Analysis, In Evaluation of Human Work, Wilson, J. R. & Corlett, E. N., Taylor and Francis, London 1990Google Scholar
- Stanton, N. and Annett, J. (2000) Future directions for task analysis, In Task Analysis, Annett, J. & Stanton, N. (Eds.) London, Taylor & FrancisGoogle Scholar
- Stanton, N. A. and Barber, C. (1996) Factors affecting the selection of methods and techniques prior to conducting a usability evaluation. In Usability Evaluation in Industry, Jordan, P. W., Thomas, B; Weerdmeester, B. A. and McClelland, I. L. (Eds.). Taylor & Francis, London.Google Scholar
- Stanton, N. A. and Young, M. (1998) Is utility in the eye of the beholder? A study of Ergonomics Methods, Applied Ergonomics Vol. 29, No. 1, 21--54Google ScholarCross Ref
- Stanton, N. A. and Young, M. S. (1999) A guide to methodology in ergonomics, Taylor and Francis, London.Google Scholar
- van Welie, M., van der Veer, G. C., & Eliëëns, A. (1998) Euterpe - Tool support for analyzing cooperative environments, Proceedings of the Ninth European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics, Limerick, IrelandGoogle Scholar
- van Welie, M., van der Veer, G. C. & Eliëëns, A. (1998) An ontology for task world models, In Proceedings of the fifth International Workshop on Design, Specification and Verfication of Interactive Systems (DSV-IS '98) (pp. 57--70) vienna: Springer-VerlagGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Wilson, J. (1995) A framework and context for ergonomics methodology. In Evaluation of Human Work, Wilson, J. and Corlett, N. (Eds.), 2nd Edition pp 1--39. Taylor and Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
Index Terms
- TaskArchitect: taking the work out of task analysis
Recommendations
Use-Case Informed Task Analysis for Secure and Usable Design Solutions in Rail
Critical Information Infrastructures SecurityAbstractMeeting secure and usable design goals needs the combined effort of safety, security and human factors experts. Human factors experts rely on a combination of cognitive and hierarchical task analysis techniques to support their work. We present an ...
An Evaluation of the Usability of Human-Computer Interaction Methods in Support of the Development of Interactive Systems
HICSS '02: Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'02)-Volume 5 - Volume 5In the course of this research project the output of four Task Analysis (TA) methods were investigated, explored and evaluated to ascertain whether they could support the Requirements Analysis (RA) phase and so contribute directly to other activities in ...
Hierarchical Task Analysis of a Synthetic Aperture Radar Analysis Process
11th International Conference on Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics - Volume 8532Imagery analysts are given the difficult task of determining, post-hoc, if particular events of importance had occurred, employing Synthetic Aperture Radar SAR images, written reports and PowerPoint presentations to make their decision. We were asked to ...
Comments