Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!stanford.edu!unix!ctnews!pyramid!athertn!hemlock!mcgregor
From: mcgregor@hemlock.Atherton.COM (Scott McGregor)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: Individual Differences
Message-ID: <35560@athertn.Atherton.COM>
Date: 24 Jun 91 17:27:52 GMT
References: <80905@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Sender: news@athertn.Atherton.COM
Reply-To: mcgregor@hemlock.Atherton.COM (Scott McGregor)
Organization: Atherton Technology -- Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 25

thiagarajan palanivel writes:

> For example, can one 
> predict that a user with high verbal and reasoning skills but relatively low 
> spatial skills, will perform (the same task) better on a Command Language 
> based interface, than on a Direct Manipulation based interface. From a 
> different pointof view, can one say for example, that verbal ability is the 
> single best predictor of performance on a command language interface ?...

> 3) Chosen three of categories ( Command Language, Menu, Direct Manipulation) 
> that encompass sufficient variability on each of the dimensions.

Will people be doing the same task different ways?  How do you correct
for the fact that the number of possible errors that a user can make are
large in a command language (typographical errors, choosing missing
objects, etc.) which are not possible in more constrained menu or direct
manipulation systems (e.g. no typographical errors possible in menus,
since there is nothing to type, no selection of missing objects possible
in direct manipulation because they aren't presented)... Or is tolerance
for errors part of the cognitive skills that your are trying to compare
against?

Scott McGregor
Atherton Technology
mcgregor@atherton.com