INTERACTION BETWEEN HUMAN & COMPUTER

Transcription

1 International Journal of Engineering and Management Research, Vol. 2, Issue-1, Jan 2012 ISSN No.: Pages: INTERACTION BETWEEN HUMAN & COMPUTER Ms. Salvi Rathi 1, Mrs. Kamini Teotia 2 Alpine College of Engineering, G.B Nagar. 1 Computer Science & Engineering Department, 2 Management Department. 1 salvi.online@gmail.com, 2 kaminiteotia@gmail.com Abstract: The computers crunched through the calculations necessary to create mathematical tables, then an indispensable reference tool for many scientists. The calculations were complex and the computers, drawn largely from the ranks of New York s poor, possessed only basic numeracy. So the mathematicians in charge of the project worked out how to break each calculation down into simple operations, the outcomes of which could be combined to give a final result. Mobile devices are one of the most accessible, transformative technologies that we have created, and they have had a rapid worldwide impact. Thus, a journal dedicated to the study of how they are used, how we perceive them, what systems we envisage creating, supporting or supplementing with them, and how they are altering our perceptions of communication, computation, interaction, and technology is both timely and interesting. To tackle that task, signal processing and analysis techniques have to be developed, while, at the same time, consolidating psychological and linguistic analyses of emotion. Many accounts of human information processing in humancomputer interaction are based around a cycle of goal formation, planning, action and perception. Norman (1988) and Rasmussen (1987), for instance, have applied such stagebased descriptions to analyze a variety of interfaces. Two channels have been distinguished in human interaction: one transmits explicit messages, which may be about anything or nothing; the other transmits implicit messages about the speakers themselves. Both linguistics and technology have invested enormous efforts in understanding the first, explicit channel, but the second is not as well understood. Understanding the other party's emotions is one of the key tasks associated with the second, implicit channel. Keywords: HCI, Unconventional Computation, Human Brain, HCI modeling, Distributed cognition, Interaction design. I. INTRODUCTION Human computer Interaction (HCI) involves the study, planning, and design of the interaction between people (users) and computers. It is often regarded as the intersection of computer science, behavioral sciences, design and several other fields of study. The term was coined by Card, Moran, and Newell in their germinal book, "The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction." The term connotes that, unlike other tools with only limited uses (such as a hammer, useful for driving nails, but not much else), a computer has many affordances for use and this takes place in a sort of open-ended dialog between the user and the computer. Research in Human- Computer Interaction (HCI) has been spectacularly successful, and has fundamentally changed computing. Just one example is the ubiquitous graphical interface used by Microsoft Windows 95, which is based on the Macintosh, which is based on work at Xerox PARC, which in turn is based on early research at the Stanford Research Laboratory (now SRI) and at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Another example is that virtually all software written today employs user interface toolkits and interface builders, concepts which were developed first at universities. It was a technique that had been employed for decades across America and Europe. The field of human computing even had its own journal and trade-union representation. Computing offices calculated ballistics trajectories, processed census statistics and charted the course of comets. Over the past few years, human computing has been reborn. The new generation of human computers carries out different tasks, but they mirror their predecessors in many other ways. They are being drafted in to perform tasks that computers cannot. They are 4

2 employed in large numbers and are organized into streamlined workflows. And, as was the case in the age before electronic computers, their output is combined to generate results that could not easily be produced in any other way. Interactions magazine is the mirror on the human-computer interaction and interaction design communities and beyond. It is the multiplicities of conversations, collaborations, relationships and new discoveries focused on how and why we interact with the designed world of technologies. Interactions magazine carries a special voice that lies between practice and research with an emphasis on making accessible and engaging HCI research in practitioner communities. II. GOALS OF HCI The aim of HCI research is to make computer interfaces more accessible and user friendly. As a result a number of goals have been formulated to guide programmers in creating their interfaces so as to maximize their effectiveness. The world we live in has become suffused with computer technologies. They have created change and continue to create change. It is not only on our desktops and in our hands that this is manifest; it is in virtually all aspects of our lives, in our communities, and in the wider society of which we are a part. Developers could safely ignore social or organizational concerns when the spread of multi-tasking systems and personal computing made single-user systems and applications very profitable. The design and use of word processor or spreadsheet programs, for example, are relatively independent of the social context in which they are used. The profits enabled American product development companies to form research groups, recruit heavily from leading universities, and influence the direction of academic research. This field, human-computer interaction, has had less involvement from those working in contract development, where usability is taking even longer to come into focus. In-house development also remains relatively uninvolved, due in large part to differing interests: internal development must focus on the individual and group differences and social dynamics that product developers could ignore; these are central to the acceptance of a specific in-house or custom-built system. In addition, the narrow "user interface" focus is less meaningful to in-house developers, who are more likely to consider functionality and its interface together. The goals of HCI are to produce usable and safe systems, as well as functional systems. Effectiveness: It is a very general goal and refers to how good a system at doing what it is suppose to do. In order to produce computer systems with good usability, developers must attempt to: 1. Understand the factors that determine how people use technology. 2. Develop tools and techniques to enable building suitable systems. 3. Achieve efficient, effective, and safe interaction. Utility: It refers to the extent to which the system provides the right kind of functionality so that user can do what they need or want to do. An example of a system with high utility is an accounting software package providing a powerful computational tool that accountants can use to work out tax returns. An example of a system with low utility is a software drawing tool that does not allow users to draw free hand but forces them to use a mouse to create their drawings, using only polygon shapes. Memorability: It refers to how easy a system is to remember how to use, once learned. This is especially important for interactive systems that are used infrequently. If users haven t used a system or an operation for a few months or longer, they should be able to remember or at least rapidly be reminded how to use it. Users shouldn t have to keep relearning how to carry out tasks. Unfortunately, this tends to happen when the operation required to be learning are obscure, illogical, or poorly sequenced. Users need to be helped to remember how to do tasks. Standardization: Standardization seeks consistency across programs so that, for example, a user could learn one word processor and then be able to use any word processor available to them, i.e. learn Microsoft Word and then be able to sit down and use Corel WordPerfect and ClarisWorks with a minimum of effort. Security and Data Integrity: It is the program protects the users' data from unwanted tampering and alteration. Hackers and viruses are two of the most common threats to security and data integrity however flaws in the programs code (bugs) can also alter and/or destroy users' data without warning. Consistency: It is a control works the same way every time it is encountered, it is function does not change inside the program. For example, a user always clicks a button, they do not click it sometimes and type text into at other times. III. RELATION BETWEEN HUMAN & COMPUTER In the Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) field it is common to choose the human as the task-giver and the computer as the obedient servant. HCI seeks to construct an interface between the human and the computer in such a way that the human needs to adapt as little as possible to facilitate this cooperation. In this paper we propose a role-reversal whilst maintaining the goal of minimizing the perceived disruption of normal human activities. The human will be coaxed to operate as a computer and perform basic logic operations. This setup is suggested to open up the discussion whether HCI would 5

3 benefit by looking at the interaction from the other direction. It leads us to reconsider the extent to which HCI design can produce perfect interaction between fallible users and machines. The study of the relationship between humans and computers has quickly become one of the most dynamic and significant fields of technical investigation. Iowa State University's graduate program in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) is an established leader in this rapidly changing field, making strategic investments to accelerate research, attract talented students and faculty, and expand the program of study. IV. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN BRAIN & COMPUTERS Although the brain-computer metaphor has served cognitive psychology well, research in cognitive neuroscience has revealed many important differences between brains and computers. a computer uses a program to process data but the human brain processes data and processes programs which process data (to improve the data processing programs and thus increase the brain's effectiveness and efficiency) Appreciating these differences may be crucial to understanding the mechanisms of neural information processing, and ultimately for the creation of artificial intelligence. 1. Brains are analogue; computers are digital: It's easy to think that neurons are essentially binary, given that they fire an action potential if they reach a certain threshold, and otherwise do not fire. This superficial similarity to digital "1's and 0's" belies a wide variety of continuous and non-linear processes that directly influence neuronal processing. 2. The brain uses content-addressable memory: In computers, information in memory is accessed by polling its precise memory address. This is known as byteaddressable memory. In contrast, the brain uses contentaddressable memory, such that information can be accessed in memory through "spreading activation" from closely related concepts. For example, thinking of the word "fox" may automatically spread activation to memories related to other clever animals, fox-hunting horseback riders. 3. Short-term memory is not like RAM: Although the apparent similarities between RAM and short-term or "working" memory emboldened many early cognitive psychologists, a closer examination reveals strikingly important differences. Although RAM and short-term memory both seem to require power (sustained neuronal firing in the case of short-term memory, and electricity in the case of RAM), short-term memory seems to hold only "pointers" to long term memory whereas RAM holds data that is isomorphic to that being held on the hard disk. 4. No hardware/software distinction can be made with respect to the brain or mind: For years it was tempting to imagine that the brain was the hardware on which a "mind program" or "mind software" is executing. This gave rise to a variety of abstract program-like models of cognition, in which the details of how the brain actually executed those programs was considered irrelevant, in the same way that a Java program can accomplish the same function as a C++ program. 5. The brain is a self-organizing system: This point follows naturally from the previous point - experience profoundly and directly shapes the nature of neural information processing in a way that simply does not happen in traditional microprocessors. For example, the brain is a self-repairing circuit - something known as "trauma-induced plasticity" kicks in after injury. This can lead to a variety of interesting changes, including some that seem to unlock unused potential in the brain (known as acquired savantism), and others that can result in profound cognitive dysfunction (as is unfortunately far more typical in traumatic brain injury and developmental disorders). V. RESOURCES FOR INTERACTION We now consider a model which allows features of a task to be considered separately from their implementation in either the interface or the user s head. These features are modeled as resources for action. Instead of focusing on task knowledge the user may have, we look at the information distributed throughout a system that is needed by the user. At certain times, the user relies on knowing the current goal to select appropriate actions from those that are possible, and at others relies on a predetermined plan. The meanings or effects of actions in the current context can be employed as can a record of past events. Furthermore, there is no single place where all this information resides some items are explicit in the system s interface, some are implicit in the constraints of the dialogue, while others must necessarily be stored in the user s memory. A set of resources that play a role in shaping interaction is shown in Figure contains: plans, specifying actions to be performed; goals and sub-goals; the current state of the world or interactive system; historical information about previous actions and what state properties held in the past; a model of the effect that actions have on the system; and the set of actions in which the system currently supports (affordances). 6

4 World State Goals Plans Action History Next Action? State History Action Effect Model Affordances Figure 1: Information resources employed in interaction Processing An interaction sequence will be described in a number of steps, each step being characterized by a resource configuration. In making a step from one configuration to the next, two processes are carried out by the whole human-machine system: Determining a correct next action and performing it. Updating the required set of resources in preparation for the next step. Both are important from the perspective of design because choices regarding the allocation of resources to representational media will affect how the processing is done. For instance, if a goal or a plan is implemented in the system s interface, then updating it can be performed by the system rather than the human. Human Centered Design Process for Interactive Systems: Human-centered development is an approach to interactive system development that focuses specifically on making systems usable. It is a multidisciplinary activity, which incorporates human factors and ergonomics knowledge and techniques. The range of disciplines involved in modern system development can be enormous taking in business analysts, information architects, graphic designers, user experience designers, media designers, animators, interaction designers, programmers, and quality assurance personnel, to name a few. The application of these enhances effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction, by designing out adverse effects of product usage on human health, safety and productivity. The primary method of receiving information from a computer is visually. The physiology of the eye will determine what limitations must be placed on an HCI. Current technology is able to present information at a faster rate than the eye can see. Limitations of HCI seem to be placed by the Human, not the Computer. There are two different types of photoreceptors on the retina which are commonly referred to as "Rods" and "Cones". Rods are very sensitive to light whereas Cones are less sensitive The amount of data that can be accurately seen within a single view is therefore also quite small and the eye must continually be moving in order to see a complete screen and then must mentally assimilate all the data into a complete mental page. This, in combination with the capacity of short-term memory sets a relatively low limit on the amount of data that can be contained on a single screen. Before deciding the specifications of the HCI, the designer must look at the target market for the product. Four Levels of Users are generally defined. 1. Naive - These are the users who have never encountered or used a computer in their lives. With the fact that computers now permeate our lives to such an extent, this group is becoming quite small. 2. Novice - These are users who are slightly familiar with computers but would be quite unfamiliar with your system and how it would work. They are not computer phobic but just lack the exposure and experience. 3. Skilled - Skilled users have considerable computer experience and would be quite comfortable operating most computer systems. They would know where to go for help with a system functional problem but still would not have the expertise to understand the internal working of a computer or application. 4. Expert - The expert user is extremely comfortable with many aspects of computers and systems. They understand how they function and would attempt first to correct many problems themselves before obtaining professional help. Human Factors Computer Programming Interactive System Design Theories Principles Methodologies Guidelines Analyze Design Build Test Human Computer Interface VI. INTERFACE ANALYSIS AND SPECIFICATION Figure: HCI 7

5 VII. CONCLUSION: Computers have played a massive role in changing the way we live over the last couple of decades. They are no longer possessions of the privileged but are rapidly becoming inexpensive, everyday commodities. They have evolved from being isolated machines to globally interconnected devices. Not only has access to computers vastly increased, but the ways we interact with them and materials used for computer devices have changed too. All of this means that computers can now be interwoven with almost every aspect of our lives. As we move towards 2020, so the extent of these changes will increase. By 2020, it may not be possible to realize all of our goals, ambitions and aspirations without using a computer or computing in one way or another. This binding of computing to our daily activities will in turn affect our values, goals and aspirations. REFERENCES 1. Howes, A. and S. Payne (1990). Display-based competence: towards user models for menudriven interfaces. International Journal of Man- Machine Studies 33, Hutchins, E. and T. Klausen (1991). Distributed cognition in an airline cockpit. In Y. Engstr om and D. Middleton (Ed.), Cognition and Communication at Work. Cambridge University Press Baecker, R, Grudin, J, Buxton, W, Greenberg, S (eds) (1995) Readings in Human-Computer Interaction: Toward the Year nd ed. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann. 5. Buxton, B (2007) Sketching User Experience: Getting the Design Right and the Right Design. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann. 6. Carroll, JM (ed) (2002) Human-Computer Interaction in the New Millennium. New York: ACM Press. 7. Dix, A, Finlay, J, Abowd, G and Beale, R (2003) Human-Computer Interaction. 3rd ed. Prentice Hall. 8. Jacko, J and Sears, A (2007) Human-Computer Interaction Handbook. 2nd ed. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. 9. Jones, J and Marsden G (2005) Mobile Interaction Design.London: Wiley & Sons. 8