CONTEXTS

Recent & RelevantFeedback preferences and impressions ofwaitingBranaghan, R. J., & Sanchez, C. A. (2009). Human Factors, 51, 528–538.“Three experiments examined the effects of variousfeedback displays on user preference, apparent waitingdurations, waiting time reasonableness, and other userexperience measures. …. User interface guidelinesadvocate keeping users informed about system status;however, the duration estimation literature shows thatfocusing on temporal information makes the wait seemlonger. How can designers reconcile these issues? ….In three experiments, students chose movies froma simulated movie database and then were shownfeedback displays (static, sequential dots, constantrateprogress bars, or variable-rate progress bars) fordifferent durations. Users judged how reasonablethe wait was and how long it lasted and then rankedtheir preference for the dialogs …. The pattern ofpreference results was different from duration-relatedjudgments. Users preferred feedback that providedmore information. On the other hand, when judgingduration, users perceived simpler interfaces as beingmost reasonable …. Different types of feedback arerequired for reducing perceived wait and increasingpreference. Ratings of wait time reasonablenesswere consistent with the attentional gate theory ofprospective timing; attention-demanding activitycaused the wait to seem less reasonable. Preference, onthe other hand, requires keeping users informed aboutthe progress of operations …. Users prefer morefeedback rather than less, even if it makes the waitseem less reasonable. However, the constant progressbar performed at the top of both reasonableness andpreference, keeping users informed without increasingarousal or focusing attention on temporal stimuli.Other options are also discussed to make durationperceptions more reasonable.”DesignObservational data on practicalexperience and conditions of use ofwritten instructionsGanier, F. (2009). Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 39,401–415.“This article presents a study investigating howpeople deal with procedural documents when using anew domestic appliance. An observational study wascarried out in a quasi-experimental setting in order tooutline the behavior of users encountering and usingan appliance for the first time. The purpose of thisobservation was to identify two kinds of factors: onthe one hand, factors inciting the use of proceduraldocuments accompanying appliances, and on theother hand, design features facilitating the use of thesedocuments when looking for specific information.User behavior and strategies were categorized usingtwo kinds of indicators: 1) the number of times thedocuments were examined prior to contact with theappliance and/or while carrying out the prescribedtasks; and 2) the total time required to locateinformation in three different kinds of documents:Text only, Picture only, Text + Picture. Resultsshow that 16 participants out of 30 spontaneouslyused the procedural documents before starting touse the appliance. However, during the session, 27participants consulted the documents at least once.This consultation was determined by the task to carryout and the complexity level of the task. Otherwise,results show that time taken to locate information wasshortest when instructions were displayed in text andpicture format.”Valerie J. VanceSherry Southard362 Technical Communication l Volume 57, Number 3, August 2010