User Interface and User Experience (UI/UX) Design
khabar laila
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
Advances in personal computing and information technologies have fundamentally transformed how maps are produced and consumed, as many maps today are highly interactive and delivered online or through mobile devices. Accordingly, we need to consider interaction as a fundamental complement to representation in cartography and visualization. UI (user interface) / UX (user experience) describes a set of concepts, guidelines, and workflows for critically thinking about the design and use of an interactive product, map-based or otherwise. This entry introduces core concepts from UI/UX design important to cartography and visualization, focusing on issues related to visual design. First, a fundamental distinction is made between the use of an interface as a tool and the broader experience of an interaction, a distinction that separates UI design and UX design. Norman's stages of interaction framework then is summarized as a guiding model for understanding the user experience with interactive maps, noting how different UX design solutions can be applied to breakdowns at different stages of the interaction. Finally, three dimensions of UI design are described: the fundamental interaction operators that form the basic building blocks of an interface, interface styles that implement these operator primitives, and recommendations for visual design of an interface. Definitions affordance: a signal to the user about how to interact with the interface feedback: a signal to the user about what happened as a result of the interaction interaction: the two-way question-answer or request-result dialogue between a human user and a digital object mediated through a computing device interaction primitive: the fundamental components of interaction that can be combined to form an interaction strategy interaction operator: a generic function implemented in an interactive tool that enables the user to manipulate the display interface: a tool enabling a user to manipulate a digital object interface complexity: the total number of unique representations that can be created through the interface (scope multiplied by freedom) interface flexibility: ability to complete the same objective with an interface through different interaction strategies interface freedom: the precision by which each operator can be executed interface scope: the baseline number of operators implemented in an interactive tool interface style/mode: the manner by which user input is submitted to perform the operator
Related papers
The Impact of Interface Aspects on Interactive Map Communication - An Evaluation Methodology
International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, 2009
In this paper, we will present an analytical and methodological procedure to evaluate the interfaces of Interactive Maps. The main aims of one such evaluation is to (i) identify the essential aspects of these interfaces, (ii) investigate their influence on the communication with users and, based on this, (iii) set directives to guide the design of interfaces of future Interactive Maps. The process of evaluation leads to a detailed analysis of both the interface and the interaction itself. In order to do so, the process consists of the analysis of the essential elements of the interfaces, the evaluation of these aspects in relation to the users and, finally, the study of the results obtained. The results mainly refer to significant information on those aspects of the interfaces which, in turn, concern the necessary resources to both the interaction itself and the functionalities that Interactive Maps provide.
Usability perspectives for the design of interactive maps
2007
OF DOCTORAL DISSERTATION HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY P.O. BOX 1000, FI-02015 TKK http://www.tkk.fi Author Lic.Sc. (Tech.) Annu-Maaria Nivala Name of the dissertation Usability Perspectives for the Design of Interactive Maps Manuscript submitted 05.06.2007 Manuscript revised 22.10.2007 Date of the defence 30.11.2007 Monograph Article dissertation (summary + original articles) Department Department of Computer Science and Engineering Laboratory Software Business and Engineering Institute Field of research Usability Research Opponent(s) Professor Kaisa Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila and Dr. Jason Dykes Supervisor Professor Marko Nieminen Instructor Docent, D.Sc. (Tech.) Tiina Sarjakoski Abstract Recent changes in information and communication technology have led to new methods for visualising geospatial data and to interactive map applications. Consequently, traditional map design and evaluation methods may no longer be suitable for the new range of users, use situations and devices. Th...
Guest editorial: map interaction
GeoInformatica, 2017
Spatial information and especially maps have become ubiquitous: many websites rely on maps for different purposes. Maps are used on mobile devices, for navigation systems, in analysis and planning tools, for information visualization, or in gaming. In many cases, these maps are not a static picture but support interaction, e.g. in order to change the displayed area, to find specific sites of interest, or even to edit the map and/or its underlying information. While map-making has a long tradition and consequently benefits from a large body of research to draw from, this is not true for map interaction. In contrast to map-making, there is no agreed-upon set of rules or guidelines that have emerged with respect to how to design interaction with maps. When looking at different popular web services or applications that use interactive maps, a broad range of different approaches become apparent. How we work with interactive maps thus is not only inconsistent across systems but can also be quite awkward. Even simple queries can require a lot of interaction, and the formulation of complex queries is sometimes not even possible-although we know more about the user, the context, and the task than ever before. Given the rapid proliferation of interactive maps and our increasing dependency on them (e.g. in the context of location-based services), a
Visualisations; Functionality and Interaction
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2001
The interface to any visualisation application can essentially be split into two; the visualisation itself, and the interface that is associated with the interface. Despite the fact that the data plays a major part in any visualisation application, this is generally accessed only through either the interface or the visualisation. An important issue then arises over the location of functionality in the application. To be able to provide a usable and effective visualisation application (including data integration) where are the various selections, filters, customisations, and interrogation mechanisms located; the visualisation or the interface? The interaction mechanisms involved play a part in guiding this decision, but the amount of coupling between the visualisation and interface is also important.
User-Centered Graphical User Interface Design for GIS (91-6)
1991
The quality of the user interface has a great bearing on the utility of a geographic information system. The user interface, however, has not been a strong point of GIS (Cowen and Love 1988; Egenhofer and Frank 1988). To increase the efficiency of GIS the user interface must provide a simple conceptual model of what is happening to the database (Collins et al. 1983). It must be easy to learn, appear natural, and independent of implementation complexities such as data structures and algorithms (Eggenhoffer and Frank 1988). In order to do this, the user interface of the GIS should show itself to its user as a system, and not as various collections of data (Driver and Liles 1983). This paper discusses how traditional user interface design focuses on how to best represent the software functionality rather than on how to meet the expectations of the user. User-Centered Design is offered as an alternative that focuses on the two-way mapping between system functionality and the user's conceptual model of the system. Graphical user interface techniques are discussed as ways of creating the necessary two way mapping and facilitating the usability of GIS systems. User-Centered Design The problem of making GIS useful to people is a user interface design problem rather than an engineering problem. Engineering typically begins by eliminating the subjective factors, but it is exactly the subjective factors that are critical to the usability of information systems. To create a successful user interface the designer must understand how people think and work. The designer must realize that users do not actually use algorithms, data structures, networks, functions or subroutines, even though as technical professionals this is typically the domain in which they work. Instead, system users push buttons, choose options, type things in, make selections from menus, give commands and manipulate controls. In other words, user interfaces are illusions that hide the underlying architecture of the technology prominent in the programmer's view and repackage it as something understandable and usable by analysts and decision makers. Some of the most successful user interfaces are complete illusions outwardly bearing no resemblance to the data processing happening inside the machine. Of course, these illusions require their own program code. It is not unusual for more than 60% of the code in a complex software system to be dedicated purely to the user interface. This stands in sharp contrast to the 35% dedicated to the user interface in early GISs (Nicholson 1983). Why do users need these illusions? One of the biggest problems for end-users is that the things computers let users do are abstract. Even the terminology they employ: files, directories, records, databases, logging on and off, function keys, scroll-bars, control-alt key combinations, etc. is often unfamiliar and grounded in abstraction. In everyday controls such as light switches, door handles and shower fittings, there is usually a fairly obvious correspondence between what a control looks and feels like physically and what it actually does. If one is not sure which light switch on a panel controls which light, one can generally try them until the right one if found. John Carroll (1984) at IBM calls this learning through exploration and the ability to perform this significantly increases the learnability of a system. In computer software this element of physicality is lost. Almost everything relating to the internal workings of the computer is hidden and largely divorced from anything the user understands. To make systems truly usable software illusions are built on top of the underlying functionality. These illusions make abstract things appear concrete and give users the impression that they are controlling real objects. For example, the three-dimensional buttons and animated pulldown menus of Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) have utility far extends far beyond mere cosmetic drapery. They serve to restore an element of physicality and concreteness that promotes understanding and a feeling of being in control of computer software. User Models Users have mental models about the tasks they accomplish with a system, and the way the system lets them accomplish those tasks. These models are defined by the user's prior experience, existing knowledge, and preconceptions about tasks. For both a
Intuitive Use of User Interfaces: Defining a Vague Concept
2007
In this paper we present a general definition of the concept 'intuitive use of user interfaces' on the basis of our current interdisciplinary work. 'Intuitive use' is regarded as a characteristic of human-machine systems. It refers to a special kind of interaction process between users and technical systems that use the users' intuition. The main part of the paper deals with central aspects of this definition in detail and discusses pre-conditions and restrictions of the use of the concept. The main aspects that we discuss are the design of technical systems, application and non-conscious use of previous knowledge, intuition as a non-conscious process, interaction, and effectiveness. We complement this discussion by addressing the relationship between aesthetics and intuitive use.
Affordances: Clarifying and evolving a concept
2000
The concept of affordance is popular in the HCI community but not well understood. Donald Norman appropriated the concept of affordances from James J. Gibson for the design of common objects and both implicitly and explicitly adjusted the meaning given by Gibson. There was, however, ambiguity in Norman's original definition and use of affordances which he has subsequently made efforts to clarify. His definition germinated quickly and through a review of the HCI literature we show that this ambiguity has lead to widely varying uses of the concept. Norman has recently acknowledged the ambiguity, however, important clarifications remain. Using affordances as a basis, we elucidate the role of the designer and the distinction between usefulness and usability. We expand Gibson's definition into a framework for design.
Interaction Design Needs Modified Principles of "Design Affordance" for Navigation Applications
2020
It is a common scene for many of us getting from point A to point B these days. One we forget did not exist a little over a decade ago. A phone or device is taken out, a destination is typed into a search box, and a route or several are offered. The user then makes a route decision, places the device within sight, or holds it as they travel. The user relies on provided instructions for most of the route taken and tangential subsequential decision-making. These behaviors are not only accepted as the norm, but our reliance deems them necessary to find our way around. The implications of these behaviors can be observed on a daily basis. As the development of Internet of Things (IOT) unfolds, we have witnessed a new design paradigm that needs addressed-balancing the users' ability to successfully manage contextual information and ambient information. The term, "Affordance" was originally mentioned in 1977 by James Gibson, a psychologist, as the relationship between physical objects and their actionable properties to humans. However, is more known and attributed to Donald Norman, a designer within the interaction design realm as the perceived properties of an interface. This struggle to maintain balance between the two definitions is most seen regarding the GPS navigation experience. Navigation interfaces are typically flooded with functions that are more marketable than usable in the physical space for which they are designed, sometimes leading to hazardous outcomes. A solution is acknowledging that both affordances exist simultaneously, but should be harmoniously cognizant of when and how each should be prioritized. Moving forward, designers of navigation systems should agree on principles that successfully integrate both Norman and Gibson's definition, emphasizing the physical world's properties and supporting our ability to respond quickly and safely.
Related papers
Graphic design of interactive interfaces
THE 9TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE INDONESIAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY ICICS 2021: Toward a Meaningful Society
In the epoch of digital media, graphic design has become an important part in the process of creating interactive platforms for work and entertainment. To a great extent, design defines the way in which the user will communicate in the virtual environment. If the visual hierarchy in the texts, shapes and colours is not implemented, then dealing even with the most up-to-date software may become challenging. The modern human is overwhelmed with information and he instinctively seeks for the most direct way to reach his goal. Each graphic element that is not in its designated place is a reason to disrupt the fluent dealing with the interface and results accordingly in bad usability. It is noticed that many developers of such type of platforms perceive interactive and print design as overlapping areas. Although their origin, principles and components are common, the differences between them in terms of technical and user elements are considerable, which influences also the creative process. The purpose of the current article is to define the areas of differences between print and interactive design. Systematizing them will be useful for optimizing the graphic design for interactive interfaces, achieving intuitive navigation, user comfort and accessibility for the content.
Interaction-related Properties of Interactive Artifacts
Over the years, several attempts have been made to describe properties of interactive artifacts and/or interaction. However, these attempts tend to describe more than one aspect, e.g. combining artifact properties with aspects of the user’s experience and/or with aspects that arise in use. Or, authors have focused on a small subset of qualities, or very overarching or very domain-specific qualities. This is an attempt to describe only interaction-related properties of interactive artifacts in themselves, i.e. explicitly focusing on what can actually be inscribed into an interactive artifact (as opposed to what the user may experience, or what may happen during interaction). The aim has been to extend the interaction designer’s vocabulary, providing a means for discussing, analyzing and comparing the interactive aspects of things. The collection of properties is comparably extensive; it contains 30 properties related to six different categories: Interaction; Expression; Behavior; Complexity; Time and Change; and Users. It can be used in several ways – to analyze and discuss properties of an artifact, as a checklist during design, and lastly as a design tool – what happens if we start out with an artifact and then change the attributes?
On the relevance of cartography – An interaction design perspective
Proceedings of the ICA, 2019
We see more cartographic products in our digital world than ever before. But what role does cartography play in the modern production of cartographic products? In this position paper, we will argue that the democratization and diffusion of cartographic production has also led to the presumed "fading relevance" of cartography. As an argument against this notion, we highlight starting points for the field of cartography to improve modern cartographic production through its inherent cartographic knowledge.
The GIS Manual 1 CHAPTER 42 Interactive Maps for Exploring Spatial Data
2014
A hallmark of modern geographic information system (GIS) software is its capability for user interaction. Interactivity—referring here to the myriad ways that a system, or data represented in a system, can change according to user input—is now ubiquitous enough in computerized information systems that it is often taken for granted. However, interactivity
User Interface Design Principles for Interaction Design
Design Issues, 2008
Multimodal interfaces for expressive interaction
4th Italian …, 2005
The Italian ACM SIGCHI Chapter, called SIGCHI Italy, has been officially chartered on April 24, 1996. Its aim is to promote an increased knowledge and greater interest in the science, technology, design, development, and application of methods/tools/techniques for HCI. SIGCHI Italy has scientific and educational goals, and aims to provide a mean of communication between persons having interest in HCI. It also organizes meetings, conferences, discussion groups and workshops. SIGCHI, ACM's Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction, brings together people working on the design, evaluation, and implementation of interactive computing systems for human use, and the study of major phenomena surrounding such systems. It embraces work on the hardware and software engineering of interactive systems, the structure of communications between human and machine, characterization of the use and context of use for interactive systems, methodology of design, and new designs themselves. It helps to organize and coordinate information through on line information, traditional publications, conferences, workshops, and symposia relating to human-computer interaction. SIGCHI members are interested in keeping up with changes in this rapidly evolving field -in research and development, or the design and evaluation of new user interfaces -making computers easier to use and extending technology into new domains for new users.
Intuitive Interaction Applied to Interface Design
Intuitive interaction involves utilising knowledge gained through other products or experience(s). Therefore, products that people use intuitively are those with features they have encountered before. This position has been supported by experimental studies. The findings suggest that relevant past experience is transferable between products, and probably also between contexts, and performance is affected by a person's level of familiarity with similar technologies. Appearance (shape, size and labelling of features) seems to be the variable that most affects time on task and intuitive uses.
Interactive maps for exploring spatial data
2008
A hallmark of modern geographic information system (GIS) software is its capability for user interaction. Interactivity-referring here to the myriad ways that a system, or data represented in a system, can change according to user input-is now ubiquitous enough in computerized information systems that it is often taken for granted. However, interactivity should be examined critically in the context of maps and geographic representations in order to understand how far GIS has come in facilitating data analysis, and what might still be developed in order to examine data sets that are presently difficult to examine given the stateof-the-art of GIS. This chapter explores the design and use of interactive maps for spatial data exploration and analysis, paying particular attention to applications incorporating approaches from cartography, statistics and computer science. We also consider the role of the interactive capabilities and potential of GIS for the burgeoning field of visual analytics, and look ahead to the possibilities of incorporating interaction into future designs of GIS, in particular those that can handle spatiotemporal data. Present GISs, with their unique and highly interactive interfaces, are well-designed for many spatial data exploration tasks. However, developers and users should consider implementing modes of interaction not presently enabled in GIS that would facilitate a wider range of geographic visualization and analysis. We thus advocate the increase of interactive capabilities for map products created in a GIS environment based on the improvements for data exploration that could be gained. 42.2 Interaction and Geo-visualization Traditional maps are designed by cartographers to communicate information to a map user or group of map users. The incorporation of interactivity into maps allows for this same communication between cartographer and map user, but it also affords a dialogue of sorts between the representation and the user, as the map user becomes an important agent in the creation and representation of the information. In the days before users were given opportunities to interact with maps, the process of cartography was a one-way path that led from "reality" through several intermediate steps-the cartographer's filtering of that reality (tempered by his or her own intentional or unintentional bias), selection, generalization, symbolization, the user's perception of the map, and a (potential) alteration of the user's mental model of the represented phenomenon (Figure 42-1) (Robinson et al. 1995; MacEachren 1995). The provision of interactivity adds an important feedback to this process: though the user cannot alter reality itself, every other step of the cartographic process can be subject to alteration with an interactive map. User interaction can alter the themes and base map information that are displayed, the scale and aggregation of the data, the level of detail, the type of map, the classification, the color scheme, the viewing angle, the highlighted elements-interactive maps afford a user an infinite number of representation possibilities, each with the potential to alter mental models and to construct knowledge in a unique way (Figure 42-2).
A Study on User Experience
IRJET, 2022
Personal computing and information technology advancements have fundamentally changed how maps are produced and consumed, with many maps now being highly interactive and delivered online or via mobile devices. As a result, interaction needs to be viewed as a key addition to illustration in cartographic and visualization purposes. The terms "user interface" and "user experience" refer to a set of ideas, prescriptions, and procedures for considering critically the creation and use of interactive products. There are several ways available to effectively convey material to people. The emphasis moves to user comfort as a result of the flexibility and diversity of the information that may be supplied via web apps. Therefore, for such apps, a user experience design geared at user delight becomes the primary focus.
What Is Interaction for Data Visualization ?
IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (TVCG/VIS '19)., 2020
Interaction is fundamental to data visualization, but what “interaction” means in the context of visualization is ambiguous and confusing. We argue that this confusion is due to a lack of consensual definition. To tackle this problem, we start by synthesizing an inclusive view of interaction in the visualization community – including insights from information visualization, visual analytics and scientific visualization, as well as the input of both senior and junior visualization researchers. Once this view takes shape, we look at how interaction is defined in the field of human-computer interaction (HCI). By extracting commonalities and differences between the views of interaction in visualization and in HCI, we synthesize a definition of interaction for visualization. Our definition is meant to be a thinking tool and inspire novel and bolder interaction design practices. We hope that by better understanding what interaction in visualization is and what it can be, we will enrich the quality of interaction in visualization systems and empower those who use them.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.