Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction

Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction: A Comparison

between Task Analysis Techniques

Nairoz Jamal Eddin

University of Benghazi faculty of information technology

Software engineer

6 January 2023

E-mail address: [email protected]

Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction

1- INTODUCTION

Interest in design and development of interactive software applications has increased

considerably over recent years. The underlying reason for this interest is the need to allow the

greatest number of people access to software applications for the largest number of purposes and

in the widest number of contexts. However, making systems easier to use implies taking into

account many factors in the design of an interactive application, such as tasks to support, context

of use, user preferences, media and interaction techniques available, and so on. It is thus

important to have structured methods for allowing designers to manage such a complexity.

Despite the many direct manipulations tools currently available to designers to enable rapid

building of user interfaces with graphical icons and multimedia effects, the design of interactive

applications is still difficult and one of the main problems they have is to identify the interaction

and presentation techniques more effective to support the possible tasks. On the other hand, end

users often find interfaces difficult to understand and use in order to attain their desired ends.

One of the main reasons for this is that in many cases users have trouble understanding what

tasks are supported or how to associate the desired logical actions with physical actions of the

user interface.

Central to the design of such systems is a clear understanding of what users actually want to do:

What are their tasks? What is the nature of those tasks? Many techniques have been proposed to

help answer these questions. Here I’m discussing how task analysis has evolved from studies of

physical activity to encompass the cognitive and sociocultural challenges faced by today’s

knowledge workers. And analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the primary approaches, and

discuss possibilities for future developments of task analysis techniques and technologies.

2
Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction

2- BACKGROUND AND RELATED WORK

A. Task Analysis

Task analysis is the process of understanding the user's task thoroughly enough to help

design a computer system that will effectively support users in doing the task. By task is

meant the user's job or work activities, what the user is attempting to accomplish. By

analysis is meant a relatively systematic approach to understanding the user's task that

goes beyond unaided intuitions or speculations, and attempts to document and describe

exactly what the task involves. Task analysis is especially valuable in the context of

human-computer interaction (HCI). User interfaces must be specified at an extremely low

level (e.g. in terms of particular interaction styles and widgets), while still mapping

effectively to users’ high-level tasks.

B. Design phase of computer systems

The design of functionality is a stage of the design of computer systems in which the

user-accessible functions of the computer system are chosen and specified. A successful

design of functionality requires a task analysis early enough in the system design to

enable the developers to create a system that effectively supports the user's task. Thus the

proper goal of the design of functionality is to choose functions that are both useful in the

user's task, and which together with a good user interface, results in a system that is

usable, being easy to learn and easy to use.

The user's task is not just to interact with the computer, but to get a job done. Thus

understanding the user's task involves understanding the user's task domain and the user's

larger job goals.

3
Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction

3- THE ROLE OF TASK ANALYSIS IN DEVELOPMENT

Problems with misdefined functionality arise because first, there is a tendency to assume that the

requirements specifications for a piece of software can and should contain all that is necessary to

design and implement the software, and second, the common processes for preparing these

specifications often fail to include a real task analysis.

Usually the requirements are simply a list of desirable features or functions, chosen randomly,

and without critical examination on how they will fit together to support the user. Thus,

understanding the user's task is the most important step in system and interface design. The

results of task analyses can be used in several different phases in the development process:

1- Development of requirements. A task analysis should be conducted before developing

the system requirements to guide the choice and design of the system functionality; the

goal of task analysis at this point is to find out what the user needs to be able to

accomplish.

2- User interface design and evaluation. Task analysis results are needed during interface

design to effectively design and evaluate the user interface. The usability process itself,

and user testing, requires information about the user's tasks.

3- Follow-up after installation. Task analysis can be conducted on fielded or in-place

systems to compare systems or identify potential problems or improvements. When a

fully implemented system is in place, it is possible to conduct a fully detailed task

analysis; these results could be used to compare the demands of different systems,

identify problems that should be corrected in a new system, or to determine properties

of the task that should be preserved in a new system.

4
Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction

4- TASK ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES

As applied system designers dealt with ever-more complex tasks and supporting systems to

increase efficiency and productivity, they began to search for more rigorous, systematic, and

cost-effective analytical techniques. These techniques influenced the emerging interdisciplinary

practice of HCI. As computing power expanded, HCI came to encompass vast new areas of

human behavior, and task analysis took on greater scope and complexity. These techniques focus

on quite different levels of analysis and contribute different insights.

4.1. Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA)

Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA) was introduced by Annett and Duncan (1967) to evaluate an

organization’s training needs. The underlying technique, hierarchical decomposition, analyzes

and represents the behavioral aspects of complex tasks such as planning, diagnosis and decision

making. HTA breaks tasks into subtasks and operations or actions. These task components are

then graphically represented using a structure chart. HTA entails identifying tasks, categorizing

them, identifying the subtasks, and checking the overall accuracy of the model. HTA is useful for

interface designers because it provides a model for task execution, enabling designers to envision

the goals, tasks, subtasks, operations, and plans essential to users’ activities. So it is useful for

decomposing complex tasks, but has a narrow view of the task, and normally is used in

conjunction with other methods of task analysis to increase its effectiveness. HTA serves as both

an analytical framework and a practical tool for designers.

The strengths and weaknesses of HTA flow from its strong system-centric stance. While user-

centered design advocates often see task analysis as requiring deep understanding of individual

behavior, HTA theory views tasks in a more abstract sense, as a set of interlinked goals,

resources and constraints. The focus is on the system and its properties.

5
Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction

Table1. Example of a HTA.

Figure1. HTA-diagrammatic-description.

HTA recognizes the responsibility of the operator (user) to plan the use of available resources to

attain a given goal, but it treats the operator’s cognitive processes as a black box. HTA fails to

support the components needed to analyze system flows and dynamics.

6
Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction

4.2. Cognitive Techniques

4.2.1 Cognitive modeling (GOMS)

What do we find if we peer inside the “black box” of cognition? By developing models of how

the brain and body respond in certain situations, psychologists have created valuable insights for

HCI theorists and designers, enabling them to create what Norman (1988) calls “natural

mappings” between cognition and interface.

Card, Moran, and Newell (1983) proposed a Model Human Processor (MHP), consisting of three

interacting systems: perceptual, motor and cognitive. The MHP assumes that the brain is capable

of performing various information-processing operations, such as comparing, matching and

calculating. While this model does not directly apply to task analysis or system design, Card et

al. developed an engineering model of human performance—GOMS.

GOMS enables the MHP’s characterizations of human performance to be applied to task

analysis. According to Card et al., the purpose of a task analysis is to map out the constraints

imposed on behavior by the nature and features of the task environment, and to determine what

users knows about the task, and when they know it. GOMS models tasks in terms of a set of

Goals, a set of Operators, a set of Methods for achieving the goals, and a set of selection rules

for choosing among competing methods for goals. A set of goals is defined as a symbolic

structure that defines a state of affairs to be achieved and determines a set of possible methods

for achieving it. Operators are defined as elementary perceptual, cognitive acts whose execution

is necessary to change any aspect of the user’s mental state or to affect the task environment. A

method is defined as a description of a procedure for accomplishing a goal, and is one of the

ways that users store their task knowledge. Methods are learned procedures that the user already

has and are not created during a task performance. The selection rules in a GOMS task analysis

7
Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction

determine how a user selects a particular method, and can be used to predict which method the

user will select on the basis of knowledge of the task environment. Furthermore, a GOMS

analysis can be used to predict the quality of an existing system or prototype.

GOAL: ACCESS ATM

GOAL: ENABLE ACCESS
INSERT CREDIT CARD
INSERT PASSWORD
GOAL: TAKE CASH
SELECT WITHDRAW SERVICE
SELECT AMOUNT OF MONEY
PRESS OKAY
TAKE MONEY
VERIFY AMOUNT OF MONEY
Table2. Example of a GOMS specification

4.2.2 Cognitive task analysis (CTA)

Analysis of cognitive activity has led to another class of techniques, known as Cognitive Task

Analysis (CTA). Development of CTA has been motivated by the observation that as “tasks have

become more intricate, knowledge-intensive, and subject to increasingly integrated forms of

technological support, traditional forms of task decomposition appear to have an overly restricted

scope” (Barnard and May, 2000). In contrast to GOMS-style cognitive models, CTA targets more

abstract, high-level cognitive functions.

Compared to HTA or GOMS, CTA presents quite different challenges to the analyst. It requires

deep engagement with a particular knowledge domain, working closely with subject-matter

experts to elicit their knowledge about various tasks. Here, many techniques—such as structured

interviews, naturalistic observation, ethnography and contextual inquiry—could be of value.

CTA represents an attempt to capture task expertise. Since expertise is often tacit or idiosyncratic

in nature, it can be much more difficult to analyze than the explicit actions typically considered

by HTA. In fact, CTA requires “making explicit the implicit knowledge and cognitive-processing

8
 Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction

requirements of jobs” .This challenge has spawned a diversity of CTA methods, ranging from

ecological approaches (Flach, 2001) to constraint-based analysis (Vicente, 1999). Compared to

HTA or cognitive modeling, CTA has increased understanding of many important cognitive

aspects of modern task environments. However, it is unclear how effective CTA techniques are in

representing these aspects in a systematic and useful way. Another significant problem with

many CTA techniques is that studying high-level cognitive functions in a real task situation is

very difficult. Studies may take months or years and rely on the dedicated efforts of senior

researchers.

5- DESCUSION

Inevitably, there is a tradeoff between efficiency (complexity and usability) and effectiveness

(quality and depth of the output). In my opinion the challenge is to develop techniques that

optimize this tradeoff. The table below shows a comparison between task analysis techniques

taking into account efficiency and effectiveness according to empirical evidence which I have

taken from different researches.

TECHNIQUE COMLEXITY & USABILITY QUALITY

 Decomposes complex tasks  Improves problem diagnosis

HTA into subtasks. and useful for concurrent
(Not always applicable, not all  Complex activities demand operations.
task are hierarchical) extensive hierarchy  Does not account for system
construction. dynamics.
 Requires detailed analysis  Improves productivity.
GOMS of keystroke level  Not applicable to broader
(Considers only sequential tasks, interaction. problems.
it doesn’t consider user errors)  Ignores contextual factors
 Defines a coherent  Increases the understanding of
knowledge representation cognitive aspects of the task.
CTA for the domain being  Captures task expertise.
(Needs experts) studied.  Fails to fully incorporate
 Requires deep engagement learning, contextual and
with a particular knowledge historical factors.
domain.
Table 3. Complexity, usability and quality based on empirical evidence in task analysis research.

9
Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction

6- CONCLUSION

The development of task analysis can be seen as mirroring the progress of research trends in

HCI. HCI research has evolved over the past fifty years. As they have evolved, task analysis

techniques have become increasingly complex and fragmented. As a result the sophisticated

forms of task analysis developed by researchers are often ignored in practice. For task analysis to

realize its potential, researchers must improve its usability and degree of integration.

So a major challenge for future research is to investigate the use of task analysis techniques in

context, assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of these techniques for particular tasks,

situations, design problems and organizational structures.

References

1. Annett, J. and Duncan, K. (1967). Task Analysis and Training Design. Occupational

Psychology 41, 211-221.

2. Annett, J., and Stanton, N., eds. (2000). Task analysis. London: Taylor & Francis.

3. Card, S., Moran, T. and Newell, A. (1983). The Psychology of Human-Computer

Interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbau

4. Barnard, P. and May, J. (2000). Towards a theory-based form of cognitive task

analysis of broad scope and applicability. In: Schraagen, et al., 147-163.

5. MacLean, A., Young, R., Bellotti, V. and Moran, T. (1991). Questions, options and:

Elements of design space analysis. Human-Computer Interaction, 6: 201-250.

6. Shepherd, A. (2001). Hierarchical task analysis. New York: Taylor & Francis.

7. Schraagen, J., Chipman, S., and Shalin, V. (2000). Cognitive task analysis. Mahwah,

NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

8. Norman, D. (1988). The Design of Everyday Things. New York: Doubleday.

10
Task Analysis in Human Computer Interaction

9. Vicente, K. (1999). Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy

Computer-Based Work. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

10. Vicente, K. (1999). Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy

Computer-Based Work. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

11