A comparison of static, adaptive, and adaptable menus

@inproceedings{citeulike:210859, abstract = {Software applications continue to grow in terms of the number of features they offer, making personalization increasingly important. Research has shown that most users prefer the control afforded by an adaptable approach to personalization rather than a system-controlled adaptive approach. No study, however, has compared the efficiency of the two approaches. In a controlled lab study with 27 subjects we compared the measured and perceived efficiency of three menu conditions: static, adaptable and adaptive. Each was implemented as a split menu, in which the top four items remained static, were adaptable by the subject, or adapted according to the subject's frequently and recently used items. The static menu was found to be significantly faster than the adaptive menu, and the adaptable menu was found to be significantly faster than the adaptive menu under certain conditions. The majority of users preferred the adaptable menu overall. Implications for interface design are discussed.}, address = {New York, NY, USA}, author = {Findlater, Leah and Mcgrenere, Joanna }, booktitle = {CHI '04: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems}, citeulike-article-id = {210859}, doi = {10.1145/985692.985704}, isbn = {1581137028}, pages = {89--96}, posted-at = {2008-07-22 10:50:02}, priority = {4}, publisher = {ACM Press}, title = {A comparison of static, adaptive, and adaptable menus}, url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=985704}, year = {2004} }

TY - CONF ID - citeulike:210859 L3 - citeulike-article-id:210859 TI - A comparison of static, adaptive, and adaptable menus T2 - CHI '04: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems SP - 89 EP - 96 AD - New York, NY, USA PB - ACM Press SN - 1581137028 N2 - Software applications continue to grow in terms of the number of features they offer, making personalization increasingly important. Research has shown that most users prefer the control afforded by an adaptable approach to personalization rather than a system-controlled adaptive approach. No study, however, has compared the efficiency of the two approaches. In a controlled lab study with 27 subjects we compared the measured and perceived efficiency of three menu conditions: static, adaptable and adaptive. Each was implemented as a split menu, in which the top four items remained static, were adaptable by the subject, or adapted according to the subject's frequently and recently used items. The static menu was found to be significantly faster than the adaptive menu, and the adaptable menu was found to be significantly faster than the adaptive menu under certain conditions. The majority of users preferred the adaptable menu overall. Implications for interface design are discussed. AU - Findlater, Leah AU - Mcgrenere, Joanna PY - 2004/// UR - http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=985704 ER -