Systematic evaluation of design choices for software development tools

[Abstract]: Most design and evaluation of software tools is based on the intuition and experience of the designers. Software tool designers consider themselves typical users of the tools that they build and tend to subjectively evaluate their products rather than objectively evaluate them using established usability methods. This subjective approach is inadequate if the quality of software tools is to improve and the use of more systematic methods is advocated. This paper summarises a sequence of studies that show how user interface design choices for software development tools can be evaluated using established usability engineering techniques. The techniques used included guideline review, predictive modelling and experimental studies with users

An empirical investigation of menu design in language-based editors

In program visualization some form of graphics is used to represent some aspect of a program. However, graphics are necessarily expensive with respect to 'screen real estate'. Alternatives, therefore, may be required for presentation of certain concepts fundamental to the programmer's model of a program. For example, one graphical representation of a program, written in a block-structured language like Pascal or Modula-2, is the structure chart model of the hierarchical structure of the blocks or modules making up the program. This graphic may be the most appropriate but it may not be conveniently implemented as a menu and a means of 'directly' selecting blocks of program code to view or edit. Such graphics are used extensively, for example, in the Garden environment developed at Brown University. An alternative is a text-based list of block names indented to summarize the program's structure. UQ1, a language-based editor developed at the University of Queensland, implements the concept in this manner. Both types of menu structure were examined and compared for efficiency in a direct manipulation style of interaction. In general, there was no significant difference (P > 0.05) in time taken by subjects to select items from either style of menu