Transcript slides
Learning Where to Look: An ACT-R/PM Model Brian D. Ehret ARCH Laboratory Human Factors and Applied Cognition George Mason University ACT-R Workshop - August 7, 1999 Overview HCI research has demonstrated that users learn the locations of interface objects However, not much known about mechanisms underlying location learning Systematically vary conditions under which location learning may occur in order to Infer characteristics of location learning mechanisms Embed these characteristics into a computational cognitive model using ACT-R/PM (Byrne & Anderson, 1998) Color-Match Condition Meaningful Text Condition Arbitrary Icon Condition Performance Time Results 16 14 16 Arbitrary Color-Match Meaningful 14 Trial Time (sec) No-Label 12 12 10 10 8 8 6 6 4 4 2 2 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Blocks 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Overview of Model 35 rules for all four conditions 20% of rules common to all four conditions Overlap between conditions ranges from 23% between Color-Match and Arbitrary to 86% between Arbitrary and No-Label Interacts directly with software via ACT-R/PM Relies on search vs. retrieve paradigm Akin to compute vs. retrieve (arithmetic facts) Preference for less costly strategy Overview of Model (cont’d) Declarative structures Buttons Locations Labels Colors Learning Parameters Base level learning (d=0.3) Merging and retrieval Associative strength learning (:al=1) Source spread Search Cost and Strategies Search Cost - number of buttons evaluated per trial Search Cost - Buttons Evaluated 7 7 Arbitrary Color-Match 6 6 Number of Buttons Evaluated Meaningful No-Label 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Blocks 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Search Phase Summary Pre-attentive Search Search for location of button with correct color ACT-R/PM find-location command Controlled Search Attempt to retrieve a past use of the correct button and its associated location chunk If retrievals fail, attend to random button Retrieval attempted first (search vs. retrieve) Evaluation Cost and Strategies Evaluation Cost - time required to determine if currently attended button is currently needed Evaluation Cost - Time Per Button 2.4 2.4 Arbitrary 2.2 2.2 Color-Match Meaningful Average Time Per Button (sec) 2 2 No-Label 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 1 1 .8 .8 .6 .6 .4 .4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Blocks 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Evaluation Phase Summary Color-Match and Meaningful always label match Arbitrary label matches only if label retrieved in search phase No-Label and Arbitrary (if label not retrieved) try location assessment Attempt to retrieve a past use of the currently attended button and its associated location chunk If retrievals fail, then wait for ToolTip Retrieval attempted first (wait vs. retrieve) Implications Locations encoded as a by-product of attention Default ACT-R/PM behavior Location knowledge, once encoded into memory, is like any other knowledge Subject to the same learning mechanisms Task performance characterized as rational Attempt less costly strategies first Pre-attentive < retrieve location < search [search phase] Label-match < location assessment < tip [evaluation phase] Results in differential location learning