Human Computer Interaction Literature Review

Introduction

Over the years, Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) research has been trying to increase the good experience and try to reduce bad experiences as much as possibly with technology. The rapid change in technology allows users to use wide range of applications while on the move, however now and then designers ignore the way clients will need to associate with such interfaces while progressing. It is inefficient if an interface has good software but users struggle to relate with it because of a bad design. The design of a user interface must be simple enough so that it can be easy to interact by novice or expert user. A well designed interface is able to empower and support users who require a sense of agency and control. It is important

Those who are experts however perceive technology as the best thing that has ever happened. Although they are familiar to technology, they also admit that technology tends to takeover and they are left not in control.

Literature review

The literature review aims to describe the current state of human computer interaction, analyse measurable attributes such as effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction, and value, the type of characteristics of usability that were used during the assessment of versatile applications exhibited in a scope of papers and, tips and strategies to improve the design of the devices. The effect of this work on future usability studies and what lessons different researchers ought to consider when performing usability assessments on portable gadgets and their applications are likewise examined.

Interfaces that Adapt to the

Baker et al (2010), in one of their article on frustration compare the “cognitive-affective” states of students in different computer-based learning environments. It was found that a little bit of frustration maybe better than boredom for the learning experience. Mentis (2004), found out that in situations where people remember their frustrations moments while interacting with the interface, those were times when the system had to respond to user needs or action and not the times when users trying to understand how to express their thought to actions required by the interface. This shows that the frustration that is remembered most by the user occurred mostly in the second half the interaction, because the interface did not display or execute according to the users