Write summary of three views of user after reading the research paper.

ANSWER:

The Processor and Predictor Models of the User:

“Cognitive modeling is an area of computer science that deals with simulating human problem-solving
and mental processing in a computerized model” 1 . These models are used to simulate and predict user
interaction with regards to technology. The processes assist developers and engineers to improve the
human-computer interaction. Two models that follow the cognitive processing model are the Processor
Model and the Predictor Model. The Participant View also allows engineers to study and improve
human-computer interaction. I will be using the Canvas interface for students to discuss the processor,
predictor, and participant view models of the user. To assist in my explaination, I will be referencing two
groups of students. Group A are comprised of 4th year students who have experience using interfaces
such as Canvas. Group B are comprised of 1st year students who have no experience using Canvas or
any comparable interfaces. Engineers would be interested in studying these two groups in order to gain
understanding of how their interface works with novice users and expert users, and how they would be
able to improve the interface to make it more efficient.

The Processor Model of the User:

The processor model evaluates experimental feedback based on quantitative experiments. Quantitative
can be described in four types of research designs which include, descriptive design, correlation design,
quasi-experimental design, and experimental design2 . Most data observed using the processor model is
observatory. Engineers studying students who are using Canvas would most likely observe users in a
controlled environment, with one group being exposed to an independent variable while the other
group not being exposed to it. For example, the independent variable can be a pre-existing feature of
the participants. For this experiment using Canvas let’s assume that Group A are 4th year students who
are familiar with using an interface like Canvas. Group B are 1st year students who have never used
Canvas nor an interface that is comparable to it. Engineers will be able to view how new users and
expert users utilize Canvas within their controlled environment. Using observational and quantitative
feedback, engineers can find improvement within their interface. For example, a new user may not be
aware of how to find weekly reading assignments so they utilize the “Assignments” tab looking for them.
Assuming the “Assignments” tab contain all of the homework to be done, a novice user may become
frustrated or confused when they realize that the “Files” tab actually contains those required readings.
However, a user who is seasoned with this type of interface might assume or understand that the
“Assignments” tab contain only those assignments in which a student will be graded on. Since the
readings are considered homework and not graded, the user won’t find them in the “Assignments” tab.
The processor model is good for optimizing an interface rather than redesigning it. Therefore, the
engineer may have to figure out a method of communicating their resolution to the user that will
optimize their experience.

The Predictor Model of the User:

Engineers use the Predictor Model of the User to obtain a fuller picture of their experiment that they
wouldn’t receive using the processor model of the user. The Predictor Model requires experiments to fit
within a user’s knowledge meaning that they help the user learn what they don’t know, as well as
leverage what they do know. Therefore, this model attracts novices to get inside user’s heads to
understand their knowledge, experiences, expectations, and their thought process. The Predictor Model
evaluates feedback using qualitative studies in an ex-situ environment. This means that engineers will
likely perform their experiment in a controlled environment away from schools and libraries where
users are likely to utilize Canvas online. Engineers will use the Predictor model to observe a user’s
prediction of their action, whether the outcome matched their prediction, why the user decided to
perform that action, and if the outcome was successful. Group A will likely predict that by navigating to
the Files tab on Canvas they will locate their required readings for the week. Their prediction would
successfully be proved; therefore, it would provide positive feedback to the engineers that expert users
more easily navigate Canvas given more time using it. Group B will likely predict that by navigating to
the Assignments tab they will find all required assignments that need to be completed in order to
succeed in their weekly tasks. Their prediction would be proved false, the user may become frustrated
and begin navigating elsewhere to find their readings. Based on the failed prediction an engineer may
conclude that in order to avoid confusion a table of contents or orientation is be best method for
assisting novice users. In this case, the engineers were able to gain a fuller picture on how to make
Canvas efficient to use regardless of the experience level of the user.

Insights on the Predictor and Processor Models of the User:

The Predictor and Processor models provided different feedback for the engineers. The Processor
model measured what is physically usable to the user, for example, what they can see, touch, and hear.
In the experiment sampled, Group B had a difficult time navigating the system which caused frustration
and poor time management due to the time they had to take in order to find their weekly readings.
Given this issue, engineers concluded that they would need to communicate more clearly with the user
from Group B by optimizing efficiency rather than redesigning the interface. The Predictor model
allowed engineers to understand how Group B thought, why they thought they would find their
readings under the Assignment tab, and their reaction when the prediction failed. This forces the
engineer to help the user from Group B understand what they don’t know (which is where to find their
reading list). A solution to this issue is requiring novice users to complete an orientation prior to
beginning their online class in order to be educated on how to use the interface and how to navigate it.

The Participant View of the User:

Engineers are interested in the Participant View of the User because it provides the most authentic
context and feedback from experiments. This model focuses on the user in a real-world context.
Engineers are likely to study users who physically use their variable or interface, know how to use it, and
they interact with the system in the context they expect. In this example, I will be referencing a Video
Call application to explain how the Participant View of the User works.

Contexts and Constraints:

Users generally make or receive video calls while driving or are out in public. In both contexts, users are
viably distracted and not focused on their cognitive resources. Other constraints include lack of privacy if
out in public, creating a distraction to others, and safety issues while driving.

Improved Design Interface:

 Engineers studying users who make or receive video calls will conclude that improved interface design
is necessary for the safety and privacy of users. There are two solutions to improve video call usage if a
driver were to receive a video call while driving. By installing a Bluetooth device in a vehicle (whether it
be built-in or purchased separately) engineers can create an auto-prompt so that the interface picks up
directly through the vehicle’s Bluetooth and creating a hands-free distraction to the video call. This
solution can be applied in conjunction to block the video feature of the driver while the vehicle is
engaged to prevent dangerous distractions to the driver. Users who receive or make calls in public
settings run the risk of a privacy issue with regards to being overheard by strangers, but they also cause
a distraction to the public around them by having a loud, public conversation via video call. A solution to
this privacy and distraction issue is to have the video app automatically muted until the receiver of the
call inputs headphones. Should the user not have