A portable system for anywhere interactions
Noi Sukaviriya, Rick Kjeldsen, et al.
CHI EA 2004
A source of intellectual overhead periodically encountered by scientists is the call to be “hard,” to ensure good science by imposing severe methodological strictures. Newell and Card (1985) undertook to impose such strictures on the psychology of human-computer interaction. Although their discussion contributes to theoretical debate in human-computer interaction by setting a reference point, their specific argument fails. Their program is unmotivated, is severely limited, and suffers from these limitations in principle. A top priority for the psychology of human-computer interaction should be the articulation of an alternative explanatory program, one that takes as its starting point the need to understand the real problems involved in providing better computer tools for people to use. © 1986, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
Noi Sukaviriya, Rick Kjeldsen, et al.
CHI EA 2004
D. Oliveira, R. Silva Ferreira, et al.
EAGE/PESGB Workshop Machine Learning 2018
Julia Rubin, Krzysztof Czarnecki, et al.
SPLC 2013
Amit Anil Nanavati, Nitendra Rajput, et al.
MobileHCI 2011