How to Write an Abstract
Grad Tips by Saul Greenberg
University of Calgary
Image from:
Paper Structure
Abstract
• communicates results of paper / thesis / grant …
• completely self-contained
o bibliographies, on-line databases...
• introduces and summarizes
With the ever increasing amount of digital information, users desire
more screen real estate to process their daily computing work, and
might well benefit from using a wall-size large high-resolution
display instead of a desktop one. Unfortunately, we know very little
about users' behaviors when using such a display for daily
computing. We present a week-long study that investigates large
display use in a personal desktop computing context by comparing
it with single and dual desktop monitor use. Results show users'
unanimous preference for using a large display: it facilitates multiwindow and rich information tasks, enhances users' awareness of
peripheral applications, and offers a more immersive experience.
Further, the data reveals distinct usage patterns in partitioning
screen real estate and managing windows on a large display.
Detailed analysis of these results provides insights into designing
interaction techniques and window management systems more
suited to a large display.
Bi, Xiaojun and Balakrishnan, Ravin (2009): Comparing usage of a large high-resolution
display to single or dual desktop displays for daily work. ACM CHI 2009 1005-1014.
Example Abstract
• Background/motivation
• Focus and innovation
• Problem
• Method
• Results / Contribution
Example Abstract
• Background/motivation
With the ever increasing amount of digital
information, users desire more screen real
estate to process their daily computing work..
• Focus and innovation
• Problem
• Method
• Results / Contribution
Example Abstract
• Background/motivation
• Focus and innovation
…and might well benefit from using a wall-size large highresolution display instead of a desktop one.
• Problem
• Method
• Results / Contribution
Example Abstract
• Background/motivation
• Focus and innovation
• Problem
Unfortunately, we know very little about users'
behaviors when using such a display for daily
computing.
• Method
• Results / Contribution
Example Abstract
• Background/motivation
• Focus and innovation
• Problem
• Method
We present a week-long study that
investigates large display use in a personal
desktop computing context by comparing it
with single and dual desktop monitor use.
• Results / Contribution
Example Abstract
• Background/motivation
• Focus and innovation
• Problem
• Method
• Results/Contribution
Results show users' unanimous preference for using a
large display: it facilitates multi-window and rich
information tasks, enhances users' awareness of
peripheral applications, and offers a more immersive
experience. Further, the data reveals distinct usage
patterns in partitioning screen real estate and managing
windows on a large display.
Example Abstract
• Background/motivation
• Focus and innovation
• Problem
• Method
• Results/Contribution
Detailed analysis of these results provides insights into
designing interaction techniques and window
management systems more suited to a large display.
Icons are used increasingly in interfaces because they are
compact "universal" pictographic representations of
computer functionality and processing.
Animated icons can bring to life symbols representing
complete applications or functions within an application,
thereby clarifying their meaning, demonstrating their
capabilities, and even explaining their method of use.
To test this hypothesis, we carried out an iterative design of
a set of animated painting icons that appear in the
HyperCard tool palette.
The design discipline restricted the animations to 10 to 20
second sequences of 22x20 pixel bit maps.
User testing was carried out on two interfaces - one with the
static icons, one with the animated icons.
The results showed significant benefit from the animations in
clarifying the purpose and functionality of the icons.
Abstract from: Ronald Baecker, Ian Small, and Richard Mander. 1991. Bringing icons to life. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '91), Scott P. Robertson, Gary M. Olson, and Judith S. Olson (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1-6.
Background/motivation
• Icons are used increasingly in interfaces because they are compact
"universal" pictographic representations of computer functionality and
processing.
Focus and innovation:
• Animated icons can bring to life symbols representing complete
applications or functions within an application, …
Problem:
•
thereby clarifying their meaning, demonstrating their capabilities, and
even explaining their method of use.
Method:
• To test this hypothesis, we carried out an iterative design of a set of
animated painting icons that appear in the HyperCard tool palette. The
design discipline restricted the animations to 10 to 20 second sequences
of 22x20 pixel bit maps. User testing was carried out on two interfaces one with the static icons, one with the animated icons.
Results/Contribution
• The results showed significant benefit from the animations in clarifying
the purpose and functionality of the icons.
Abstract from: Ronald Baecker, Ian Small, and Richard Mander. 1991. Bringing icons to life. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '91), Scott P. Robertson, Gary M. Olson, and Judith S. Olson (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1-6.
Many surface computing prototypes have employed gestures
created by system designers. Although such gestures are
appropriate for early investigations, they are not necessarily
reflective of user behavior. We present an approach to designing
tabletop gestures that relies on eliciting gestures from nontechnical users by first portraying the effect of a gesture, and then
asking users to perform its cause. In all, 1080 gestures from 20
participants were logged, analyzed, and paired with think-aloud
data for 27 commands performed with 1 and 2 hands. Our findings
indicate that users rarely care about the number of fingers they
employ, that one hand is preferred to two, that desktop idioms
strongly influence users' mental models, and that some commands
elicit little gestural agreement, suggesting the need for on-screen
widgets. We also present a complete user-defined gesture set,
quantitative agreement scores, implications for surface technology,
and a taxonomy of surface gestures. Our results will help designers
create better gesture sets informed by user behavior.
Wobbrock, Jacob O., Morris, Meredith Ringel and Wilson, Andrew D. (2009): User-defined
gestures for surface computing Proceedings of ACM CHI 2009. pp. 1083-1092..
Background/motivation
• Many surface computing prototypes have employed gestures created by
system designers.
Focus and innovation:
• We present an approach to designing tabletop gestures that relies on
eliciting gestures from non-technical users by first portraying the effect
of a gesture, and then asking users to perform its cause.
Problem:
• Although such gestures are appropriate for early investigations, they are
not necessarily reflective of user behavior.
Method:
• In all, 1080 gestures from 20 participants were logged, analyzed, and
paired with think-aloud data for 27 commands performed with 1 and 2
hands..
Results
• Our findings indicate that users rarely care about …. We also present a
complete
Contribution
• Our results will help designers create better gesture sets informed by
user behavior.
Abstract from: Ronald Baecker, Ian Small, and Richard Mander. 1991. Bringing icons to life. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '91), Scott P. Robertson, Gary M. Olson, and Judith S. Olson (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1-6.
Permissions
You are free:
•
to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
•
to Remix — to adapt the work
Under the following conditions:
Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author (but not in any way that suggests that
they endorse you or your use of the work) by citing:
“Saul Greenberg , University of Calgary, AB, Canada: Grad Tips , http://saul.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/saul/
Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes, except to assist one’s own teaching and training
within commercial organizations.
Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or
similar license to this one.
With the understanding that:
Not all material have transferable rights — materials from other sources which are included here are cited
Waiver — Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.
Public Domain — Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no
way affected by the license.
Other Rights — In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license:
•
Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and limitations;
•
The author's moral rights;
•
Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy
rights.
Notice — For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do
this is with a link to this web page.