A task based web browser - Conquering information overload

1,016 views
951 views

Published on

Many users are overloaded by the number of webpages they use simultaneously. We introduce TabFour, a prototype web browser which integrates three features that address the design requirements identified in an initial design study. Webpages can be grouped into tasks, providing
a unified target for resumption after an interruption. Tasks and pages can be annotated, supporting
resumption after longer intervals. Finally, tasks can be shared through a simple yet novel web-service, allowing users to share groups of webpages more easily than with existing tools.

Video: http://vimeo.com/9088447
Code: http://code.google.com/p/tabfour/
Paper: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://tabfour.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/Tab4/doc/CHI2010_SRC.pdf

More info @ http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~mohanr/

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,016
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
157
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

A task based web browser - Conquering information overload

  1. 1. ZenFox CS544 2009F Project Phase III The Tab Four Lam, Billy MacKenzie, Russ R, Mohan Su, Tao A task-focused web browser
  2. 2. Agenda <ul><li>Problem </li></ul><ul><li>Redesign </li></ul><ul><li>Implementation </li></ul><ul><li>Evaluation Procedure </li></ul><ul><li>Results </li></ul><ul><li>Demo + Video </li></ul>
  3. 3. Problem <ul><li>Support for multi-session tasks </li></ul>Percentage of users Time before task resumption (Survey from SearchBar: Morris et al, 2008)
  4. 4. Problem Current coping strategies for task resumption (Survey from SearchBar: Morris et al, 2008) Strategy Respondents Active Storage / Active Retrieval 55.00% Written or typed notes 30.00% Browser bookmarks 26.00% Save Web pages locally as files 5.30% E-mail to self 2.40% Online bookmarks/tagging 1.80% Print Web pages 0.60% Passive Storage / Active Retrieval 8.20% Browser history 7.60% Online query history 1.20% Passive Storage / Passive Retrieval 49.00% Memory 36.00% Leave browser open 14.00% Link coloring 2.40% Autocomplete 2.40%
  5. 5. Problem Current coping strategies for task resumption (Survey from SearchBar: Morris et al, 2008) Strategy Respondents Active Storage / Active Retrieval 55.00% Written or typed notes 30.00% Browser bookmarks 26.00% Save Web pages locally as files 5.30% E-mail to self 2.40% Online bookmarks/tagging 1.80% Print Web pages 0.60% Passive Storage / Active Retrieval 8.20% Browser history 7.60% Online query history 1.20% Passive Storage / Passive Retrieval 49.00% Memory 36.00% Leave browser open 14.00% Link coloring 2.40% Autocomplete 2.40%
  6. 6. Problem Information overload
  7. 7. Redesign <ul><li>Review: A task-focused browser interface </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Suspension and Interruption </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Annotation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sharing </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Redesign <ul><li>Lessons from Phase II </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Paper prototype generally well-received </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Excitement about ideas </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Generally kept all features </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Two key points . Default hiding of task management features . Transparent sharing </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Redesign <ul><li>Worries about sharing feature </li></ul><ul><ul><li>But still keen on easier sharing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Originally just attach/send files </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>What if there’s an error? What if they can’t open it? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>What if versions change? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Software isn’t even written and already they don’t trust it! </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Replaced with drag-n-drop and added cloud sharing </li></ul>
  10. 10. Redesign Drag & Drop
  11. 11. Redesign Drag & Drop “ The internet” Share Load Entire context is loaded!
  12. 12. Implementation <ul><li>Firefox plugin vs Flex prototype </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Practical significance vs. practicality for CS544 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Subset of features: vertical prototype </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Annotation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Suspension and Resumption </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sharing </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Implementation
  14. 14. Evaluation Procedure <ul><li>Extended use of prototype not feasible </li></ul><ul><li>8 subjects, c omparison with FireFox </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Very minimal training session </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Short (& intensive!) multi-tasking scenarios </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Interruption </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Suspension </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Resumption </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sharing </li></ul></ul>
  15. 15. Evaluation Procedure <ul><li>Primary Task </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Trip planning with hypothetical friend </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>“ Mark” or “Jane” – same sex as subject </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Communications through Email and IM </li></ul><ul><li>Interrupts through IM </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Add secondary tasks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Extra details to primary task (sightseeing) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Interruption of primary task (research papers) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Evaluation Procedure <ul><li>Questionnaires and short discussion </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Work load of assigned tasks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Immediately after trial </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>7 point Likert scale </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Comparisons between browsers and general questions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>At end of session </li></ul></ul></ul>
  17. 17. Results <ul><li>Quantitative analysis of data </li></ul><ul><li>NASA TLX-like </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Used Wilcoxon test, Bonferroni corrected </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>All task load questions non-significant, p > 0.1 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Still, 6/8 rank TabFour higher for question: “How effectively did the browser interface support what you were asked to do”? </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. Results <ul><li>Quantitative analysis of data </li></ul><ul><li>Other questions mostly unanimous: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Which browser was easier to use to complete the tasks? -TabFour </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Did you find the task-based browsing useful? –Yes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Would you use task-based browsing if it was available in your regular web browser? –Yes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In which browser was it easier to share webpages with other people? -TabFour </li></ul></ul>
  19. 19. Results <ul><li>Qualitative feedback </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Usability issue on Load/Share context dialog </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>More organized in TabFour </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Integration with existing tools desirable </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Want to click links/task names in email </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What if Mark gives me a bad link (typo)? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Simple, doesn’t require extra learning to use” </li></ul></ul>
  20. 20. Results <ul><li>Qualitative feedback </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ FireFox lets you see things all at once” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Benefits and costs more obvious in prolonged use? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Task groups cut down on time needed to complete tasks” </li></ul></ul>
  21. 21. Demo + Video Code: http://code.google.com/p/tabfour/ Video: http://vimeo.com/9088447

×