Mismatched metaphor: User vs system model in computer-aided drafting

Ulrich Flemming, Suresh Bhavnani, Bonnie E. John

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We report findings from an extensive study of the users of a Computer-Aided Drafting (CAD) system. Our observations suggest that the CAD system is used inefficiently, because users approach computer-aided drafting from a T-square metaphor reflecting their past experience with traditional drawing media. This prevents them from discovering and using effectively powerful system commands that have no equivalent in manual techniques. These findings suggest that we should rethink the ways in which CAD users are trained and manuals are written, and that we introduce CAD users to a more strategic use of CAD, particularly to a Detail/Aggregate/Manipulate (DAM) strategy that takes advantage of the compositional logic underlying a design.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)349-368
Number of pages20
JournalDesign Studies
Volume18
Issue number4
StatePublished - Oct 1997
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

system model
metaphor
Computer systems
experience

Keywords

  • Architectural design
  • Case study
  • Computer-aided drafting
  • Modelling
  • User behaviour

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design
  • Civil and Structural Engineering
  • Engineering(all)

Cite this

Mismatched metaphor : User vs system model in computer-aided drafting. / Flemming, Ulrich; Bhavnani, Suresh; John, Bonnie E.

In: Design Studies, Vol. 18, No. 4, 10.1997, p. 349-368.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Flemming, Ulrich ; Bhavnani, Suresh ; John, Bonnie E. / Mismatched metaphor : User vs system model in computer-aided drafting. In: Design Studies. 1997 ; Vol. 18, No. 4. pp. 349-368.
@article{a8bd0a1b3efa401bbf7b046a7b64c2db,
title = "Mismatched metaphor: User vs system model in computer-aided drafting",
abstract = "We report findings from an extensive study of the users of a Computer-Aided Drafting (CAD) system. Our observations suggest that the CAD system is used inefficiently, because users approach computer-aided drafting from a T-square metaphor reflecting their past experience with traditional drawing media. This prevents them from discovering and using effectively powerful system commands that have no equivalent in manual techniques. These findings suggest that we should rethink the ways in which CAD users are trained and manuals are written, and that we introduce CAD users to a more strategic use of CAD, particularly to a Detail/Aggregate/Manipulate (DAM) strategy that takes advantage of the compositional logic underlying a design.",
keywords = "Architectural design, Case study, Computer-aided drafting, Modelling, User behaviour",
author = "Ulrich Flemming and Suresh Bhavnani and John, {Bonnie E.}",
year = "1997",
month = "10",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "349--368",
journal = "Design Studies",
issn = "0142-694X",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mismatched metaphor

T2 - User vs system model in computer-aided drafting

AU - Flemming, Ulrich

AU - Bhavnani, Suresh

AU - John, Bonnie E.

PY - 1997/10

Y1 - 1997/10

N2 - We report findings from an extensive study of the users of a Computer-Aided Drafting (CAD) system. Our observations suggest that the CAD system is used inefficiently, because users approach computer-aided drafting from a T-square metaphor reflecting their past experience with traditional drawing media. This prevents them from discovering and using effectively powerful system commands that have no equivalent in manual techniques. These findings suggest that we should rethink the ways in which CAD users are trained and manuals are written, and that we introduce CAD users to a more strategic use of CAD, particularly to a Detail/Aggregate/Manipulate (DAM) strategy that takes advantage of the compositional logic underlying a design.

AB - We report findings from an extensive study of the users of a Computer-Aided Drafting (CAD) system. Our observations suggest that the CAD system is used inefficiently, because users approach computer-aided drafting from a T-square metaphor reflecting their past experience with traditional drawing media. This prevents them from discovering and using effectively powerful system commands that have no equivalent in manual techniques. These findings suggest that we should rethink the ways in which CAD users are trained and manuals are written, and that we introduce CAD users to a more strategic use of CAD, particularly to a Detail/Aggregate/Manipulate (DAM) strategy that takes advantage of the compositional logic underlying a design.

KW - Architectural design

KW - Case study

KW - Computer-aided drafting

KW - Modelling

KW - User behaviour

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031246260&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031246260&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0031246260

VL - 18

SP - 349

EP - 368

JO - Design Studies

JF - Design Studies

SN - 0142-694X

IS - 4

ER -