ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
A bug's eye view of immediate visual feedback in direct-manipulation programming systems
Full text PdfPdf (1.87 MB)
Source Papers presented at the seventh workshop on Empirical studies of programmers table of contents
Alexandria, Virginia, United States
Pages: 20 - 41  
Year of Publication: 1997
ISBN:0-89791-992-0
Authors
Curtis Cook  Department of Computer Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon
Margaret Burnett  Department of Computer Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon
Derrick Boom  Department of Computer Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon
Sponsor
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 2,   Downloads (12 Months): 21,   Citation Count: 6
Additional Information:

references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues   peer to peer  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/266399.266403
What is a DOI?

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
2
 
3
Burnett, M. & Ambler, A. (1994). Interactive Visual Data Abstraction in a Declarative Visual Programming Language. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 5(1), Mar. 1994, 29-60,
 
4
 
5
Eisenstadt, M. (1993). Why HyperTalk Debugging Is More Painful Than It Ought To Be. HCi'93 Conference, pub. as People and Computers VIII. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 443- 462.
 
6
Gilmore, D. (1995). Interface Design: Have We Got It Wrong? In K. Nordby, D. Gilmore, and S. Arnesen, (Eds.), INTERACT '95. London, England: Chapman & Halt.
 
7
Green, T. & Petre, M. (1996). Usability Analysis of Visual Programming Environments: A 'Cognitive Dimensions' Framework. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 7(2), June 1996, 131-174,
 
8
Green, T., Petre, M., & Bellamy, R. (1991). Comprehensibility of Visual and Textual Programs: A Test of Superlativism Against the 'Match-Mismatch' Conjecture. In J. Koenemann-Belliveau, T. Moher, S. Robertson (Eds.), Empirical Studies of Programmers: Fourth Workshop. Norwood, NJ: Ablex,
 
9
 
10
Lawrence, A., Badre, A., & Stasko, J. (1994). Empirically Evaluating the Use of Animations to Teach Algorithms. 1994 IEEE Symp.~Visual Languages, St. Louis, MO, Oct. 4-7, 1994, 48-54.
 
11
Martin, G. & Cod, K. (1986). System Response Time Effects on User Productivity. Behaviour and Information Technology 5(1), 3-13.
 
12
Modugno, F., Corbett, A., & Myers, B. (1996). Evaluating Program Representation in a Demonstrational Visual Shell. In W. Gray and D. Boehm-Davis (Eds.), Empirical Studies of Programmers: Sixth Workshop. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
 
13
Moher, T., Mak, D., Blumenthal, B., & Leventhal, L. (1993). Comparing the Comprehensibility of Textual and Graphical Programs: The Case of Petri Nets. In C. Cook, J. Seholtz, and J. Spohrer (Eds.), Empirical Studies of Programmers: Fifth Workshop. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
 
14
15
16
 
17
Pandey, R. & Bumett, M. (1993). Is It Easier to Write Matrix Manipulation Programs Visually or Textually? An Empirical Study. 1993 IEEE Symp. Visual Languages, Bergen, Norway, Aug. 24-27, 1993, 344-351.
18
 
19
Ramsey, F. & Schafer, D. (1997). The Statistical Sleuth: A Course in Methods of Data Analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
 
20
 
21
Shneiderman, B. & McKay, D. (1976). Experimental Investigation of Computer Program Debugging and Modifications. Proceedings 6th International Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, July 1976.
 
22
 
23
Tanimoto, S. (1990). VIVA: A Visual Language for Image Processing. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 2(2), June 1990, 127-139.
 
24
Whitley, K. (1997). Visual Programming Languages and the Empirical Evidence For and Against. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 8(1), February 1997, 109-142.
25


Collaborative Colleagues:
Curtis Cook: colleagues
Margaret Burnett: colleagues
Derrick Boom: colleagues

Peer to Peer - Readers of this Article have also read: