Margherita Andrao , Barbara Treccani , Massimo Zancanaro
{"title":"使触发-操作规则更易于理解:调查哪些语言线索可以有效地指导非程序员","authors":"Margherita Andrao , Barbara Treccani , Massimo Zancanaro","doi":"10.1016/j.ijhcs.2025.103613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Trigger-Action Programming is a commonly used paradigm in End-User Development interfaces, allowing users without programming experience to create new automation systems. Even if considered easy to grasp, this approach poses some challenges: non-programmers often confuse events (instantaneous occurrences) and states (prolonged occurrences), leading to critical errors in the definition of triggers. Although past research has already questioned the effectiveness of the typical <em>if-then</em> structure, there is a limited exploration of which specific linguistic cues might help or hinder users from distinguishing between events and states. Our study, involving 85 non-programmers, examines a broader pool of linguistic aspects, investigating (i) preferences for conjunctions and verbs when describing events and states and (ii) which conjunctions help users accurately differentiate these occurrences. Our results indicate that while participants tended to prefer temporally specific language, such as ”<em>when</em>” for events and ”<em>while</em>” for states, some of these conjunctions, like ”<em>when</em>”, may not support users in accurately identifying and differentiating events from states, similar to the generic ”<em>if</em>”. These findings underscore the role of specific language on non-programmers’ comprehension and mental representations of triggers. Designing interfaces with more easily graspable linguistic cues and mapping them at the system level may help guide non-programmer users in correctly structuring trigger-action rules.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54955,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies","volume":"205 ","pages":"Article 103613"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Making trigger-action rules more comprehensible: Investigating which linguistic clues effectively guide non-programmers\",\"authors\":\"Margherita Andrao , Barbara Treccani , Massimo Zancanaro\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijhcs.2025.103613\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Trigger-Action Programming is a commonly used paradigm in End-User Development interfaces, allowing users without programming experience to create new automation systems. Even if considered easy to grasp, this approach poses some challenges: non-programmers often confuse events (instantaneous occurrences) and states (prolonged occurrences), leading to critical errors in the definition of triggers. Although past research has already questioned the effectiveness of the typical <em>if-then</em> structure, there is a limited exploration of which specific linguistic cues might help or hinder users from distinguishing between events and states. Our study, involving 85 non-programmers, examines a broader pool of linguistic aspects, investigating (i) preferences for conjunctions and verbs when describing events and states and (ii) which conjunctions help users accurately differentiate these occurrences. Our results indicate that while participants tended to prefer temporally specific language, such as ”<em>when</em>” for events and ”<em>while</em>” for states, some of these conjunctions, like ”<em>when</em>”, may not support users in accurately identifying and differentiating events from states, similar to the generic ”<em>if</em>”. These findings underscore the role of specific language on non-programmers’ comprehension and mental representations of triggers. Designing interfaces with more easily graspable linguistic cues and mapping them at the system level may help guide non-programmer users in correctly structuring trigger-action rules.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies\",\"volume\":\"205 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103613\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581925001703\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, CYBERNETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581925001703","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, CYBERNETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Making trigger-action rules more comprehensible: Investigating which linguistic clues effectively guide non-programmers
Trigger-Action Programming is a commonly used paradigm in End-User Development interfaces, allowing users without programming experience to create new automation systems. Even if considered easy to grasp, this approach poses some challenges: non-programmers often confuse events (instantaneous occurrences) and states (prolonged occurrences), leading to critical errors in the definition of triggers. Although past research has already questioned the effectiveness of the typical if-then structure, there is a limited exploration of which specific linguistic cues might help or hinder users from distinguishing between events and states. Our study, involving 85 non-programmers, examines a broader pool of linguistic aspects, investigating (i) preferences for conjunctions and verbs when describing events and states and (ii) which conjunctions help users accurately differentiate these occurrences. Our results indicate that while participants tended to prefer temporally specific language, such as ”when” for events and ”while” for states, some of these conjunctions, like ”when”, may not support users in accurately identifying and differentiating events from states, similar to the generic ”if”. These findings underscore the role of specific language on non-programmers’ comprehension and mental representations of triggers. Designing interfaces with more easily graspable linguistic cues and mapping them at the system level may help guide non-programmer users in correctly structuring trigger-action rules.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Human-Computer Studies publishes original research over the whole spectrum of work relevant to the theory and practice of innovative interactive systems. The journal is inherently interdisciplinary, covering research in computing, artificial intelligence, psychology, linguistics, communication, design, engineering, and social organization, which is relevant to the design, analysis, evaluation and application of innovative interactive systems. Papers at the boundaries of these disciplines are especially welcome, as it is our view that interdisciplinary approaches are needed for producing theoretical insights in this complex area and for effective deployment of innovative technologies in concrete user communities.
Research areas relevant to the journal include, but are not limited to:
• Innovative interaction techniques
• Multimodal interaction
• Speech interaction
• Graphic interaction
• Natural language interaction
• Interaction in mobile and embedded systems
• Interface design and evaluation methodologies
• Design and evaluation of innovative interactive systems
• User interface prototyping and management systems
• Ubiquitous computing
• Wearable computers
• Pervasive computing
• Affective computing
• Empirical studies of user behaviour
• Empirical studies of programming and software engineering
• Computer supported cooperative work
• Computer mediated communication
• Virtual reality
• Mixed and augmented Reality
• Intelligent user interfaces
• Presence
...