<XML><RECORDS><RECORD><REFERENCE_TYPE>3</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>7845</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>van Biljon,J</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>Kotze,P</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>Renaud,K</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>McGee.M</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>Seffah,A</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2004</YEAR><TITLE>Judy van Biljon, Paula Kotze, Karen Renaud, Marilyn McGee and Ahmad Seffah. The Use of Anti-Patterns in Human-Computer Interaction - Wise or Ill-Advised?, SAICS 2004. Stellenbosch, South Africa. 4-6 October.</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED> </PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>N/A</PUBLISHER><PAGES>Judy van Biljon, Paula Kotze, </PAGES><LABEL>van Biljon:2004:7845</LABEL><KEYWORDS><KEYWORD>Patterns</KEYWORD></KEYWORDS<ABSTRACT>In this paper the tenability of anti-patterns in Human Computer Interaction is explored. A pattern is a generalized solution to a common problem within a context. Patterns have been accepted as being very useful in software development and more recently also in Human Computer Interaction. Anti-patterns are solutions that look promising but which contain hidden pitfalls. A concerted effort is being made in Software Engineering (SE) to identify and document anti-patterns. Patterns and anti-patterns are essentially about transferring captured expert knowledge, therefore compatibility between the nature of anti-patterns and the nature of the learner’s internal knowledge representation and processing is crucial. This paper addresses the differences and similarities between patterns and anti-patterns and how this impacts on the mental models and cognitive processing of patterns and anti-patterns. We present evidence from theories of mental modelling and reasoning that might highlight possible significant dangers in the use of anti-patterns to teach novices Human Computer Interaction principles. Given the nature of Human Computer Interaction, it is possible that the misuse of anti-patterns in the Human Computer Interaction context could at worst lead to design patterns being completely misconstrued in the first instance or recalled and used in the wrong manner. A case study on the use of anti-patterns in Human Computer Interaction teaching is presented to support this argument. Both patterns and anti-patterns has been proven as potentially successful constructs in knowledge transfer. The use of the less investigated anti-pattern in the context of Human Computer Interaction needs special consideration if the concept is to be used effectively. If the notion that the current representation of anti-patterns is not supporting cognitive processing, is correct, a new approach to structuring anti-patterns is needed. </ABSTRACT></RECORD></RECORDS></XML>