The art of thinking · 4 · Comprehension and mental representation
Gulfs of execution and evaluation
Also known as: Gulf of execution, Gulf of evaluation, Seven stages of action
German: Kluft der Ausführung und der Bewertung
In cognitive engineering, the gulf of execution is the gap between what a user intends to do and the actions a system allows, and the gulf of evaluation is the gap between the state a system displays and the user’s ability to perceive and interpret it in terms of the goal; both were described by Donald A. Norman.
- Cognitive psychology
- Human factors
- Usability
In one sentence
Norman’s gulfs: the gap between a user’s goal and the system’s actions (execution) and between system state and its interpretation (evaluation).
Example
An operator wants to acknowledge an alarm but cannot see which key does it (gulf of execution); after pressing a key, nothing on the HMI shows whether the alarm was acknowledged (gulf of evaluation).
What the research shows
Donald A. Norman (1986) described action as seven stages: forming a goal, forming an intention, specifying the action sequence, executing it, perceiving the system state, interpreting it and evaluating it against the goal. Between the user's goals and the physical system lie two gulfs: the gulf of execution (how hard it is to translate an intention into the actions the system offers) and the gulf of evaluation (how hard it is to tell from the system's output whether the goal was reached). Edwin L. Hutchins, James D. Hollan and Donald A. Norman (1985) used the gulfs to explain why direct manipulation interfaces feel easy. Norman popularized the model in The Psychology of Everyday Things (1988), later titled The Design of Everyday Things.
Evidence status
The gulfs and the seven stages are a conceptual model from cognitive engineering, not an experimentally tested theory; Norman presented the stages as an approximation, since real action does not run through them in strict order. The model is widely used in human-computer interaction teaching and in evaluation methods such as the cognitive walkthrough. It is related to German action regulation theory, which also describes action as goal-directed and regulated by feedback.
How it applies
Instructions bridge the gulf of execution by telling users which action achieves their goal; result statements and feedback descriptions bridge the gulf of evaluation by telling them what they should see when the action has worked. The glossary “Applied cognitive psychology for information use” covers the evaluation side, for example the cognitive walkthrough and usability testing. Documentation can narrow the gulfs of a human-machine interface (HMI); it does not replace feedback the interface itself must give.
External references
How to read this pool
Entries, context cards and transitional topics
The art of thinking explains ways of thinking — where a method comes from, what it asks of you and how it was adapted later. You meet four kinds of content here, each with its own job:
- Glossary entry
- Defines one concept or method of thinking: its origin, an example and how it relates to neighboring ideas. “X vs. Y” sections set two methods side by side.
- Context card of the art of thinking
- A short, self-contained answer to one question about a way of thinking — its lineage, its steps, its limits. These cards are listed on The art of thinking only.
- Transitional topicBridges both pools
- A context card that bridges both pools: it shows how a way of thinking was adapted into documentation, analysis or quality practice. It sits with the reference context cards and is marked as transitional wherever it appears.
- Reference entry or context card
- Belongs to the Glossary & Norms Space on regulation, norms and engineering. Entries here link to one only where a method is also an established tool of documentation or quality work, such as the five whys or a user’s mental model.