Norman vs. GOMS Comparison Table
| Norman’s Stage | Real-World Example (iPhone 13 / Samsung S25) | GOMS Interpretation & Rationale | Alignment Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Goal ↔ GOAL (User intention) |
“I need Wi-Fi ON to access the internet.” |
Goal: Enable-Wi-Fi. Top-level objective in GOMS. |
Perfect Match Direct correspondence between models. |
| Plan ↔ METHOD & Selection Rules | “I’ll use the quick toggle.” |
Method: Swipe down → Quick panel → Tap Wi-Fi. Selection Rule (optional): If device unlocked → use quick toggle. |
Conceptual Match Norman’s “Plan” maps to GOMS “Method.” |
| Specify | User visually locates the Wi-Fi icon among other toggles. |
Not explicitly modeled in GOMS. GOMS assumes the correct UI object is already known. |
Key Divergence Norman explains cognitive work that GOMS abstracts away. |
| Execute ↔ OPERATOR | Physical action: tap the Wi-Fi toggle. |
Operator: Tap (or click). Example KLM sequence: M P K. |
Direct Match Both models represent execution. |
| Perceive / Interpret / Evaluate | Toggle changes color and Wi-Fi icon appears in the status bar. |
Not modeled in GOMS. GOMS assumes perfect perception and automatic goal satisfaction. |
Fundamental Divergence Norman focuses on feedback and closing the Gulf of Evaluation. |
Quick Note
This page is included as a conceptual reference for Lab 01. The focus is clean, semantic HTML and the ability to explain why structure matters for accessibility.