The graphical user interface (GUI) has become something of a standard for instructional programs in recent years. One type of GUI is the metaphorical type. For example, the Macintosh GUI is based on the "desktop" metaphor where objects one manipulates within the GUI are implied to be objects one might find in a real office's desktop. Metaphors can be divided into two classes: underlying (or primary) and auxiliary (or secondary). Auxiliary metaphors may be either complementary, adding to the underlying metaphor, or confounding, in which the user finds the metaphor too problematic and rejects the comparison. Not all objects or images that appear in a GUI are guaranteed to be metaphorical. This paper attempts to classify metaphorical interfaces along a four-point continuum from lowest level of metaphorical implementation to highest, from non-metaphorical to immersive. It explores how position on that continuum exemplifies the interaction between complementary and confounding auxiliary metaphors and determines the design demands of an interface. It also considers how the same basic metaphor may be implemented differently to meet these demands. Eleven illustrations are provided. (Contains 23 references.) (Author/AEF)