This chapter focused on understanding the cognitive aspects of users. According to Interaction Design, cognition includes attention, perception / recogntion, memory, learning, reading / speaking / listening, and problem solving / planning / reasoning / decision making.
Attention is crucial for us to focus on information to process and is dependent on our goals and how the information is presented to us. Information presentation is important for how easily and accurately we understand the material. The design implication for attention would be to make information avaiable when it needs to be attended to at a given stage of a task, and to use techniques such as spacings, groupings, pictures, colors, and sounds to help the user to focus and sort.
Perception is complex and incorporates memory, attention, and language. Vision is the most dominant type of attention, followed by auditory and touch. The design implications for perception include using borders (which are more effective than color contrasts), icons & other graphical representations (which should enable users to readily distinguish their meaning), use sound effects, etc.
Memory is exercised through a filtering process. This includes 1) encoding: the extent to how information is interpreted when it is encountered affects the ability to recall it later, 2) context in which it is encoded (such as the neighbor at the train station), 3) better at recognizing things than recalling (it is better to browse through a list than have to recall from memory). This is all a part of the PIM, or personal information management.
Learning takes into account both learning how to use a novel application or using an application as an aid to learn. Interactive technologies is a strong example of learning; other design implications include encouraging exploration and to dynamically linking concrete representations and abstract concepts to help difficult material to be more understandable.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
HALL OF SHAME!!!
This is a true story.
My sorority had interviews on Friday and Saturday, but unfortunately I had missed the first couple of candidates. Kelly had recorded all of interviews on the new JVC camcorder, so I asked her to watch those earlier interviews during our lunch break. She handed me the camcorder then left for lunch. I, a perfectly proficient technology user, figured that I would be able to easily playback the video as I had on so many other cameras before. I own a camera, so I thought It would be just like mine. I was wrong.
As a first time user, I looked at this camcorder to find any sort of player buttons. On the right side there were three options: “REC”, “OFF”, and “PLAY”. I switched it to “PLAY” and proceeded to look for an external button to start the recording. Nothing on the outside, and nothing when I opened the left side viewer. There was nothing that indicated play, pause, fast forward, rewind, arrows, or anything that resembled those types of functions. I tried pressing a couple ambiguous buttons (such as “MENU”) that I thought might start the video, but then I got scared that I might unintentionally press a delete or record-over button. I stared at the blank black screen frustrated and defeated.
After spending the whole lunch break trying to figure out how to play camera, Kelly finally returned. After explaining to her how much I hated her camera (and thinking to myself how perfectly this fits into the Hall of Shame), I asked her to assist me. She told me to open the left side viewer and switch the right side to “PLAY” (as I had done), then to use the little joystick on the viewer (what little joystick?!?). She pointed to a little knob on the bottom left of the screen, which I thought was a button. On this “joystick” are the words “QUICK REVIEW”, “FOCUS”, and “LIGHT”. I wasn’t sure how to use this joystick, so Kelly showed me to press it up to play the video. Sure enough, as soon as I pressed the joystick up, the video started to play. How does this function make any sense? I really have no idea.
It turns out that as soon as the joystick is pressed, a screen pops up that directs the user to a screen with the icons for play/pause, fast forward, stop, and rewind around a circular shape. This assumes that the user knows that to play/pause, he or she must press the joystick to the top, to fast forward to the right, stop to the bottom, and rewind to the left. Though this would serve as a helpful reminder to the user after they know how to figure it out, this function would not even be encountered by a first time user like myself.
The reason that I’ve nominated the interface device JVC camcorder’s play function for the HALL OF SHAME is on account of the usability factor of learnability. There are other functions on this camcorder, such as the volume controls (that double as the zoom function), that also deserve to be in the Hall of Shame. The users of this type of camcorder would be average people, most likely ranging from high school students to adults, who probably have had experience using other similar technologies.
As far as the player features, this camcorder fails to present any features that users are familiar with from existing technologies, such as an arrow icon for play or the word “PLAY”. The user is then unable to resort to previous knowledge when manipulating this new product. The degree to which the playback design facilitates attention and perception are crucial factors for its usability success. It is important for functions to be visible so that users will know what to do and how to do it (Interaction Design, 29). This device lacks those visual cues, such as icons and other graphical representations, which have proven to be the most helpful to for users to distinguish meaning and assist in recognition (Interaction Design, 99). A simple picture or familiar word would drastically improve the user’s experience, so that the user doesn’t get frustrated (like me!).
Once utilized correctly and practiced routinely, the play function may be simple to remember. The screen that displays the functions acts as a helpful reminder for usages over short time intervals. However, after an extended time of not using the camera, a user could easily forget how to use the player functions. In this case, there are no visual or audio cues to remind the user, he or she would need to resort to memory or outside resources. Perhaps this playback feature is a usable function as one “joystick”; instead of several buttons that need to be looked at and pressed, once the user had acquired the understanding of which direction represents which function (play/pause, rewind, etc.) a single joystick could be a more efficient tool. Regardless, it is a difficult feature to learn which undermines its usability value.
Ultimately, this JVC camcorder’s playback feature lacks real affordances because it is difficult to know how to interact with it. It is inconsistent with pre-existing and already learned elements of similar devices. Though the playback joystick might be a brilliant idea, its learnability and memorability have helped to nominate this JVC camcorder into the Hall of Shame.
Just for kicks, I performed a partial usability test on my roommate. I asked her to play the video that was in the camcorder. She had difficulty even finding how to turn the device on and switch it to the player (opposed to the recorder). Once that was done, she was looking for buttons just as I had done, and ended up pressing “MENU” several times. She, apparently more technologically adept than I, figured it out after about fifteen minutes. Throughout the whole thing she was cursing the device.
My sorority had interviews on Friday and Saturday, but unfortunately I had missed the first couple of candidates. Kelly had recorded all of interviews on the new JVC camcorder, so I asked her to watch those earlier interviews during our lunch break. She handed me the camcorder then left for lunch. I, a perfectly proficient technology user, figured that I would be able to easily playback the video as I had on so many other cameras before. I own a camera, so I thought It would be just like mine. I was wrong.
As a first time user, I looked at this camcorder to find any sort of player buttons. On the right side there were three options: “REC”, “OFF”, and “PLAY”. I switched it to “PLAY” and proceeded to look for an external button to start the recording. Nothing on the outside, and nothing when I opened the left side viewer. There was nothing that indicated play, pause, fast forward, rewind, arrows, or anything that resembled those types of functions. I tried pressing a couple ambiguous buttons (such as “MENU”) that I thought might start the video, but then I got scared that I might unintentionally press a delete or record-over button. I stared at the blank black screen frustrated and defeated.
After spending the whole lunch break trying to figure out how to play camera, Kelly finally returned. After explaining to her how much I hated her camera (and thinking to myself how perfectly this fits into the Hall of Shame), I asked her to assist me. She told me to open the left side viewer and switch the right side to “PLAY” (as I had done), then to use the little joystick on the viewer (what little joystick?!?). She pointed to a little knob on the bottom left of the screen, which I thought was a button. On this “joystick” are the words “QUICK REVIEW”, “FOCUS”, and “LIGHT”. I wasn’t sure how to use this joystick, so Kelly showed me to press it up to play the video. Sure enough, as soon as I pressed the joystick up, the video started to play. How does this function make any sense? I really have no idea.
It turns out that as soon as the joystick is pressed, a screen pops up that directs the user to a screen with the icons for play/pause, fast forward, stop, and rewind around a circular shape. This assumes that the user knows that to play/pause, he or she must press the joystick to the top, to fast forward to the right, stop to the bottom, and rewind to the left. Though this would serve as a helpful reminder to the user after they know how to figure it out, this function would not even be encountered by a first time user like myself.
The reason that I’ve nominated the interface device JVC camcorder’s play function for the HALL OF SHAME is on account of the usability factor of learnability. There are other functions on this camcorder, such as the volume controls (that double as the zoom function), that also deserve to be in the Hall of Shame. The users of this type of camcorder would be average people, most likely ranging from high school students to adults, who probably have had experience using other similar technologies.
As far as the player features, this camcorder fails to present any features that users are familiar with from existing technologies, such as an arrow icon for play or the word “PLAY”. The user is then unable to resort to previous knowledge when manipulating this new product. The degree to which the playback design facilitates attention and perception are crucial factors for its usability success. It is important for functions to be visible so that users will know what to do and how to do it (Interaction Design, 29). This device lacks those visual cues, such as icons and other graphical representations, which have proven to be the most helpful to for users to distinguish meaning and assist in recognition (Interaction Design, 99). A simple picture or familiar word would drastically improve the user’s experience, so that the user doesn’t get frustrated (like me!).
Once utilized correctly and practiced routinely, the play function may be simple to remember. The screen that displays the functions acts as a helpful reminder for usages over short time intervals. However, after an extended time of not using the camera, a user could easily forget how to use the player functions. In this case, there are no visual or audio cues to remind the user, he or she would need to resort to memory or outside resources. Perhaps this playback feature is a usable function as one “joystick”; instead of several buttons that need to be looked at and pressed, once the user had acquired the understanding of which direction represents which function (play/pause, rewind, etc.) a single joystick could be a more efficient tool. Regardless, it is a difficult feature to learn which undermines its usability value.
Ultimately, this JVC camcorder’s playback feature lacks real affordances because it is difficult to know how to interact with it. It is inconsistent with pre-existing and already learned elements of similar devices. Though the playback joystick might be a brilliant idea, its learnability and memorability have helped to nominate this JVC camcorder into the Hall of Shame.
Just for kicks, I performed a partial usability test on my roommate. I asked her to play the video that was in the camcorder. She had difficulty even finding how to turn the device on and switch it to the player (opposed to the recorder). Once that was done, she was looking for buttons just as I had done, and ended up pressing “MENU” several times. She, apparently more technologically adept than I, figured it out after about fifteen minutes. Throughout the whole thing she was cursing the device.
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Chapter 2:Understanding and conceptualizing interaction
The two focal points of this chapter were understanding the problem space and conceptualizing the design space. Understanding the problem space is a crucial element to interaction design, and the description seemed pretty self explanatory-- to work around what the user actually needs. The conceptualizing the design space was much more interesting to me.. especially the four fundamental types of interaction that a user can have, including instructing, conversing, manipulating, and instructing:
The section that I found to be the most insightful was the discusssion of the pros and cons of major metaphors and analogies. For example, the analogy of the computer as a desktop with files that can be grouped into folders or thrown away in a trashcan, etc. Of course I understood that the computer uses familiar items so that I could easily understand its functionality, but I had never stepped aside to realize that someone had to have thought of that specific metaphor to use.. these metaphors have always existed in my conscious lifetime and therefore have seemed to become innate to me. Though there are many advantages of using such metaphors, I had never considered the limitations that are linked to them.
This book has described of how interaction is fundamental to the usability success of a product with examples that I have encountered before, and I think that these examples will be helfpul for me to remember those elaborated ideas. I thought that the vending machine and ticket machine examples were well-selected choices to explain how instructing is crucial to the interaction between the user and machine. (The usage of something I encounter everyday proves to me that the writers of these books have made this Interaction Design book user friendly for the reader... and maybe they DO know what they're talking about.) Using the reader's existing knowledge to further expand the ideas has been helpful, such as comparing how IKEA's help center, Ask Jeeve's for Kids, and an insurance company all utilize different modes of conversing.
One idea that stood out to me was the testing of the Chromarium color cubes... "in a study exploring color mixing, it was found that young children (aged 4-6 years) were far more creative, collaborative, and reflexive when mixing colors with the physical-digital cubes... in particular, they explored many more combinations and tried to see if they could change the density of the colors being mixed, for example, by placing the cubes on top of each other and pressing them hard on the table" ( Interaction Design, 71). Using children as the users would help to bring the level of usability down to a basic leven and to explore ways that a narrow minded adult might not think to do. However, a downfall to this would be that some more expertised users may find such a product to be too elementary.
... more to come later :D
The section that I found to be the most insightful was the discusssion of the pros and cons of major metaphors and analogies. For example, the analogy of the computer as a desktop with files that can be grouped into folders or thrown away in a trashcan, etc. Of course I understood that the computer uses familiar items so that I could easily understand its functionality, but I had never stepped aside to realize that someone had to have thought of that specific metaphor to use.. these metaphors have always existed in my conscious lifetime and therefore have seemed to become innate to me. Though there are many advantages of using such metaphors, I had never considered the limitations that are linked to them.
This book has described of how interaction is fundamental to the usability success of a product with examples that I have encountered before, and I think that these examples will be helfpul for me to remember those elaborated ideas. I thought that the vending machine and ticket machine examples were well-selected choices to explain how instructing is crucial to the interaction between the user and machine. (The usage of something I encounter everyday proves to me that the writers of these books have made this Interaction Design book user friendly for the reader... and maybe they DO know what they're talking about.) Using the reader's existing knowledge to further expand the ideas has been helpful, such as comparing how IKEA's help center, Ask Jeeve's for Kids, and an insurance company all utilize different modes of conversing.
One idea that stood out to me was the testing of the Chromarium color cubes... "in a study exploring color mixing, it was found that young children (aged 4-6 years) were far more creative, collaborative, and reflexive when mixing colors with the physical-digital cubes... in particular, they explored many more combinations and tried to see if they could change the density of the colors being mixed, for example, by placing the cubes on top of each other and pressing them hard on the table" ( Interaction Design, 71). Using children as the users would help to bring the level of usability down to a basic leven and to explore ways that a narrow minded adult might not think to do. However, a downfall to this would be that some more expertised users may find such a product to be too elementary.
... more to come later :D
Monday, October 1, 2007
Chapter 1
Today I read the first chapter of Interaction Design: Beyond Human Computer Interaction. Not only was it a nice review of concepts that I had learned this past spring in Cognitive Science 102C (Cognitive Engineering/Design), but more importantly it was a reflection and clarification of the work that I have recently been practicing in my internship as a human factors engineer.
Earlier today I was trying to describe the possible cognitive science roles in the design and engineering process to my friend Victoria-- I was able to describe the design and engineering aspects of it, but found it more difficult to clearly explain the more interdisciplinary fields (i.e. human factors, human-computer interaction, etc.). Even though it is my focus of study, it seems that I understand each of the concepts independently but needed to be refreshed on the broader scope of interaction design.
Sometimes when you are trying to piece together a puzzle, you need to look at each piece closely to observe the shape and size, but if you look at only one piece for too long then you can forget that the puzzle piece will only makes sense when placed in the bigger picture. In that sense, this chapter has helped me to step away from specific aspects of the design process and see how it fits into the bigger picture of our everyday living... which is what had intrigued me to pursue my educational career in cognitive science in the first place.
In general, I'm glad that this chapter clarified certain words that are too often misused and easily confused with eachother, such as user-centered and usability testing. I found this chapter to be a relatively easy and enjoyable reading and I have high hopes for this class.
Earlier today I was trying to describe the possible cognitive science roles in the design and engineering process to my friend Victoria-- I was able to describe the design and engineering aspects of it, but found it more difficult to clearly explain the more interdisciplinary fields (i.e. human factors, human-computer interaction, etc.). Even though it is my focus of study, it seems that I understand each of the concepts independently but needed to be refreshed on the broader scope of interaction design.
Sometimes when you are trying to piece together a puzzle, you need to look at each piece closely to observe the shape and size, but if you look at only one piece for too long then you can forget that the puzzle piece will only makes sense when placed in the bigger picture. In that sense, this chapter has helped me to step away from specific aspects of the design process and see how it fits into the bigger picture of our everyday living... which is what had intrigued me to pursue my educational career in cognitive science in the first place.
In general, I'm glad that this chapter clarified certain words that are too often misused and easily confused with eachother, such as user-centered and usability testing. I found this chapter to be a relatively easy and enjoyable reading and I have high hopes for this class.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)