CS 3724 Introduction to Human Computer Interaction Section 1 CRN TuTh 5:00-6: McB

Today’s Agenda  What is “good design”?  How can we look for good design?  Methods  Concept selection  Strategy switching  Recombinant construction

Today’s Agenda  What is “good design”?  How can we look for good design?  Methods  Concept selection  Strategy switching  Recombinant construction

What is good design?

Dieter Rams (product designer): Good design is innovative. Good design makes a product useful. Good design is aesthetic. Good design makes a product understandable. Good design is honest. Good design is unobtrusive. Good design is long-lasting. Good design is thorough down to the last detail. Good design is environmentally friendly. Good design is as little design as possible.

What is good design? Vitruvius :  Commodity  “useful”  “as little design as possible”  Firmness  “long lasting”  “thorough”  “environmentally friendly”  Delight  “innovative”  “aesthetic”  “understandable”  “honest’  “unobtrusive” Dieter Rams (product designer): Good design is innovative. Good design makes a product useful. Good design is aesthetic. Good design makes a product understandable. Good design is honest. Good design is unobtrusive. Good design is long-lasting. Good design is thorough down to the last detail. Good design is environmentally friendly. Good design is as little design as possible.

How to look for good design?  Look at the big picture  Don't judge solely on a single frustration  But don’t underestimate the overall response that comes from “small” interactions that frustrate you.  Be conscious of design patterns  As you use a product, take some time to understand its underlying structure.  Critique with reason, not emotion  Try to articulate what bothers you so much  Add it to a lexicon of principles that you want your designs to follow  this will make it easier to spot similar flaws in your own work, too.

Today’s Agenda  What is “good design”?  How can we look for good design?  Methods  Concept selection  Strategy switching  Recombinant construction

What methods can help us look for good design?

Concept Selection Matrix  Systematically compare alternative designs against list of requirements  Procedure: 1. Create alternative designs 2. Enumerate all requirements (even implicit ones!) 3. Fill out matrix: columns = design alternatives, rows = requirements 4. For each element: +, -, or “ “ 5. Identify “best”

Concept Selection Exercise In Class Exercise Review list of requirements Add any requirements you think are missing –Do not limit to just “user requirements” –Your team would carry out the project Use matrix to evaluate alternatives 1. Fill out matrix: columns = design alternatives, rows = requirements 2. For each element: +, -, or “ “ 3. Identify “best”

Concept Selection Exercise REQUIREMENTS: A.The website should provide a calendar of meeting times B.Some members are not able to attend regularly, so the website should communicate which pieces are needed to fit with larger group projects C.The website must work with minimal technical skill level D.The website should support the social interaction of the club members. E.The website should support both sophisticated and unsophisticated searching. F.Your team should trade off spending time rather than having a rich set of features. G.The website must be up and running in a week or so.

Concept Selection Exercise In Class Exercise (Part II) Get into groups (Next slide) Compare results Add/remove/edit extra requirements Create new selection matrix Compare each groups’ results

Groups GROUP A 1:Roy, Hecht, Sica 2: Luc, Shih, Pillmore 3: Sams, DelaRosa, Kim B 4: Muessig, Schafer, Cox 5: Bhatia, Reyes, Al- Qattan 6: Liss, Jin, Bannerjee C 7: Chapman, Franklin, Demma 8: Bowers, Sternowski, Loftus 9: Stegnre, Lu, Larkins D 10: Dorsett, Fein, Rich 11: Miller, Houglum, Rendin 12: Nash, Weaver, Will E 13: Damodaran, Gungordu, Patel 14: Huynh, Haley, Karbassiyoon 15: Butler, Sabri, Galeeme, Smith F 16: Otiji, Norwood, Asaad, 17: Huffman, Merheb, Wood, Kostyk

Concept Selection Matrix  Some possible problems with this method:

Concept Selection Matrix  Some possible problems with this method:  No one alternative maybe “best”  No alternative may even be “acceptable”  Does not suggest new alternatives  Requirements are not weighted by importance so making tradeoff decisions are not evaluated  NOTE:you are asked to include a concept selection matrix in Team Report 2

How can we make a good design better?

Recombinant construction  This method inserts dissimilar ideas into a design (more like recombinant DNA than hybridizing)  Procedure: 1. From Concept Selection Matrix, take top 2 designs 2. Enumerate features of each 3. Create matrix of features (best = column, second best = rows) 4. For each cell of matrix: “X” = common to both, “+” = does not interfere, “ “ = cannot work together 5. “What new idea incorporates all the ‘X’ and ‘+’ features?”  NOTE: save original ideas since you may need to revert to them.

Recombinant construction X X X X X X The object is to describe a new thing that uses the compatible features of the best and second-best concepts.

Recombinant Exercise In Class Exercise (Part III) In your groups In a blank matrix: 1. From Concept Selection Matrix, take top 2 designs 2. Enumerate features of each 3. Create matrix of features (best = column, second best = rows) 4. For each cell of matrix: “X” = common to both, “+” = does not interfere, “ “ = cannot work together 5. “What new idea incorporates all the ‘X’ and ‘+’ features?”

Recombinant construction  Some possible problems with this method:

Recombinant construction  Some possible problems with this method:  Featuritis  Violates metaphor  Worse, it can create an “Edsel” (that is, good system and good patterns get lost)  Seductive (loose sight of real users)

What if we end up with no good design?

Strategy switching 1. Start over using original strategy 2. Keep a record of every spontaneous thought that occurs to team members; do not resume work until everyone understands the random thought. 3. When “enough” random thoughts have been recorded to see a pattern, STOP all work and compare pattern of random ideas to current strategy. 4. Decide whether to adopt new strategy or ignore spontaneous thoughts  Repeat above until strategy is found that yields “good” results

Strategy switching  Some possible problems with this method:

Strategy switching  Some possible problems with this method:  It takes time  It relies on “outlier” thoughts  You must be disciplined  You might see a misleading pattern  There might not be any good design ideas

wHaT wErE aLl ThOsE mEtHoDs AgAiN?  WiZaRd Of Oz  MeTaPhoR  pErSiCoPe  GrApHiC dEsIgN  CoGpSyCh LaB eXpErImEnTs  MeNtAl MoDeLs  PeRfOrMaNcE oPtImIzAtIoN  rOlE-pLaYiNg  DeCoNsTrUcTiOn  ReComBiNaNt CoNsTrUcTiOn  GoMs  StOrYbOaRdS  pArTiCiPaToRy  AnAlOgIeS fRoM tOtAlLy UnReLaTeD ArEaS

Methods we’ve learned so far:  Brainstorming  Delphi planning method  Hierarchical task analysis  Morphological box  Wizard of Oz  Metaphor  Periscope  Strategy switching  CogPsych Lab Experiments  Mental Models  Performance Optimization  Role-playing  Deconstruction  Recombinant Construction  GOMS  Storyboards  Participatory  Analogies From Totally Unrelated Areas  Concept Selection  Design Review

Today’s Agenda  What is “good design”?  How can we look for good design?  Methods  Concept selection  Strategy switching  Recombinant construction

For Tuesday:  Team 8: Hall of Fame / Hall of Shame  Next Lecture: “Where is the interface?”, some good ideas from graphic design and a preview of the midterm For Thursday:  Mid Term In TWO weeks:  Team Report 2