1. Brugergrænseflader til apparater BRGA Presentation 7: Users

2. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 2 af 25 Outline Recap: Cognitive HCI & Heuristics Problem with Predictive Mehtods Users Context or lab Available methods involving users

3. Recap: Cognitive HCI & Heuristics

4. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 4 af 25 Until now we have looked at Cognitive HCI: –Theory & Methods –Modeling Use (models) –Mainly predictive methods GOMS/KLA/Fitts Law Designers: CW Heuristics & Guidelines –Distilled experiences –Avoid common design pitfalls by following design principles: guidelines & heuristics –Method: Heuristic Evaluation

5. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 5 af 25 The problem with predictive methods & heuristics / guidelines Makes overall assumptions –May often be right (that’s why we use them) –May sometimes be inadequate Makes assumptions on behalf of the users –But we cannot really know if these holds to be true The problem: we cannot be sure that we are building the right product – only that we are building the product right The solution: consulting the users

6. Now we will look at users & context

7. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 7 af 25 The Users Four important guidelines apply: 1.Remember that you are NOT your typical user “The designer” is not a good user 2.Know your users “Everyone” is not a user “The Vice President” is rarely the user “Marketing” is rarely the user If you can’t find a user – then you’re in big trouble! 3.Users aren’t designers It is your job to generate visions (prototypes, future workshops) and to collect their feedback 4.Users aren’t all-knowing Beware of users giving you wrong information – use & study several Discuss your Experiences on this

8. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 8 af 25 The context Cognitive HCI is not concerned with the context where the work is situated Focus is on the mapping between the user & the computer in an isolated setting This approach has various flaws

9. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 9 af 25 The “new wave” of HCI psychology Social Computing (born in the late 80’s) –Users are not isolated beings –They are part of a context – social & cultural –Not possible to isolate the work context completely in a lab Users act differently when not in their work context –Solution Study the users at the work setting (field studies & interviews) Integrate users in the development team Concepts –Distributed Cognition –Situated Action Theory –Activity Theory –Participatory Design (field studies & interviews) –Prototyping –XP: eXtreme Programming (and other Agile Methods)

10. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 10 af 25 Social Computing Distributed Cognition (Edward Hutchins 1991) –The need to study more than one user at a time (a work setting …) –Builds on Cognition Psychology Situated Action Theory (Lucy Suchman 1987) –Complete opposite of Cognitive Psychology. “Action only takes place due to the situated context (you can NEVER predict how a user might act …)” Activity Theory (Sussanne Bødker 1989 – AU) –”All activities are driven by needs, mediated by one or more instruments, and always affected by the context of the activity” –Psychology of the Sovjet Union: Vygotsky, Leontjev

11. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 11 af 25 Activity Theory Subject Instrument Object (goal of Activity) RulesCommunityDivision of labour Figure: Engeström’s triangle illustrates an Activity, and all the elements influencing it None of the elements can be separated Need to understand the entirety – the overall context This can be done by field studies (preliminary) + checklist Evaluation of UI’s at best carried out in work context Methods: Activity Checklist Focus Shift Analysis mediates other tools available? disturbing factors (phones ringing)? competing goals? need for externalization (to colleagues)? Asyncronous communication (colleagues around the globe) Who will be using the technology? access to the tools? PC in office – farmer in stable

12. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 12 af 25 Warning Not all user involvement needs to be in the work context as this might be expensive As always - cost/benefit Different methods to apply involving users

13. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 13 af 25 Techniques for Observing and Listening to Users Field studies / Contextual Inquiry Thinki Aloud: talk while doing the job Talk Right After : debriefing after the job Role Playing Cueing recall with videotape (Focus Shift Analysis) Focus groups & interviews Mailed surveys Others: Retrospective Testing, Coaching Method, Constructive Interaction

14. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 14 af 25 Field studies / Contextual Inquiry Field studies (Nielsen: Observations) are undertaken to understand the users work context and enable the designer to discover possible user needs –Use before design (task analysis) or with working products –Usually video recording is employed as well as note taking. Do not interfere with the work Contextual Inquiry –As field studies, but ask fitting questions

15. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 15 af 25 Environment Analysis Where do people use your interface? Many variations: –An outdoor ATM in a cold location where people wear gloves while using it (need huge buttons) –On a combination cell phone/wireless browser, with a tiny display (need tiny fingers!) –In a location where direct sun can hit your display, making it hard to read –In an extremely noisy factory, where any sound you add would be impossible to understand Observe your users in their own setting

16. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 16 af 25 Cueing recall with video After getting written permissions, tape the user at work This records the user interacting with others in a normal work setting Later, play the tape and have the user explain what was going on Bødker: Focus Shift Analysis

17. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 17 af 25 Focus group: good if you can make it work, but has problems Bring users together (6 or more) for discussions May obtain valuable end user input Requires a skilled and experienced leader One or two people may dominate Some people may get into side conversations

18. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 18 af 25 Questionaries Good if you can make it work, but has problems Very difficult to write good questions Choice of mail list can bias results A return rate of 10% is extremely good; 1-2% is typical May report on what people think they do, not what they actually do Quality of answers (spent time) May be inexpensive

19. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 19 af 25 Think Aloud Psychological Test Method Both lab & in situ (Tognazzini, 1992): might be big controlled lab experiments with video cameras – or cheap no nonsense studies “May be the single most valuable … method” (Nielsen, 1993) Makes the users mental model of the system clear to us – to close the gap to the system model

20. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 20 af 25 Think Aloud Samples of facilitating remarks: –“Could you tell me what options you are considering?” –“Is anything in particular puzzling you?” –“What might you do next?” BUT: No feedback, positive or negative No answers or hints If users get stuck, have them go on Neutral demeanor at all times ”I’m not the designer” PLEASE READ CHAPTER 6

21. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 21 af 25 Talk Right After Sometimes talking while doing the work is not feasible

22. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 22 af 25 Talk Right After Talking right after may be best alternative to thinking aloud

23. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 23 af 25 Role Playing Some things happen so infrequently that there is no way to observe the user Someone may be able to play the role of a user in that situation

24. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 24 af 25 Recruiting Users If product is in use, test with real current users: –Employees –Customers If it is a new product – test with potential users Provide incentives: –Coffee mugs, T-shirts, wine Not family or friends: they won’t be critical enough Ethical aspects –Conduct all test with the deepest respect for their well- being Users are only “novice” users the first time! –Do not waste your usability testing resources on basic problems – make sure your product is ready for testing

25. Ingeniørhøjskolen i Århus Slide 25 af 25 Common Pitfalls Reliability –Huge differences between test users –Best user up to 10x efficient –25% users twice as fast as the slowest 25% –May use standard statistical tests –Number of test users will determine reliability Validity –Are we measuring something useful? –Statistics won’t help here – only common sense and experience