1. Human–Computer Interaction post-millennial models Alan Dix alan@hcibook.com http://www.hcibook.com/alan/teaching/rome2003/

2. course outline Week 1: 19–23 May 2003 basics of HCI and cognition Tues 20 th am and pm lightening introduction vision 3D and colour time human context strand Wed 21 st am, Thurs 22 nd pm and Fri 23 rd pm scenarios task analysis rich work ecologies understanding interaction Week 2: 26–30 May 2003 system definition strand Mon 26 th pm and Tues 27 th am and pm understanding state physical–logical mappings continuous interaction and time formal interaction modelling at the edge Thurs 29 th am and pm designing experience innovation and creativity

3. planning for innovation usually risk and gain trade off –innovate = high risk, may fail –conservative = low risk, unspectacular results can we get the best of both?

4. the detailed plan many small steps pre-planned guaranteed outcome but sooooooo boring

5. the spark from heaven plan very common review, invent method, implement, evaluate, … may be great … but likely to fail completely BRIGHT IDEA !

6. back burner activity low risk path + high risk high gain path strong feed from low  high risk non-essential high  low ? 

7. incremental output linear path … but incremental –outputs at many stages –can stop at any stage –good for limited time syuh how gtw hsio i ert ag ty ghn ty we ghty chdi qw oatyf wet dfla ght a syuh how gtw hsio i ert ag ty ghn ty we ghty chdi qw oatyf wet dfla ght a syuh how gtw hsio i ert ag ty ghn ty we ghty chdi qw oatyf wet dfla ght a syuh how gtw hsio i ert ag ty ghn ty we ghty chdi qw oatyf wet dfla ght a (normally dangerous!) + high risk elements (e.g. PhD!)

8. validating work justification –expert opinion –previous research –new experiments evaluation –experiments –user studies –peer review your work evaluation experiments user studies peer review justification expert opinion previous research new experiments

9. justification vs. validation different disciplines –mathematics: proof = justification –medicine: drug trials = evaluation combine them: –look for weakness in justification –focus evaluation there evaluationjustification