140 likes | 294 Views
ISC 551 - Chapter Three Notes. Managing Design Processes. Revisiting Grudin’s consistency arguments 3 Pillars Rapid prototyping Participatory design. LUCID. Summary. Revisiting Grudin-consistency. Consistency is not the most important goal of interface design Then, what is?
E N D
ISC 551 - Chapter Three Notes Managing Design Processes
Revisiting Grudin’s consistency arguments 3 Pillars Rapid prototyping Participatory design LUCID Summary Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
Revisiting Grudin-consistency • Consistency is not the most important goal of interface design • Then, what is? • The user performing a task, efficiently and error-free, learning, and retaining, being satisfied (the 5 goals) Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
But goals could be in conflict • Five goals may be in conflict with each other • Then, what? • Figure out which goal is more important for the user/task and emphasize that goal • or, try to achieve both goals simultaneously with creative interface design Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
What of consistency, then? • Only be consistent when being consistent achieves, or does not detract from, goals of interface design • When two consistencies are in conflict, what to do? • Select design that fits user/task in achieving five goals Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
3.1 Introduction • Does introduction support or refute Grudin’s arguments? Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
Three pillars of design • Guidelines documents and processes • sounds like conformance and consistency again! • User interface software and tools • for (rapid) prototyping • Expert reviews and usability testing Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
Rapid prototyping • Interface does not need full functionality • Must know a lot to build • Wastes effort • But identifies problems earlier than written requirements Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
LUCID methodology • 6 sequential steps • an SDLC for interface design • what’s missing? • Non-interface-related activities Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
Participatory Design • If HCI is a user-oriented paradigm, • ...why does Shneiderman think participatory design is controversial? Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
User participation • Two voices of participation • instrumental voice • overall responsibility • hands-on activities • user-IS relationships • non-instrumental voice • benefits and listening Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
User participation • Hunton and Beeler (1997) found that: • instrumental participation leads to the highest levels of involvement • selling users on benefits and listening to their feedback produced higher levels of involvement than no participation Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
ACM and user participation • The ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct states that computing professionals should: Ensure that users and those who will be affected by a system have their needs clearly articulated during the assessment and design of requirements. Later the system must be validated to meet requirements. Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.
References • Grudin, Jonathan, “The Case Against User Interface Consistency,” Communications of the ACM (32:10), 1989, pp. 1164-1173 • Hunton, J.E., Beeler, J.D. "Effects of User Participation in Systems Development: A Longitudinal Field Experiment," MIS Quarterly (21:4), December 1997, pp. 359-388. • Shneiderman, Ben, and Plaisant, C. Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, 1998, Pearson/Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA, 2004 Jeffrey P. Landry, Ph. D.