DOCSLIB.ORG

Usability/User-Centered Design in the Ischools: Justifying a Teaching Philosophy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Usability/User-Centered Design in the Ischools: Justifying a Teaching Philosophy Usability/User-Centered Design in the iSchools: Justifying a Teaching Philosophy Randolph G. Bias Associate Professor, School of Information, Tbe University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX. Email: [email protected] Paul F. Marty Associate Professor, Scbool of Library and Information Studies, College of Communication and Information, Florida State University, Tallabassee, FL. Email: [email protected] Ian Douglas Associate Professor, Learning Systems Institute, Florida State University, Tallabassee, FL. Email: [email protected] Researchers from two universities surveyed a decade's worth of iSchool graduates who had taken and passed at least one master's level course in usability and user-centered design (UCD). The purpose of the survey was to assess the value of a teaching phi- losophy that considered usability skills to be of value to future information profession- als, even when they are not pursuing careers as usability engineers. The survey results strongly validated this teaching philosophy, with 94% of respondents reporting that they use the general principles of usability on the job regularly, despite only 20% stating that they were hired to perform UCD. The researchers argue that these results justify a teaching philosophy that emphasizes the value of usability for all LIS students, regard- less of their career goals, and make a strong case for including usability/ UCD as a core course in the iSchools and the LIS curriculum. Keywords: usability, user-centered design, LIS education, iSchools, survey methods Introduction versity (both members of the iSchools consortium) teach graduate level courses he iSchools movement represents a re- in usability/UCD, and have done so for Tsponse to a variety of perceived needs, about a decade. These courses are offered including the need for Library and Infor- based on an implicit belief that the top- mation Studies (LIS) pedagogy to em- ics covered are valuable for LIS students, brace new technologies, and the need for despite the fact that neither usability nor an integrated approach to the study and UCD appears anywhere in the American practice of information use by human be- Library Association's Core Competencies ings. The 33 member institutions that com- of Librarianship (ALA, 2009). The deci- prise the iSchools recognize that building sion to offer courses on usability and UCD successful relationships between people, as électives for students pursuing master's information, and technology requires an degrees in LIS, therefore, represents an "understanding of the use and users of in- ideal case study of the impact of the iS- formation" (http://ischools.org/). This rec- chools movement on the evolution of the ognition has led many iSchools to include LIS curriculum in the 21st century. Does it courses on usability and user-centered de- make sense for LIS students, the vast ma- sign (UCD) in their curricula. jority of whom will never work as usabil- The LIS programs at the University of ity engineers, to take courses on usability Texas at Austin and Florida State Uni- and UCD? J. of Education for Library and Information Science, Vol. 53, No. 4—(Fall) October 2012 ISSN: 0748-5786 © 2012 Association for Library and Information Science Education 274 Usability/User-Centered Design in the iSchools: Justifying a Teaching Philosophy 275 To answer fhis quesfion, this sfudy pres- seeking has hecome one of the major sub- enfs resulfs fi-om a n online survey designed fields of human-computer interaction. [...] fo explore fhe following research ques- One area of research in human-computer fions: Are usabilify / user-cenfered design interaction is the development of methods courses of value fo LIS sfudents in ferms of for doing human-centered design of infor- fhe skills fhey need in fhe workplace? Whaf mation systems. [...] A number of these aspecfs of fhese courses are LIS sfudenfs methods have much in common with how mosf likely fo use as pracficing informafion librarians attempt to understand what kind professionals upon graduafion? Exploring of information a patron is seeking. (Olson fhese quesfions will help educafors and sfu- & Olson, 1998, p.88) denfs beffer undersfand fhe role of usabilify and UCD in fhe LIS curriculum, and shed The ferm "usabilify" has been used in lighf on how fhe iSchools movemenf, wifh differenf confexfs by differenf disciplines, ifs focus on fhe use and users of informa- which place slightly differenf perspecfives fion, has influenced feaching and leaming on ifs meaning and scope. If can refer fo a for LIS sfudenfs and faculfy. process (e.g., usabilify as a form of evalu- ation) as well as a characferisfic (e.g., fhe Background degree fo which somefhing is usable). A general definifion can be found in fhe The evolufion of fhe iSchools move- Infemafional Sfandards Organizafion's ment has faken place in parallel wifh an in- "Ergonomics of Human Sysfem Inferac- creased need for usabi 1 ify and user-centered fion Part 11 : Guidance on Usabilify" (ISO design in educafion and pracfice. While if 9241-11, 1998), which defines usabilify as is sfill possible fo eam an undergraduafe fhe "exfenf fo which a producf can be used or graduafe degree in compufer science by specified users fo achieve specified or elecfrical engineering wifhouf faking a goals wifh effecfiveness, efficiency and single course in usabilify, and UCD prac- safisfacfion in a specified confexf of use." fifioners sfill sfruggle fo demonsfrafe fheir The classic definifion of usabilify is rel- value fo fhe developers of informafion sys- afive rafher fhan absolufe (Nielsen, 1993); fems, fhere has been an increased appre- we cannof say wifh absolufe cerfainfy fhaf ciation for fhe value of usabilify and UCD any one design has good usabilify. Insfead, in fhe developmenf of all human-machine we fend fo say fhaf design A is relafively sysfems (Vredenburg, Righi, & Isensee, more usable fhan design B based on some 2002). The clearly quantifiable benefifs of measure of effecfiveness (e.g., fask com- integrating usabilify analysis info sysfems pletion or number of errors), efficiency design (Bias & Mayhew, 2005), combined (e.g., fime faken fo complefe fhe fask), wifh fhe demonsfrafed need for usabilify safisfacfion (e.g., users' rafing of experi- experfise given fhe dramafic growfh of fhe ence), or leamabilify (e.g., amounf of in- number and fypes of fasks people carry ouf sfrucfion required). These characferisfics online everyday (Nielsen, 2005), has nof musf be evaluafed for a range of fasks in only increased fhe number of pracficing realisfic use environmenfs, and numer- usabilify professionals, buf also driven fhe ous usabilify evaluafion fechniques have inclusion of usabilify and UCD courses in emerged fo measure fhese facfors (Nielsen educafional programs. Usabilify is a now &Mack, 1994). a global phenomenon (Douglas & Liu, Some researchers have gone beyond 2011). mechanical measures fo focus on fhe emo- fional impacfs of design (Norman, 2003). Usability: Definitions and Context Many would now prefer fo focus on whaf is fermed fhe "user experience," rafher It is scarcely surprising that infonnation fhan fhe more hisforical ferm "usabilify." 276 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE This shift in focus recognizes that while will (or should) have an essential interest usability is an important and often-ne- in usability. glected part of design, the holistic nature This evolution from ergonomics to hu- of design is such that a successful design man factors to usability to UCD to inter- requires balancing many different aspects action design to user experience is part (e.g., usability, functionality, aesthetics) meaningfril distinction and part semantic and not just concentrating on one to the convenience. As opposed to the histori- neglect of the others. A finished design is cal, more constrained definition, this study a gestalt, where the whole is greater than uses the term usability as a shorthand for the sum of its parts. the full expanse of UCD as an interactive One ofthe earliest communities to con- process incorporating requirements gath- sider usability as a general design issue ering, information architecture, iterative was ergonomics (Meister, 1999). While design, and user interface evaluation (in- ergonomists were initially concemed with cluding inspection methods and end-user physical interaction design, the develop- testing). In this paper, therefore, the term ment of cognitive ergonomics (Falzon, usability refers to the full gamut of user Gaines, & Monk, 1990) has influenced experience design and evaluation; usabil- education in industrial engineering depart- ity is not merely concerned with the design ments, as well as more specialized human and testing of software or web site inter- factors engineering departments. Usability faces. also figures prominently in the field of Hu- man-Computer Interaction (HCI), which Usability in LIS Programs: A Teaching has a strong, but not exclusive relationship Philosophy with computer science departments. While HCI initially focused on developing new Most librarians would agree that their web- methods of interaction with desktop com- site is an important, and in many cases the puters, it has since branched out into other most important, point of interaction with areas of design and other technological their patrons. (Cervone, 2005, p. 244) products (e.g., mobile phones, ubiquitous computing), and recent studies focus more Usability courses are commonly taught on understanding user behavior than de- in a variety of degree programs—includ- veloping a specific instance of a technol- ing psychology, engineering, computer ogy (Rode, 2011). science, and instructional systems—but Researchers and practitioners interested there can be great variation in terms ofthe in psychology, information architecture, appropriateness ofthe course for the aver- web science (Hendler et al, 2008) and the age student pursuing any particular degree. science of design (Purao et al, 2008) also Many of these courses are taught with the view usability as a common thread that philosophy that students should be trained runs through all their work, although their to conduct formal usability evaluations in understanding may be different based on formal usability laboratories.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Software Quality Management
    Software Quality Management 2004-2005 Marco Scotto ([email protected]) Software Quality Management Contents ¾Definitions ¾Quality of the software product ¾Special features of software ¾ Early software quality models •Boehm model • McCall model ¾ Standard ISO 9126 Software Quality Management 2 Definitions ¾ Software: intellectual product consisting of information stored on a storage device (ISO/DIS 9000: 2000) • Software may occur as concepts, transactions, procedures. One example of software is a computer program • Software is "intellectual creation comprising the programs, procedures, rules and any associated documentation pertaining to the operation of a data processing system" •A software product is the "complete set of computer programs, procedures and associated documentation and data designated for delivery to a user" [ISO 9000-3] • Software is independent of the medium on which it is recorded Software Quality Management 3 Quality of the software product ¾The product should, on the highest level… • Ensure the satisfaction of the user needs • Ensure its proper use ¾ Earlier: 1 developer, 1 user • The program should run and produce results similar to those expected ¾ Later: more developers, more users • Need to economical use of the storage devices • Understandability, portability • User-friendliness, learnability ¾ Nowadays: • Efficiency, reliability, no errors, able to restart without using data Software Quality Management 4 Special features of software (1/6) ¾ Why is software ”different”? • Does not really have “physical” existence
    [Show full text]
  • Quality-Based Software Reuse
    Quality-Based Software Reuse Julio Cesar Sampaio do Prado Leite1, Yijun Yu2, Lin Liu3, Eric S. K. Yu2, John Mylopoulos2 1Departmento de Informatica, Pontif´ıcia Universidade Catolica´ do Rio de Janeiro, RJ 22453-900, Brasil 2Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, M5S 3E4 Canada 3School of Software, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China Abstract. Work in software reuse focuses on reusing artifacts. In this context, finding a reusable artifact is driven by a desired functionality. This paper proposes a change to this common view. We argue that it is possible and necessary to also look at reuse from a non-functional (quality) perspective. Combining ideas from reuse, from goal-oriented requirements, from aspect-oriented programming and quality management, we obtain a goal-driven process to enable the quality-based reusability. 1 Introduction Software reuse has been a lofty goal for Software Engineering (SE) research and prac- tice, as a means to reduced development costs1 and improved quality. The past decade has seen considerable progress in fulfilling this goal, both with respect to research ideas and industrial practices (e.g., [1–3]). Current reuse techniques focus on the reuse of software artifacts on the basis of de- sired functionality. However, non-functional properties (qualities) of a software system are also crucial. Systems fail because of inadequate performance, security, reliability, usability, or precision, to name a few. Quality concerns, therefore, should also be front and centre in methods for software reuse. For example, in designing for the NASA Mars Spirit spacecraft, one would not adopt a “cosine” function from an arbitrary mathemat- ical library.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Rules
    Design rules Chapter 7 adapted by Dr. Kristina Lapin, Vilnius University design rules Designing for maximum usability – the goal of interaction design • Principles of usability – general understanding • Standards and guidelines – direction for design • Design patterns – capture and reuse design knowledge types of design rules • principles – abstract design rules – low authority – high generality Guideline s • standards – specific design rules – high authority – limited application increasinggenerality Standards • guidelines generality increasing – lower authority increasing authority increasing authority – more general application Principles to support usability Learnability the ease with which new users can begin effective interaction and achieve maximal performance Flexibility the multiplicity of ways the user and system exchange information Robustness the level of support provided the user in determining successful achievement and assessment of goal- directed behaviour •Predictability •Synthezability Learnability •Familiarity •Generalizability •Consistency Principles of learnability Predictability – determining effect of future actions based on past interaction history – operation visibility Predictability http://www.webbyawards.com/ 7 Principles of learnability Synthesizability – assessing the effect of past actions – immediate vs. eventual honesty Synthesizability 1. 2. 3. 9 Principles of learnability (ctd) Familiarity – how prior knowledge applies to new system – guessability; affordance Principles of learnability (ctd) Generalizability
    [Show full text]
  • Usability Basics for Software Developers Usability Engineering
    focususability engineering Usability Basics for Software Developers Xavier Ferré and Natalia Juristo, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Helmut Windl, Siemens AG, Germany Larry Constantine, Constantine & Lockwood n recent years, software system usability has made some interesting ad- vances, with more and more organizations starting to take usability seri- ously.1 Unfortunately, the average developer has not adopted these new I concepts, so the usability level of software products has not improved. Contrary to what some might think, us- Usability engineering defines the target us- This tutorial ability is not just the appearance of the user ability level in advance and ensures that the examines the interface (UI). Usability relates to how the software developed reaches that level. The system interacts with the user, and it includes term was coined to reflect the engineering ap- relationship five basic attributes: learnability, efficiency, proach some usability specialists take.3 It is between usability user retention over time, error rate, and sat- “a process through which usability character- and the user isfaction. Here, we present the general us- istics are specified, quantitatively and early in interface and ability process for building a system with the the development process, and measured desired level of usability. This process, which throughout the process.”4 Usability is an is- discusses how most usability practitioners apply with slight sue we can approach from multiple view- the usability variation, is structured around a design- points, which is why many different disci- process follows a evaluate-redesign cycle. Practitioners initiate plines, such as psychology, computer science, design-evaluate- the process by analyzing the targeted users and sociology, are trying to tackle it.
    [Show full text]
  • USABILITY of PROCESSES in ENGINEERING DESIGN Becerril, Lucia; Stahlmann, Jan-Timo; Beck, Jesco; Lindemann, Udo Technical University of Munich, Germany
    21ST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENGINEERING DESIGN, ICED17 21-25 AUGUST 2017, THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, VANCOUVER, CANADA USABILITY OF PROCESSES IN ENGINEERING DESIGN Becerril, Lucia; Stahlmann, Jan-Timo; Beck, Jesco; Lindemann, Udo Technical University of Munich, Germany Abstract Processes in Engineering Design are generally optimized towards efficiency, quality, costs, risks, etc., however an analysis that includes requirements from the process users' view is missing. Within the last years, the concept of usability has being introduced to examine business processes. This is a promising approach for Engineering Design, by involving process "users" (designers, engineers, software developers, project managers, etc.) in the process planning phase, several issues such as consistency flaws or counter-intuitive information flow can be identified beforehand. This paper aims to explore the transferability of usability concepts and evaluation methods to processes in the field of Engineering Design. The goal of this paper is to set a basis for further studies with regard on how to plan and design processes that interact efficiently, effectively and satisfactorily with the people involved. For this purpose ten process usability attributes are consolidated from the overlap between usability attributes (of products and systems) and process system properties. Moreover, five usability evaluation methods are examined on their applicability for evaluating design processes. Keywords: Design management, Design process, User centred design Contact: Lucia Becerril Technical University of Munich Chair of Product Development Germany [email protected] Please cite this paper as: Surnames, Initials: Title of paper. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED17), Vol. 2: Design Processes | Design Organisation and Management, Vancouver, Canada, 21.-25.08.2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Quality Attributes and Design Tactics
    Quality Attribute Scenarios and Tactics Chapters 5-11 in Text Some material in these slides is adapted from Software Architecture in Practice, 3rd edition by Bass, Clements and Kazman. J. Scott Hawker/R. Kuehl p. 1 R I T Software Engineering Quality Attributes – Master List • Operational categories • Developmental categories – Availability – Modifiability – Interoperability – Variability – Reliability – Supportability – Usability – Testability – Performance – Maintainability – Deployability – Portability – Scalability – Localizability – Monitorability – Development distributability – Mobility – Buildability – Compatibility – Security – Safety J. Scott Hawker/R. Kuehl p. 2 R I T Software Engineering Achieving Quality Attributes – Design Tactics A system design is a collection of design decisions Some respond to quality attributes, some to achieving functionality A tactic is a design decision to achieve a QA response Tactics are a building block of architecture patterns – more primitive/granular, proven design technique Tactics to Control Stimulus Response Response J. Scott Hawker/R. Kuehl p. 3 R I T Software Engineering Categories of Design Decisions Allocation of responsibilities – system functions to modules Coordination model – module interaction Data model – operations, properties, organization Resource management – use of shared resources Architecture element mapping – logical to physical entities; i.e., threads, processes, processors Binding time decisions – variation of life cycle point of module “connection” Technology choices J. Scott Hawker/R. Kuehl p. 4 R I T Software Engineering Design Checklists Design considerations for each QA organized by design decision category For example, allocation of system responsibilities for performance: What responsibilities will involve heavy loading or time critical response? What are the processing requirements, will there be bottlenecks? How will threads of control be handled across process and processor boundaries? What are the responsibilities for managing shared resources? J.
    [Show full text]
  • Application of User-Centered Design for a Student Case Management System
    IT 11 057 Examensarbete 15 hp August 2011 Application of User-Centered Design for a Student Case Management System Vincent Kahl Institutionen för informationsteknologi Department of Information Technology ! Abstract Application of User-Centered Design for a Student Case Management System Vincent Kahl Teknisk- naturvetenskaplig fakultet UTH-enheten The student office and student counselors of Uppsala University’s IT Department need a new application for organizing and coordinating Besöksadress: student cases. The aim of this thesis is to define a specification for a Ångströmlaboratoriet Lägerhyddsvägen 1 new system. A user-centered design (UCD) approach is taken to Hus 4, Plan 0 ensure that the new application will increase productivity, is usable, and is accepted by the people that will work with it. The employed Postadress: UCD process is a custom adaption of the ISO 9241-210 standard’s Box 536 751 21 Uppsala UCD process proposal. Following the activity cycle of the ISO standard for user-centered design, this specification will understand and Telefon: specify the context of use, specify the user and organizational 018 – 471 30 03 requirements, and produce design solutions that are evaluated against Telefax: the requirements. 018 – 471 30 00 Hemsida: http://www.teknat.uu.se/student Handledare: Lars Oestreicher Ämnesgranskare: Lars Oestreicher Examinator: Anders Jansson IT 11 057 Tryckt av: Reprocentralen ITC ! Table of Contents 1! Introduction ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • An Analytics Platform for Everyone: Flexibility, Scalability, Usability
    An Analytics Platform for Everyone: Flexibility, Scalability, Usability ALLIANCE Comprehensive analytics and reporting capabilities of WebFOCUS from Information Builders, running on the robust and scalable Teradata® Database redefines self- Information Builders and Teradata service analytics by helping organizations use BI more The Need strategically across the enterprise. BI and analytics are needed more than ever to help The value of BI is best measured by how widely it can organizations succeed and thrive in ever more competi- impact decision making across the enterprise and beyond. tive landscapes. This means extending access to BI and WebFOCUS on Teradata Database answers this need, analytics throughout the enterprise. delivering rich, consumable, interactive information to the widest range of employees, managers, analysts, The Solution partners, and customers. All of this can be done in real- WebFOCUS by Information Builders, running on time, while importing data from a spectrum of disparate Teradata ® Database, provides the industry-leading sources—structured and unstructured data, and present- BI and analytics platform. WebFOCUS dashboards, ing results in award-winning user-friendly dashboards and scorecards, and other features provide self-service, other rich formats. real-time solutions to maximize the benefits of BI and analytics across the organization. The Challenge of Pulling Insights The Benefits from Data • Comprehensive solution serves as a complete BI and analytics platform. Business intelligence has long been mission critical, yet many organizations, bursting with data, are frustrated by • Real-time analytics. the challenges of integrating disparate data sources to • Ease of use and award-winning UI answer the need harness the information generated by every customer, for self-serve BI and analytics.
    [Show full text]
  • Software Quality Assurance „ Process-Based (Conformance to Requirements) „ Product-Based (You Get What You Pay For) „ Transcendent (Excellence)
    Five Views of Quality Value-based (Engineer to price) User-based (Fitness for purpose) Software Quality Assurance Process-based (Conformance to requirements) Product-based (You get what you pay for) Transcendent (Excellence) M8034 @ Peter Lo 2006 1 M8034 @ Peter Lo 2006 2 Software Quality Definition The Definition Emphasize Conformance to explicitly stated functional and Software requirements are the foundation from which performance requirements, explicitly documented quality is measured. Lack of conformance to development standards, and implicit requirements is lack of quality. characteristics that are expected of all Specified standards define a set of development criteria that guide the manner in which software is engineered. If professionally developed software. the criteria are not followed, lack of quality will almost surely result. There is a set of implicit requirements that often goes unmentioned. If software conforms to its explicit requirements, but fails to meet implicit requirements, software quality is suspect. M8034 @ Peter Lo 2006 3 M8034 @ Peter Lo 2006 4 How Important Software Quality? Software Quality Factors It is important to have the understanding that the It can be categorized in two groups: software quality work begins before the testing Factors that can be Directly Measured (e.g. phase and continues after the software is delivered. errors; KLOC; unit-time) Factors that can be Measured only Indirectly (e.g. usability or maintainability) Or, it can be categorized into: Internal – Attributes which can be measured or observed in isolation. External – Attributes which can only be observed in relation to external environment. M8034 @ Peter Lo 2006 5 M8034 @ Peter Lo 2006 6 McCall’s Triangle of Quality McCall’s Triangle of Quality McCall’s quality factors were proposed in the PRODUCT REVISION PRODUCT TRANSITION early 1970s.
    [Show full text]
  • Usability Issues in Software Development Lifecycle
    Volume 3, Issue 8, August 2013 ISSN: 2277 128X International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering Research Paper Available online at: www.ijarcsse.com Usability Issues in Software Development Lifecycle R.Madhavan* Dr.K.Alagarsamy Department Of CSE, Computer Centre Joesuresh Engineering College, Tamilnadu, India Maduraikamaraj University, Tamilnadu, India Abstract: Usability is one of the key quality attributes in software development. It is a factor present in almost all software quality assurance models. There is a close analogy between the terms usability and quality. Usability is an important quality factor for interactive software systems. The usability attributes which contribute to quality of use will include the style and properties of the user interface, the dialogue structure, and the nature of the functionality. The aim of this paper is to improve software quality by finding ways to integrate usability with software quality measurements throughout the life cycle. Keywords: User requirements, design, software architecture, SDLC, software quality. I. Introduction Usability is the extent to which specific users can use a product to their satisfaction in order to effectively and efficiently achieve specific goals in a specific context of use. A number of studies have pointed out a wide range of benefits stemming from usability: it improves productivity and raises team morale, reduces training and documentation costs, improves user productivity, increases e-commerce potential, etc. Additionally, and contrary to what one might think, the cost/benefit ratio of usability is highly worthwhile. Some authors have state that every dollar spent on usability offers a return of $30.25. There are also studies for e-commerce sites that show that a 5% improvement in usability could increase revenues by 10% to 35%.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Principles Usability Evaluation the Design of Everyday Things
    The design of everyday things (Norman, 1990) Design principles The ordinary objects reflect the problems of user Usability interface design ! Door handles Evaluation ! Washing machines ! Telephones ! etc. Introduces the notion of affordance, metaphores, and conceptual models Provides design rules Conceptual model vs. mental model Metaphor Transfer of a relationship between a set of objects to another set of objects in a different domain conceptual mental model model formal informal structured incomplete logical sometimes erroneous image folders of the system electronic desktop designer user office/desktop Affordances Affordances Quality of an object, which allows a user to perform an action The form, the size, the view of the object suggest what we can do with it « Much of everyday knowledge resides in the world, not in the head » (Norman, 1988) Affordances Affordances Button for pressing Dials for turning but action unknown Sliders for These sliding buttons? Affordances Perceived Affordances in this UI? The concept of affordance was first introduced by psychologist James J. Gibson in 1977. Gibson’s affordances are independent of the individual’s ability to recognize them. They depend on their physical capabilities. Norman’s affordances also depend on the individual’s perception. Norman explained that he would rather replace his term by the term « perceived affordances ». Constraints Constraints Our mental models of the mechanics and physics Are these user interfaces effective? help us predict and simulate the operation of an object Mappings Mappings Example: Find the correspondance between the stove Example: Find the correspondance between the stove burners and the controls burners and the controls ...and now? Example: designing a watch Example: designing a watch Conceptual model? Conceptual model? Affordances? Affordances? Mappings? Mappings? ...and user feedback? Norman’s principles (1990) Usability 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Usability Testing Report
    Usability Testing Report Kate Meizner Kristen Droesch Alex Hagenah Jo Polanco Pratt Institute EXECUTIVE(SUMMARY( 2! INTRODUCTION( 4! METHODOLOGY( 5! USER(TEST(PARTICIPANTS( 7! PARTICIPANT(DATA(SUMMARY( 8! FINDINGS(&(RECOMMENDATIONS( 11! FINDING(1:(USERS(HAD(DIFFICULTY(LOCATING(THE(SEARCH(BAR,(AND(DIDN’T(HAVE(CONFIDENCE(USING(IT.( 11! RECOMMENDATION(1:(INCORPORATE(A(SEARCH(BAR(PROMINENTLY(ON(THE(HOMEPAGE.( 11! FINDING(2:(USERS(WERE(OVERWHELMED(BY(THE(MAGNITUDE(OF(THE(SUBJECT(HEADINGS.( 12! RECOMMENDATION(2:(CONDENSE(SUBJECT(HEADINGS(TO(PROVIDE(USERS(WITH(A(MORE(APPROACHABLE(PLATFORM.( 13! FINDING(3:(NO(STATUS(FEEDBACK(FOR(KEYWORD(SEARCHES( 14! RECOMMENDATION(3A:(ADD(A(STATUS(INDICATOR(TO(THE(SEARCH(BOX.( 14! RECOMMENDATION(3B:(PROVIDE(MULTIPLE(SIGNIFIERS(THAT(SEARCH(RETURNS(ARE(RELEVANT.( 15! FINDING(4:(APPLYING(AND(CLEARING(FILTERS(CONFUSED(USERS.( 16! RECOMMENDATION(4:(PROVIDE(STRONGER(FILTRATION(FEEDBACK(BY(MAKING(SELECTIONS(MORE(PROMINENT(ON(THE( PAGE.(CONSOLIDATE(SIGNIFIERS(THAT(CLEAR(FILTER(SELECTIONS.( 16! FINDING(5:(SPECIFIC(EDITS(TO(THE(CURATED(“FEATURED(COLLECTION”(TEMPLATE(WOULD(BUILD(UPON(POSITIVE( FEEDBACK( 18! RECOMMENDATION(5:(MAKE(FEATURED(COLLECTION(MORE(PROMINENT(AND(HIGHLIGHT(ITS(FEATURES.( 18! CONCLUSION( 20! APPENDICES( 21! APPENDIX(1(–(RECRUITMENT(QUESTIONNAIRE( 21! APPENDIX(2(–(PRELTEST(QUESTIONNAIRE( 23! APPENDIX(3(–(MODERATOR’S(SCRIPT( 25! APPENDIX(4(–(TASK(RESULT(SUMMARY( 28! APPENDIX(5(–(SYSTEM(USABILITY(SCALE((SUS)( 29( APPENDIX(6(–(PRIORITY(VISUALIZATION(SCALE( 30! REFERENCES( 32! 1 Executive Summary This report details a usability study conducted by four Pratt Institute evaluators of the PEN America Archive prototype. Launching in Spring 2017, the site features a dynamic search function allowing users to browse several hundred pieces of archived PEN America audio and video content.
    [Show full text]