Fig 5 - uploaded by John V. H. Bonner
Content may be subject to copyright.
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... this example the participant has confused a display having an illustrative icon on it with a real control object that could be physically manipulated. Adaptability of the design tools has been identified as an important aspect to improve ownership of the tools and was encouraged. Providing this form of control did, however, have an effect on the procedural understanding of methods adopted thus affecting the reliability of the outcomes. Between the first and second card-sorting exercise, the designers recognised by themselves that the first task-planning activity was too detailed and procedural. The designers had produced cards with prescriptive instructions resembling instructions from a cooking recipe. They also recognised that card depiction was ‘text’ heavy and more graphical images would increase interpretation and improve card recognition. When interviewing the designers after the card-sorting workshops, they appeared to have very clear views about what the participants wanted from a microwave interface. They asserted that the participants were reluctant to use non-tactile control devices, as one designer stated, ‘ that means no more touch screen interfaces ’. The designers concluded that any proposed interface should have no more than three control devices, although this had not been discussed explicitly during the workshops with the participants. The function filtering activity (part of the card=sorting process to ensure that only functions deemed important by the participants are considered first) was thought to be the most productive interaction model in terms of establishing design guidance in the form of user requirements. Although the task plan and function filter were photographed, they were not analysed to produce further types of design data, such as gaining a navigation model from the task map (bottom left hand corner of Fig. 5.5). Only the preferred cards from the function filter (top right hand corner of Fig. 5.5) were retained to form tabs for the scenario design workshops. With the tab board, both designers and participants were more critical in their evaluation, selection and use of the tabs. New tabs were devised if the participants identified an alternative or improved way of achieving a goal. In some situations participants made requests for functions that did not exist on the board. In this situation, the designer and participant would simply draw a new tab that suited their needs. The process of design, build and test could be achieved in a matter of minutes. Usability issues were more comprehensively addressed with the scenario design tool, particularly issues such as consistency and compatibility. Participants did question the usability of control labels and provided more meaningful labelling suggestions; for example, replacing power levels, described in Watts, with a more contextual value such as full and half power. A range of novel concepts was introduced by the designers with the card-sorting tool, such as twin turntables, ready meal scanner, oven management system, univer- sal input controls and menu cards. Most novel concepts were quickly rejected at the card-sorting stage. Some further degree of novelty in interaction styles was introduced in the scenario design, either by participants making requests for functionality that was not provided on the tab board, or by collaborative discussion with designers. Novel suggestions at this stage, however, were through the adaptation of control and display features already provided as tabs rather than the consideration of radically new interaction styles. Early guidance and learning of the design tools came through instruction rather than reading the handbook that was provided. Progressively though, the designers used their own initiative and spontaneously resolved many procedural problems as they occurred. The designers gained confidence in using the tools and adapted the tools to improve their performance with them. Once the first workshop was complete, both designers expressed a clearer understanding of managing and conducting workshops and identified further improvements for the second workshop, for example, they revised the function filter. Initially, both designers expressed concern about the involvement of participants in design decision making. They were wary of suggesting vague design ideas to participants in fear of appearing unprofessional or inexperienced. This concern quickly evaporated once participants and designers became familiar with their roles. The relationship between the designers and participants was more consultative than participative in the card-sorting tool, but this quickly changed to positive active involvement between both groups in scenario design. External support and advice from the researcher was very important to the success and understanding of the design tools, but it was also very evident that the designers progressively gained in confidence and enjoyed using the tools. The designers were positive about the outcomes and thought they had gained useful insights that would not have been gathered oth- erwise. The design manager and senior designer in the group were interviewed to discover how they perceived the efficacy of the design tools, the quality of the design data and interaction models and the quality of the final design solutions through reading the management report. The design manager was extremely encouraged by the adoption of the design tools and felt that they reflected a recently implemented product development philosophy. This process was driven by the organisation’s ‘core values’, including a user-centred approach to product development rather than by historical organisational production methods. The introduction of the design tools was also regarded as timely as the role and skills of the design team was beginning to change by developing more innovative and user-led product proposals. In order that the design tools could gain greater acceptance, approval needed to be sought at a senior management level. The design manager suggested that the design tools would only survive if the final design solutions were sufficiently creative and in line with current product development requirements. If this could be proven, the design tools could then be ‘sold’ outside of the immediate design group. It was important the design tools could be explained and implemented succinctly to other disparate and culturally different design groups within the organisation. This, he thought, could only be done through effective training and not through a handbook, which should only be provided ...
Context 2
... this example the participant has confused a display having an illustrative icon on it with a real control object that could be physically manipulated. Adaptability of the design tools has been identified as an important aspect to improve ownership of the tools and was encouraged. Providing this form of control did, however, have an effect on the procedural understanding of methods adopted thus affecting the reliability of the outcomes. Between the first and second card-sorting exercise, the designers recognised by themselves that the first task-planning activity was too detailed and procedural. The designers had produced cards with prescriptive instructions resembling instructions from a cooking recipe. They also recognised that card depiction was ‘text’ heavy and more graphical images would increase interpretation and improve card recognition. When interviewing the designers after the card-sorting workshops, they appeared to have very clear views about what the participants wanted from a microwave interface. They asserted that the participants were reluctant to use non-tactile control devices, as one designer stated, ‘ that means no more touch screen interfaces ’. The designers concluded that any proposed interface should have no more than three control devices, although this had not been discussed explicitly during the workshops with the participants. The function filtering activity (part of the card=sorting process to ensure that only functions deemed important by the participants are considered first) was thought to be the most productive interaction model in terms of establishing design guidance in the form of user requirements. Although the task plan and function filter were photographed, they were not analysed to produce further types of design data, such as gaining a navigation model from the task map (bottom left hand corner of Fig. 5.5). Only the preferred cards from the function filter (top right hand corner of Fig. 5.5) were retained to form tabs for the scenario design workshops. With the tab board, both designers and participants were more critical in their evaluation, selection and use of the tabs. New tabs were devised if the participants identified an alternative or improved way of achieving a goal. In some situations participants made requests for functions that did not exist on the board. In this situation, the designer and participant would simply draw a new tab that suited their needs. The process of design, build and test could be achieved in a matter of minutes. Usability issues were more comprehensively addressed with the scenario design tool, particularly issues such as consistency and compatibility. Participants did question the usability of control labels and provided more meaningful labelling suggestions; for example, replacing power levels, described in Watts, with a more contextual value such as full and half power. A range of novel concepts was introduced by the designers with the card-sorting tool, such as twin turntables, ready meal scanner, oven management system, univer- sal input controls and menu cards. Most novel concepts were quickly rejected at the card-sorting stage. Some further degree of novelty in interaction styles was introduced in the scenario design, either by participants making requests for functionality that was not provided on the tab board, or by collaborative discussion with designers. Novel suggestions at this stage, however, were through the adaptation of control and display features already provided as tabs rather than the consideration of radically new interaction styles. Early guidance and learning of the design tools came through instruction rather than reading the handbook that was provided. Progressively though, the designers used their own initiative and spontaneously resolved many procedural problems as they occurred. The designers gained confidence in using the tools and adapted the tools to improve their performance with them. Once the first workshop was complete, both designers expressed a clearer understanding of managing and conducting workshops and identified further improvements for the second workshop, for example, they revised the function filter. Initially, both designers expressed concern about the involvement of participants in design decision making. They were wary of suggesting vague design ideas to participants in fear of appearing unprofessional or inexperienced. This concern quickly evaporated once participants and designers became familiar with their roles. The relationship between the designers and participants was more consultative than participative in the card-sorting tool, but this quickly changed to positive active involvement between both groups in scenario design. External support and advice from the researcher was very important to the success and understanding of the design tools, but it was also very evident that the designers progressively gained in confidence and enjoyed using the tools. The designers were positive about the outcomes and thought they had gained useful insights that would not have been gathered oth- erwise. The design manager and senior designer in the group were interviewed to discover how they perceived the efficacy of the design tools, the quality of the design data and interaction models and the quality of the final design solutions through reading the management report. The design manager was extremely encouraged by the adoption of the design tools and felt that they reflected a recently implemented product development philosophy. This process was driven by the organisation’s ‘core values’, including a user-centred approach to product development rather than by historical organisational production methods. The introduction of the design tools was also regarded as timely as the role and skills of the design team was beginning to change by developing more innovative and user-led product proposals. In order that the design tools could gain greater acceptance, approval needed to be sought at a senior management level. The design manager suggested that the design tools would only survive if the final design solutions were sufficiently creative and in line with current product development requirements. If this could be proven, the design tools could then be ‘sold’ outside of the immediate design group. It was important the design tools could be explained and implemented succinctly to other disparate and culturally different design groups within the organisation. This, he thought, could only be done through effective training and not through a handbook, which should only be provided ...
Similar publications
Bodily movements have traditionally had mostly instrumental value in interaction design. However, movements can also be given a central role in understanding behaviour and in designing technology for humans. This workshop is aiming at taking a fresh, movement-oriented look at the design and evaluation of technology in a wide variety of contexts.
O presente trabalho tem como objetivo apresentar uma proposta de interface digital que permita avaliar a proficiência, no Português Europeu (PE), de crianças lusodescendentes na diáspora, e que forneça material informativo sobre a aquisição precoce de línguas de herança. No desenvolvimento deste trabalho foram expostos e discutidos os obstáculos à...
Locating and grasping objects is a critical task in people’s daily lives. For people with visual impairments, this task can be a daily struggle. The support of augmented reality frameworks in smartphones can overcome the limitations of current object detection applications designed for people with visual impairments. We present AIGuide, a self-cont...
Online travel booking has become increasingly popular; however, most travel websites do not yet offer voice interaction. This study introduces VoiceBack, an artificial intelligence (AI)-driven voice-based feedback system conceptualized to support both customers and online travel agencies during the booking process. It proposes a theoretically and e...
Citations
... Because, overall, the usability studies did not present clear 'winners', this led to a sense of unease from the marketing department, who were co-sponsors of this research, about how to develop these proposals further. Despite the local success of the design tools and the willingness of the organisation to fund innovation, the design tools and the innovative solutions created from them ultimately did not fit with manufacturing processes, design procedures or expectations, see (Bonner 2007 ) for a more detailed analysis. Clearly the design tools were successful at the implementation level but their use and outputs created from them created uncertainties in other parts of the organisation. ...
This paper explores the adoption process of user-participative interaction design tools in manufacturing organisations in which they have not historically been used in the development of consumer product interfaces. Three case studies are presented describing the adoption of user-participative design tools at different stages of implementation. The studies reveal an interesting ambivalence towards innovation. There is willingness within design groups to adopt new design tools and motivation to produce novel and innovative products from them. Manufacturers are also willing to sponsor innovative product development methods and products but problems occur at the interface between the design group and other functionally related or dependent groups. The paper concludes by suggesting that a broad contextual frame of inquiry is required, where a deeper organisational understanding of the design and manufacture decision making should form an integral part of interaction design research.
In order to reduce risks and increase the speed of new information technology (IT) product or service development as well as to satisfy customers' demand, end users' involvement has become one of the most important issues. The chapter aims at the presentation of the user role in information system development and the activities of prosumers in e-learning. The first part of the chapter covers literature review referring to studies on end users' involvement in the information system (IS) development process. In the second part of the chapter the opportunities of prosumption development on the Internet are discussed. Particularly, the author focuses on e-learning purposes development and IT-supported communication among e-learners. The third part of the chapter covers a proposal of the architecture model as well as a discussion on methods of information system design for the prosumption development.
Time-frequency (T-F) analysis of signals propagated in dispersive environments or systems is a challenging problem. When considering dispersive waveguides, propagation can be described by modal theory. Propagated signals are usually multicomponent, and the group delay of each mode (i.e., each component) is nonlinear and varies with the mode number. Consequently, existing T-F representations (TFRs) covariant to group delay shifts (GDSs) are not naturally adapted to this context. To overcome this issue, one solution is to approximate the propagation using simple models for which the dispersion properties do not vary with the mode number. If the chosen model is both simple and robust to uncertainties about the waveguide, it can be used to define adapted TFRs, such as the power-class with a suitable power coefficient. This article focuses on a context where this methodology can be applied: low-frequency acoustic propagation in shallow water. In this case, the global oceanic dispersion can be summarized using a single scalar called the waveguide invariant. This parameter can be used to approximate the group delay of each mode with a power law. Consequently, it is possible to use power-class TFRs with a -based power coefficient. Their practical use is demonstrated on two experimental data sets: a man-made implosion used for underwater geoacoustic inversion, and a right-whale impulsive vocalization that can be used to localize the animal.
