interacting with paperbill buxton | 2007

interacting with paperbill buxton | 2007

outlineexample: scoping out tektronix

interactive paper interfaces

back to our agenda

keeping cool - a home climate controller

appearances can be deceiving

example: scoping out tektronix• testing the keypad design

• usage of a paper interface to point out the problems

• emphasis on the strenght of such testing

• a static paper interface

interactive paper interfaces• there are two types of paper interfaces: static & dynamic

• dynamic paper interfaces respond to the interaction of the user, with the help of someone

back to our agenda• in dynamic interfaces, literacy and representations are the most important tools to convey the sense of interface.

• and, this method can be enhanced with respect to speed, by taking it to an electronic environment (like a flash media)

• distinguishing the real cursor, and the implemented representation of the tested intereface’s cursor, is important

• to emphasize that the design is unfinished, sketches are used.

back to our agenda• yet, creating a rather interactive prototype is the next step after trying out the interface concept on paper-based prototypes.

• as it lets us get interactive much sooner, much faster, much cheaper

keeping cool – a home climate controller• maryam’s paper prototype of a home climate controller

• used different techniques to create an dynamic interactive paper prototype: changing whole layout, changing overlays, removing and re-pasting tapes, erasing and re-drawing on acetate paper.

• there is a necessity for a facilitator who will create the interactive responses

keeping cool – a home climate controller• maryam’s paper prototype of a home climate controller

• used different techniques to create an dynamic interactive paper prototype: changing whole layout, changing overlays, removing and re-pasting tapes, erasing and re-drawing on acetate paper.

• there is a necessity for a facilitator who will create the interactive responses

changing layout

replacing tapes

changing overlays

re-drawing indicators

keeping cool – a home climate controller• with regards to the mecahnics of manipulating a paper interface.

1. to quickly explore a concept, designer might be both the user and the facilitator

2. to have a quick insight, designer can play the role of the facilitator with a representative from the target group

3. for usability testing, design is tested with multiple users, to find errors and such. The aim is not to find the right design, rather it is to right an agreed upon design. Thus, the design cannot be changed from user to user.

for the usability test, a team is necessary, consisting of a facilitator, a computer, a videographer and an observer, at least.

appearances can be deceiving• sketches are not prototypes

• just because something looks like a sketch doesn’t mean that it is a sketch

• sketching, in this sense, is not just what you use, but how, when, where and why you use it.

• Wiklund, Thurrot & Dumas’s usability research on aesthetic refinements of an interface – to figure out the role of appearances in usability testing.

• the result: there is no bias of users, within the range of aesthetic qualities provided.

appearances can be deceiving• their results may be incorrect, as the user only saw one of their variations.

• test subjects psychology: when subjected to only one design, they have absolute judgements. when there are multiple alternatives, they can set a scale for user.

• the difference between usability engineering & design:

usability engineering –

getting the design right

act of design –

getting the right design

appearances can be deceiving• conclusions:

1. designer shouldn’t commit to any design too soon – there is a value in continually exploring various options to any questions

2. using quick, inexpensive techniques is not to save money, but to be able to afford to amke and compare alternative design solutions.

are you talking to me?bill buxton | 2007

are you talking to me?• the hypothesis: as the users are subjected to various alternatives, they may be able to give more creative and constructive suggestions

• the result: although the users became more critical, they didn’t have any constructive suggestions.

• the reason: the users did not have any experience equipped to do so.

• but when asked to draw an interface, the users indeed had original ideas – participatory design

• “sketching is a language that supports a particular form of dialogue – a dialogue that can help all of us bring our ideas one step closer to fruition.” p.394

thanks for your attention