Book postings

Some notes and points taken from the book ‘Making Use: scenario based design of Human Computer Interactions’ Some points picked up more as linked into the interviews with several scientists that have conducted this week as observed several scenarios of use of the lab book which have been insightful, but have found several useful points from chapter 2 of book, which captures some useful points on design.

- Design problems never completely satisfy their starting conditions, a critical step in design is identifying the relevant description of the current situation in the world that is to be altered by the design work. Problems can be caused by the design description of the current situation of the world that drives the design reasoning, can be incomplete, inaccurate or irrelevant.

- A second characteristic of design problems is the possible move that designers can take in reasoning from a description of the current situation, a need to be able to understand what steps are possible, relevant, and productive none is given in a design problem.

- A third difficulty is design problems will no specify the goal or solution state, the initial understanding of the problem does not specify precisely how to provide the solution of better access for example. When the solution state is specified the design work is complete.

These initial 3 problems are captured in the work by Walter Reiteman (1965) cognition and thought: (Follow up note to pick up this book and read though, as the work is described to take concern in contrasting design problems with puzzle problems studies in academic psychology, which might be a different useful perspective however it is mentioned that the approach may mask several design properties particularly important in the design of new technologies.)

- A fourth design problem characteristic is the trade off of problems among many different elements, each of which may constrain resources and the design for the other, must be able to decide the priority when conflicts arise.

- A fifth property of design problems is the requirement of a diversity of skills and knowledge, it is in this that bringing together various experts of their fields that the design problem can be clarified and a solution proposed. Again trades offs among the design elements and the need to marshal diverse knowledge and skills(is this a knowledge management issue ?) could be surely be important factors in the design.

- The sixth characteristic of a design problem is the impact which the design has on people, a design problem leads to the transformations and so alters human activity and experiences often in ways that transcend the boundaries of original design reasoning

Some points also from the book ‘The inmates are running the asylum’ by Alan Cooper.

- Concept of the dancing bear – taken from pg 27

Scenario of a man which leads on a dancing bear in front of the towns people, considered a wonderful sight as the bear shuffles around and so in reality is a terrible dancer, but it is the wonder that the bear dances at all.

This is problem of the interaction with the technology, people are prepared to put up with technology that is able to work at all, interaction problems are accepted in order to gain some benefit. The difficulty of devising a better interaction isn’t what makes the so intractable, it is instead our/my universal willingness to accept bad interaction as an unavoidable cost.

It is this judgement on cognitive friction is avoidable and that the cognitive friction does not come from technology it comes from the controllers of technology.

When the interaction and interface is expressed more in terms of implementation products are designed more in accordance with an ‘implementation model’, this is not a positive direction as it is effectively away from the human user.

- Notes on goal directed design taken from pg 149

I had wanted to get this down as would see it possible linking to the initial 3 characteristic problems of design as mentioned above,

Before the digital age design was in principle an aesthetic thing based on views of quality, with the digital age cognitive friction comes with the interaction and the interaction is necessary as there is a goal. It is based on this light that the nature of design evolves for the reason that the design must be able to meet user goals in addition to understanding the aesthetic component.

This has lead to the quality of design being able to be measure more based on the ability to achieve user goals.

Good interaction design has meaning only in the context of a person actually using it for some purpose.

- You cannot have purpose without people

The two are inseparable these two element are the basis of the design process of personas and goals - people and purposes.

The essence of good interaction design is to devise interactions that let users achieve their practical goals without violating their personal goals.

Personal goals – don’t feel stupid, no mistakes, efficient in working, enjoyable to use.

Corporate goals – these are organisational based goals, can questioned/ developed for lab environment , based on initial interviews is to produce research papers and obtain research grants

Practical Goals – bridge gap between corporate and personal goals again can questioned/ developed for lab environment

False goals – false goals are essential tasks they are a means to an end but not the end of the process, examples are save memory, easy to learn, increase graphic beauty

A note on goals and tasks:

– A goal is the end result.

– A task is a step which is taken to get to get to the goal.

In summary too be able to come back and continually reflect of the nature of the issues raised by both of these authors could help provide some useful insight.

Note quotes left out as large extracts taken from both books used page numbers as reference.