October 2022
Preece, J.; Rogers, Y. & Sharp, H. (2015), Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction , Wiley , Hoboken, NJ .
“the exciting times we are living in, when there has never been a greater need for interaction designers and usability engineers to develop current and next-generation interactive technologies. To be successful they will need a mixed set of skills from psychology, human-computer interaction, web design, computer science, information systems, marketing, entertainment, and business”
“The more people there are with different backgrounds in a design team, the more difficult it can be to communicate and progress forward the designs being generated. Why? People with different backgrounds have different perspectives and ways of seeing and talking about the world” from (1.3.2. Working together as a multidisciplinary team) Although possible, it is unlikely that just one person will be involved in developing and using a system and therefore the plan must be communicated. This requires it to be captured and expressed in some suitable form that allows review, revision, and improvement. When users are involved, capturing and expressing a design in a suitable format is especially important since they are unlikely to understand jargon or specialist notations. ” (Preece, J.; Rogers, Y. & Sharp, H. , 2015)
This is an interesting observation about working with people from different backgrounds. The language and communication used to express a project are aspects that need to be tailored to the product in mind. Before explaining a concept to a team it is necessary to clearly outline what needs to be communicated and the objectives of the product. I believe this will allow a more fluid design process and collaboration. Ii searched some keys for effective communication and I want to highlight the following: Stay on Message. Make It a Two-Way Conversation. You’re Responsible for Any Failure to Communicate. Repetition, Repetition, Repetition.
⬇️
"Interaction design involves designing interactive products. The most sensible way for users to evaluate such designs, then, is to interact with them. This requires an interactive version of the designs to be built, but that does not mean that a software version is required. There are different techniques for achieving "interaction," not all of which require a working piece of software. For example, paper-based prototypes are very quick and cheap to build and are very effective for identifying problems in the early stages of design, and through role-playing users can get a real sense of what it will be like to interact with the product."
This fragment allows me to think about making prototypes of my idea to see how people interact with it before fully making the whole project. It was interesting to see how the book suggests making paper prototypes, or prototypes that don’t require any coding. I shall use this idea in my project. I found this example in another book:
From: Hornecker, E. and Luigina Ciolfi (2019). Human-computer interactions in museums. San Rafael, California: Morgan & Claypool.
Prototyping and user testing go hand in hand in UCD. The initial concept for a painting installation for children was tested in paper form with two participants to determine if the interaction concept was understood. Ten, a half-functional mockup was created and tested by 16 adults. It had a touchscreen inserted, and a facilitator-wizard could remote-control the selection of animals and paint color in response to users’ actions. A second, improved version of this was evaluated with two chil-dren. An interim development prototype used a rear-projection, where the final system had a touch-screen as surface again (Clarke and Hornecker,2012,2015)
“IDEO: Scout Modo, a wireless handheld device delivering up-to-date information about what's going on in a city. “
This is just an anectotal project I researched. Seems to be the predecessor of Google maps. 20 years ago we had to use many different objects but nowadays phones do it all.
“A main reason for having a better understanding of users is that different users have different needs and interactive products need to be designed accordingly”
⬇️
“In interaction design, we investigate the artifact's use and target domain by taking a user-centered approach to development. This means that users' concerns direct the development rather than technical concerns. “
⬇️
This fragment expresses how user interface comes above any technical concerns, meaning that good design comes before achieving all the goals of a product. Because if a product has bad design, people will not use it, therefore rendering any objective useless. it’s better to keep something simple and functional than make something complicated that can’t be used by people. Our goal is to make something that people use.
“Design is also about trade-offs, about balancing conflicting requirements”
These fragments further my last point, Maybe one starts with a very broad and ambitious idea, but the key is how to make this idea a reality that can be used by people. So sometimes it does mean one has to sacrifice some aspects of a design in order to get something working. Once this version is working fully, maybe then add more complicated ideas to it. Get something simple to work completely, then add complexity, not try to make something complex and fail, or sacrifice a fluid UI in order to achieve these complex goals.
“ it also requires the development and evaluation of alternative solutions. Generating alternatives is a key principle in most design disciplines, and one that should be encouraged in interaction design. As Marc Rettig suggested: "To get a good idea, get lots of ideas" (Rettig, 1994). “
This reminds me to use generative design. Coming up with a good idea isn’t about thinking long and hard about ONE idea and bringing it to light out of nothing. Design is about starting with one idea that may be mediocre, but seeing it through to see how it evolves to become something greater. It takes patience and an ability to be humble, to accept that maybe…. just maybe… not everything we come up with is pure gold from the start.
“User-Centred Design (UCD) entails an iterative design process of systems. It does notrely on a “genius” designer (most geniuses actually rely on extensive experience, includingt hat of failed projects, etc.) but follows a principled approach of investigation (so to iden-tify design requirements), idea generation, and testing in order to create systems that are usable, useful, as well as suitable for the context of use.”
Hornecker, E. and Luigina Ciolfi (2019). Human-computer interactions in museums. San Rafael, California: Morgan & Claypool.
This takes me to an important aspect I have found in the process of creating. The ego. The designer, the artist’s ego. Ego many times gets in the way of being able to see flaws in a project. One has to be self aware and self critical to be able to analyze one’s idea with an open mind. A good way to do this is through peer reviews, through asking about people’s opinion on your thoughts and creating an open environment where people feel free to give and receive feedback. This is important because it sometimes can be difficult to see yourself in third person. Without this, I believe projects can lead to bankruptcy and end badly, just because nobody was able to calm their ego and address basic design and logistical flaws evident from the start of a project’s creation.
I speak from my experience being in 4D fine art foundation in CSM. This period of my life led me to make many successful, but also many failed projects. One project was a raspberry pi project. I had never coded before, I had an ambitious idea and failed miserably, heightened by the competitive nature of being in a course that was so hard to get into. Thanks to that experience I decided to join the CCI to learn how to code. I accepted my flaws and searched for help elsewhere to help me reach where I wanted to. So sometimes failures in projects can lead to better paths for the product and even in life in general.