• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Human(e) machine interaction? A reflection on the development of products

Human(e) machine interaction? A reflection on the development of products






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Human(e) machine interaction? A reflection on the development of products Human(e) machine interaction? A reflection on the development of products Document Transcript

    • Human(e) machine interaction?A reflection on thedevelopment of productsLucienne BlessingEngineering Design and MethodologyUniversity of Luxembourg21 avril 2009Product development is all about prediction A process, that starts with and idea or need and ends with a complete product description, thinking ahead into all life phases. Recycling/ Recycling Planning Development Testing Production Use Disposal Truly new things only come into existence in the product development process: what no one has seen, known or thought of, because it did not exist, is generated here, through mental effort, for the first time. Leyer
    • View on product developers „conservative and insufficiently concerned about the environment, disconnected from community and social impact of their decisions“ product-oriented user developmentProduct development and user Recycling/ Recycling Planning Development Testing Production Use DisposalUp till now  Taking the user into account: market prediction analysis of user needs prediction, needs, no concrete guidelines on how to do this  User orientation: many methods and guidelines for dealing with user requirements and for usability testing  Change from seller to buyer market: competitiveness increasingly based on product quality as perceived by the user users are becoming more user, active and demanding . Importance has been identified, but is user-centred sufficient?
    • What are the problems? t Recycling/ Recycling Planning g Development p Testing g Production Use Disposal Di lTime and collaboration gap  Time between needs analysis, testing and use can be large  Transformation from the voice of the customer into technical requirements is not effective.  Usability tests expensive, relatively late and not always sufficiently informative. informativeKnowledge and understanding gap  Designer tries to empathise and to understand, but is hardly in contact with the user and/or is not a user his or herself Knowledge and understanding of users Focus mainly on primary users, less on  Secondary users: additional users, involved during the product‘s life  Tertiary users: persons that are influenced by the product, unintentionally, now or in the future  Other stakeholders: all people having an interest in the product within or product, outside the company Diversity of users is not considered:  Knowledge and experience  Physical ability y y  Culture  Age  Gender Information is lacking
    • AgeSpecial devices for the elderly?  Danger of “over-accommodation” g  Parallel technology, increasing dependence on the product  Low acceptance by elderly people (S h h 2005) L t b ld l l (Schuh  Often inflexible  Often deficit oriented deficit-orientedGender: seat belt clip
    • Information determines solutionDynamic ConceptAdaptive to  the user (user models): p ( ) passive or active, within one modality or , y through different modalities  different users, i.e. user perspectives:  allow f i ll for increasing competence or maintaining competence i t i t i i t  context  intention Dynamic user models, adaptive customised interfaces, raising issues of acceptance (and product liability) Do we know our users well enough?
    • Everyday technologyChallenges regarding user, process and context  Users difficult to define (large variety)  No control over operation  No control over context  User oft customer (functionality is not the only argument)  Strongly increased functionality (no simple products)  Product use often assumes some experience  User not or hardly trained ( Manual? What manual?“) („Manual? manual? )  Product understanding might be limited  Safety risks caused by wrong operation or panik reactions Basic design principles: simplicity, clarity and safetyUsability aims:EN ISO 9241-11 Ergonomic requirements f office work with SO for ffvisual display terminals (VDTs) - Part 11: Guidance on usability  Effectiveness Relates to the goals ( sub-goals) of the user to the accuracy and g (or g ) y completeness with which the goals can be achieved.  Efficiency Efficiency relates the level of effectiveness to the expenditure of resources.  Satisfaction Satisfaction relates to the lack of discomfort experienced and to the extent of users’ attitudes towards the use of the product users
    • Dialogue principlesErgonomics of human-system interaction –EN ISO 9241-11 Part 110: Dialogue principles(term “software” replaced by “product”) 1. 1 A product is for solving tasks 2. A product must speak the language of users 3. Users should be in control of the product p 4. The product should present familiar things in a familiar manner 5. Users have a right to err 6. Users are different 7. A product should qualifyUsability and IntuitivenessEveryone wants to have„intuitive“ User Interfaces.No-one knows exactlywhat it means.Everyone has them.
    • Intuitive interface?„Intuitive interface designedto make searching fast andeasy“http://www.hurricanesoft.com/hsearch.jspDesign for Intuitivity„Intuitive interface allows end users touse without help“http://www.desktopdarkroom.com/upcr10l.html Intuitive use the extent to which a product can be used by subconsciously applying prior knowledge, resulting in an effective and satisfying interaction using a minimum of cognitive resources. Hurtienne
    • Intuitiveness and image schemata BAD GOOD GOOD BAD HurtienneNon-intuitive Interaction Interaction Problem System User Task Content Problem
    • Intuitive Interaction System User A fit between user, task and system that enables users to fulfill their tasks effectively, efficiently and to y their satisfaction Task Content ProblemWhat about satisfaction?Survey of 1255 British PC Users PC-Users  almost a quarter of respondents said they had to disrupt their work at least once a day because of a computer problem  half of them complaint about time loss because of crashes and system errors  two fifth criticised computer jargon in manuals and help texts  Users frequently reacted with „swearing, hitti or pulling th plug t i hitting lli the l to intractable information technology“ at the work place Knauer (2000) K (2000):
    • What is satisfaction?Who is satisfied?„And thanks to theelectronic surveillancewe only need a homehelper every half yearto adjust the generator“ generator
    • Is that all there is?Usability  takes into account effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction in a specified context of use. ISO 9241 part 11  in line with a user-centred design approach  in practice heavily focused on task fulfillment and objective practice, performance data emotional involvement of the user has to be taken into account.User experience  takes into account non-instrumental qualities of a system q y  and its emotional responses by the userConceptual User Experience Lifecycle ModelContinUE [continuous user experience] model, illustrating thesequential phases of a user experience lifecycle and theassociated aspects of appraisal forming appraisal-forming Pohlmeyer, Hecht, Blessing, 2009
    • New ISO standard on user experience User experience incorporates  “all aspects of the user’s experience when interacting with the product, service, environment or f ili I i a consequence of the presentation, i i facility. It is f h i functionality, system performance, interactive behaviour, and assistive capabilities of the interactive system. It includes all aspects of usability and d i bilit of a product, system or service from the user’s d desirability f d t t i f th ’ perspective’. ISO CD 9241-210 Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 210: Human-centred design process for interactive systems. ISO, 2008 “Designing satisfying products and motivating potential users to interact with them is something different than the mere attempt to avoid a dissatisfying solution. Thi i already k di ti f i l ti This is l d known f from ergonomics where i h discomforting features are generally independent from comforting features.” Pohlmeyer, Hecht, Blessing, Pohlmeyer Hecht Blessing 2009Emotional design ?usability f t bilit factors determine whether a device can b used d t i h th d i be demotional factors determine whether a device will be used adapted from Forlizzi et al., 2001“Emotions must be generated by a product itself, not simply tackedon through advertising. People are willing to pay more for productswith emotionally rich features.” Boatwright and Cagan, 2010
    • User involvement UserUser-centred design:  No direct communication between user and product developer  User involvement only during phases of Marketing on market analysis and prototyping Evaluatio  Already shaped product limits user imagination  E User i not i U is t involved i solution fi di l d in l ti finding Product P d t process Developer ProductUser integration Recycling/ Recycling Planning Development Testing Production Use Disposal A systematic procedure for integration of all users throughout the development process is necessary „User were more often involved and invested more resources in the development of successful products, than of products that did not lead to market success.“
    • In summary  User centred design is necessary but not sufficient  User diversity and user experiences have to be taken into account  Intuitiveness is key to usability and safety  User integration is required to provide the necessary information g q p y Considerable research and development of methods is necessary.But until then …… from: www. Dilbert.com