Oplægget blev holdt ved InfinIT-arrangementet "Temadag om evaluering af fysiske prototyper og produkter", der blev afholdt den 16. januar 2014.

1. Temadag
om
evaluering
af
fysiske
prototyper
og
produkter
Infinit
Interessegruppen
for
usability
og
Interak8onsdesign
Delta,
onsdag
16/1
2014
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen

2. Program
9.30:
Welcome
/
Infint
and
Delta
9.40:
Brugerinvolvering
og
elektronisk
skitsering
af
nye
produkter
Morten
Wagner,
Delta
10.10:
Challenges
when
doing
usability
tests
on
physical
devices
Lars
Bo
Larsen,
AAU
10.35
Pause
10.50
Usability
of
Medical
Devices
–
Possibili8es
and
Challenges
when
designing
and
tes8ng
physical
products
Morten
Purup,
Radiometer
Medical
Aps
11.20
Exploratory
user
research
with
people
that
use
drug
delivery
devices
Chris
Monnier
og
Peter
Urban
Novo
Nordisk
12.00
Plenary
Discussion
12.30
–
13.
Lunch
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
16/01/14 p. 2

3. Challenges
when
doing
usability
tests
on
physical
devices
Outline:
• Are
there
specific
methods
for
usability
tes8ng
for
physical
devices?
• What
are
the
challenges
when
tes8ng
on
physical
products?
• Examples
from
mobile
devices
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
16/01/14 p. 3

4. Methods?
Looking
at
user
tes8ng
methods
in
textbooks,
ar8cles,
etc.
reveals
that:
While
physical
devices/products
are
oXen
men8oned:
• No
usability
theories
or
methods
are
specifically
targeted
physical
devices
• Ie.
“the
usual”
methods
applies
to
physical
products
(which
also
makes
sense)
The
conclusion
must
therefore
be
that
the
challenges
are
opera8onal,
rather
than
methodical:
•
Logis8cs,
costs,
lab
vs.
field,
mockups,
test
plan
and
tasks,
etc.
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
16/01/14
p. 4

5. Usability
-­‐
ISO
9241
defini8on
The
effec,veness,
efficiency
and
sa,sfac,on
with
which
specified
users
achieve
specified
goals
in
par8cular
environments.
• effec,veness:
the
accuracy
and
completeness
with
which
specified
users
can
achieve
specified
goals
in
par8cular
environments
• efficiency:
the
resources
expended
in
rela8on
to
the
accuracy
and
completeness
of
goals
achieved
• sa,sfac,on:
the
comfort
and
acceptability
of
the
work
system
to
its
users
and
other
people
affected
by
its
use
-­‐
universal
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
16/01/14 p. 5

6. JUS
Survey
uxpa.org
A
survey
of
UXPA’s
Journal
of
Usability
Studies
for
the
past
8
years
(130
ar8cles)
years
showed:
While
about
10-­‐15%
of
the
papers
present
methodical
approaches:
• Not
one
single
paper
addressed
tes8ng
of
physical
products
as
the
main
methodical
focus
•
•
Very
few
papers
(<5)
present
and
discuss
tests
of
physical
products,
(e.g.
“vo8ng
machines”)
-­‐
however
not
from
a
methodological
point
of
view
A
higher
propor8on
discussed
mobile
or
medical
devices,
but
mostly
as
concrete
studies,
not
methods
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
16/01/14 p. 6

7. Challenges
Physical
products
–
contrary
to
soXware
products,
web,
etc
–
typically
require
much
more
handling:
•
•
•
•
•
Difficult
and
expensive
to
distribute
for
field
tes8ng
and
may
en8rely
prohibit
remote
tes8ng
Can
pose
problems
for
recording
usability
performance
parameters
Prototypes
can
be
quite
expensive
and
8me
consuming
to
produce
and
might
only
exist
in
very
few
(one)
instances
–
contrary
to
e.g.
wireframing
Test
users
oXen
need
the
whole
device
-­‐
oXen
not
possible
to
separate
the
physical
appearance
from
e.g.
soXware
driven
interac8on
(displays,
etc)
SW
and
HW
might
not
become
available
for
tes8ng
at
the
same
8me
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
16/01/14 p. 7

8. Challenges
-­‐
prototyping
Building
Mockups
for
tes8ng:
• Lo-­‐Fi
-­‐
Very
oXen
done,
not
really
a
big
problem:
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
16/01/14 p.8

9. Mockups
Solu8ons?
• Combining
real
device
with
simulated
interac8on
Good solution, but only
goes so far – and for
some types of products
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
16/01/14 p. 9

10. Challenges:
Test
design
Experimental
designs
become
more
complicated
when
both
the
hw
and
sw
designs
are
subjected
to
usability
tests
simultaneously:
• More
variables
to
keep
track
of
and
decorrelate
• Solu8on
would
typically
be
to
test
separately
as
far
as
possible,
but
at
some
point
everything
must
come
together
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
16/01/14

11. cent grip study, CAD models of the estimated based on grip style, fingers’ contact points and
modelization still encounters some practical difficulties [3],
erated, investigating user’s proximity relative anthropometric properties. A proper categorization
[4].
have
The simulation results show that the Though some standardization bodies of two already ways of
procedure led to the identification
main
proposed some preliminary hand phantoms, they utilize a
ribution in determining the total loss holding mobiles while talking, naming them “firm” and “soft”
hand
ntom torso alone. The palm-handset grip that is not supported by grip studies [3]. Thanks to a
grip styles [5] it was possible to generate more
recent contributionrespectively. In the “firm” grip style the fingers are
th absorption and mismatch loss.
detailed placed models. the handset so of this work is intermediate
hand around The objective that while the to
phalanges FDTD side, the distal ones reach its front
investigate throughtouch its (Finite Difference Time Domain) region,
proximity factors, body loss, efficiency,
with a user’s proximity effects for talk does in
simulations thecorresponding palm-handset gap thatmode not exceed
the length of the on both absorption and In the “soft” grip
mobile phones, focusing longest proximal phalanx.mismatch
NTRODUCTION
loss andstyle the hand holds the handset onlyuser’sthe distal phalanges,
isolating the contribution of both with torso and
creating an air gap between the palm andof the palm- that does
the handset
hand
e used in close proximity with the to the total loss. Moreover the influence
Fig. 1. Test room [5].
handset not exceed the length of the thumb.
s in a detrimental effect in its gap will be investigated too. This paper is structured
as a
ces [1]. While it was shown thatfollows: Section II describes the grip study and its main
results.
morphic Mannequin) phantom can Section III illustrates the used procedure to generate
orso in average sense [2], the proper hand phantoms. In Section IV all the FDTD
hand
simulations are presented. Section V finally summarizes our
ters some practical difficulties [3],
conclusions.
dardization bodies have already
ry hand phantoms, they utilize a
II. GRIP STUDY DESCRIPTION
rted by grip studies [3]. Thanks to a
A
t was possible to generate morerecent contribution within the COST Action 2100 [5]
reports a first grip study for talk and data modes in mobile
The objective of this work is to
phones,
D (Finite Difference Time Domain) where a rigorous investigation methodology was used
over
roximity effects for talk mode in a sample population of 100 subjects; thanks to an
unobtrusive data acquisition system (figures 1, 2) and a proper
on both absorption and mismatch
ntribution of both user’s torsoinvestigation protocol most of the experimental biases were
and
minimized, allowing the collection of stable and
oreover the influence of the palmcomprehensive statistics. The Fig. 1. Test room [5]. location was
index finger’s
tigated too. This paper is structured
confirmed to be in the back region of the handset in most
scribes the grip study and its main
Fig. 2: Example of videotape screenshot for talk mode (only 12/21 webcams
cases
ates the used procedure to generate (figure 3). The palm-handset distance was indirectly are displayed here) [5].
In Section IV all the FDTD
Section V finally summarizes our
STUDY DESCRIPTION
Challenges
–
data
recording
Grip study of mobile phones at AAU labs
• Data capture using 21 webcams
• 100 test persons. Tasks were texting, making and answering calls
From: “User's proximity effects in mobile phones”
within the COST Action by: Mauro Pelosi, Gert F. Pedersen et al. 3rd European Conference on Antennas and Propagation, 2009
2100 [5]
for talk and data modes in mobile
nvestigation methodology was used
16/01/14 p. 11
n of 100 subjects; thanks to an
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
1022
on system (figures 1, 2) and a proper
st of the experimental biases were
he collection of stable and

12. Summing
up
Usability
tes8ng
of
physical
products
does
not
really
call
for
specific
theore8c
or
methodical
approaches
and
has
not
drawn
much
special
alen8on
in
the
community
However,
there
are
many
prac8cal
problems
not
present
with
pure
sw
products:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Logis8cs
Mockups
Data
recording
Costs
Complexity
…..
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
16/01/14 p. 12

13. Plenary
Discussion
• Are
you
going
to
do
a
usability
test
on
a
physical
product
–
what
problems
are
you
facing?
• From
your
experiences,
can
you
recommend
solu8ons,
tools
etc
for
some
of
the
challenges
you’ve
met?
Infinit Workshop - Lars Bo Larsen
16/01/14
13