2. ● < 프리스타일 풋볼 > 은 포지션별로 전 후반에 따라 플레이 패턴이 변한다 . ● 1 차 TEST 결과 ● 수비수는 전반전에 특별히 공격 포인트에 대한 소극적인 플레이을 보였으나 후반으로 갈수록 도움과 중거리슛의 공격에 있어 큰 폭의 증가가 있어 공격에 적극적인 플레이 유형으로 변하는 패턴을 볼 수 있었다 .
3. ● 2 차 TEST 수비수 포지션에서는 왜 저런 현상이 나타나는가 ? 수비수 시간별 플레이 유형을 심층적으로 분석하기 위해 모니터링 필요
4. Lynn Leitte, User Experience Designer/Information Architect J. Boye Conference , Philadelphia, PA May 3-5, 2011 ● 2 차 TEST 설계 3) 플레이 동영상 녹화 4) 동영상 파일 제출 5) 플레이 후 설문조사 2) 프리스타일 풋볼 5 판 플레이 1) 플레이 전 설문조사
5. ● 2 차 TEST 통제 1) 각 팀의 수비수는 1 명씩 2) 실험자는 수비수 플레이 불가 3) [email_address] 으로 제출
Cognitive model (Norman 1988) 1. Execution – enter the results in the search. Cognitive process is “gulf of execution” what you did compared with goal 2. Evaluation – evaluates results. Cognitive process is “gulf of evaluation” is comparison of results with what was expected Standard model (Salton 1989) 1. Identify information need 2. Query specification 3. Examination of retrieval results 4. Reformulation of query, if needed. Quite a bit written about this one throughout the 90s. Important work on it by Marchionini and White in 2006 In 1991 Khulthari expanded the model into “stages” that are the pattern of behavior for information seeking over extended periods of time and for complex information seeking tasks. This extension also included emotional states. Berry Picking (Bates 1989) Usually gets thought of as iterative searching and selective choosing of results items. Gets a fair amount of citing in UX circles, but I don’t think with much understanding of the 3 most important contributions of this model. 1. Reading and learning from the results will cause the information need and the queries to shift 2. Needs are not met by a single, final retrieved set of documents but rather by a series of selections and bits of information along the way. 3. Search results for a goal tend to trigger new goals. Pearl Growing is a phrase coined to describe the shifting queries of the berry picking model. Users will take terms that they’ve learned via searching and use them as additional query terms. Anchoring bias (Hertzum and Frokjaer 1996) aka thrashing (Russell 2006) When the user “hangs onto” their initial keyword query making only small changes even if the term isn’t brining good results. i.e. “trucking” “truck engine” “diesel truck” rather than switch to “semi-tractor” or “lorry” or “cab chassis” Pogo Sticking. Users are frequently bouncing back and forth between results list and individual results. Some of this is normal. Lots of it, and very quickly, indicates a problem with your UI and/or algorithms or the expectation setting that your experience creates about your data. Principle of least effort: A user will tend to use the most convenient search means; they’ll stop searching as soon as minimally acceptable results are found. The user will use the tools that are most familiar and easy to use that find results. This theory holds true regardless of the user's proficiency as a searcher, or their level of subject expertise. Also this theory takes into account the user’s previous information seeking experience. The principle of least effort is analogous to the path of least resistance.
Donald O. Case defined information need as the following: Great, so what does that mean in User Experience parlance?
