1 design, prototyping, and evaluation in developing countries jen mankoff, assistant professor eecs
TRANSCRIPT
1
Design, Prototyping, and Design, Prototyping, and Evaluation in Developing Evaluation in Developing
Countries Countries
Jen Mankoff,
Assistant Professor
EECS
2
What is human computer interaction about?
Creating applications that provide needed services to clients in acceptable ways
Supporting specific goals– Efficiency– Fun– …
A design process that leads to successful adoption of designs
3
What is human computer interaction about?
Understanding interaction of – Tasks– Customers– Technology– Environment
Techniques forcycle of– Design– Prototyping– Evaluation
Tasks
Customers Technology
Envi
ronm
ent
4
Case Study: Computers for Rural Healthcare
Handheld support for rural healthcare providers Tasks supported
– Rapid access to medical records– Addition of a new case– Specific modules for pregnant women, young
children, etc. Employed a user-centered methodology (includes
customers/technology/Tasks/environment and iterative design)
5
–Norman–Value Sensitive(informed by rural health example)
6
Design: Norman paper
Even designing for engineers from MIT is difficult to get right
Solution: Use a discoverable conceptual model– Familiar affordances – Visibility of functionality– Natural mappings– Include feedback– Avoid creeping featurism
Solution: Need to iterate on designs (6-8 times!)
7
What does Norman’s model leave out?
Differing context of developing countries– We don’t necessarily know what’s familiar– Conceptual Models may be different
• Affordances differ
• Natural mappings differ
• Other thoughts?….
– Iteration even more key
Differing values in developing countries
8
Value Sensitive Design
Values “depend on the interests and desires of humans within a cultural milieu”
Explicitly considers both direct and indirect stakeholders (important for adoption)
Tripartite methodology -- shared with usability– Conceptual investigations– Empirical investigations– Technological investigations
… all support design
9
10
Prototyping
Rapid prototyping is crucial Goal of prototyping is to support further
evaluation and design (iteration)
11
Prototyping Techniques
Paper Prototyping Build it Wizard of Oz
None are perfect -- research lies in creating tools & techniques that will support rapid development and evaluation
12
Paper Prototyping
Sketch it out on paper– Fast, simple, effective– Simulate “computer”, get feedback about real use
Problems– Only really effective in well-constrained environments– Limited to desktop-like applications
13
Build it
“sketch” it out on a computer– Existing prototyping tools & UI builders – Easy to create familiar look and feel
Problems– Existing tools limited to the desktop
• Lack support for small, mobile devices• Lack support for variety of input and output
– Familiar look and feel limited to our culture
14
Wizard of Oz
Fake it– Only “prototype” the surface– Use a human “behind the curtain” to fake the rest– Particularly good for recognition
Problems– Easiest to do in a constrained environment– How does one “fake” rapid sensor input, etc?– Wizard must understand dialect, culture, etc.
15
–Conceptual–Empirical–Technological(informed by rural health example)
16
Many Different Evaluation Technqies
Different strengths and weaknesses Appropriate at different stages of iteration Samples presented today categorized under
tripartite methodology– Conceptual investigations– Empirical investigations– Technological investigations
17
Conceptual Investigations
Usability: Task analysis: – What task?– Who are the
stakeholders? – Where will it take place?
(e.g. need for rugged design)
– When will it take place? – Why is it being done?
Values– Value identification; – Stakeholder analysis
(who are they, benefits & harms for each group, connection to values);
– Informed comparison of fundamental issues (are there conflicts, etc)
18
Empirical Investigations
Usability & Values both incorporate– Ethnographic inquiries– Surveys– Interviews
However, the questions asked differ
19
Empirical Investigations: Questions to Ask
Usability– Who/Where/When/What/Why (task analysis)– What is the conceptual model work? – What are appropriate forms of feedback, mappings,
etc? Values
– How are different values prioritized by stakeholders?– How does what is said differ from what is done?– What is the impact of larger structures such as
organizations and governments on what is possible?
20
Technical Investigations
Usability & Values both incorporate:– Toolkits supporting good practice– “Probes” (technology, culture, value,…)– Experiments with prototypes– Field studies
Again, the questions asked differ
21
Technical Investigations: Questions to Ask
Usability– Does a system meet specific goals (such as usability,
learnability, fun, etc)– Does the conceptual model work?
Values– Does a given technology allow values to be expressed
in certain ways? – Does a given technology imply values or impose values
that were not the designer’s intent?– What benefits and harms does a technology imply?
How does this map onto corresponding values?
22
As it happens…
Major research goal for me is developing tools and techniques for evaluation– Ubiquitous computing (mobile devices,
unconstrained environments)– Universal access (disability, literacy, etc)
Applications in developing countries are a perfect testbed for these ideas
23
Contributions to date
Tools & Techniques for simulating different user experiences– Motor impairments– Visual impairments (relates to literacy)
Technique for handling different values (modified heuristic evaluation)
Comparison of field & lab techniques for dealing with a subset of ubicomp applications
24
Plans for the future
Tool for supporting combination of paper prototyping & Wizard of Oz in unconstrained, mobile applications
Modifications to Ubicomp prototyping tools specific to supporting different evaluation techniques
Additional modifications to evaluation techniques