Designing for Experience

It wasn’t part of the new facebook, but recently facebook enabled you to group your friends into different lists.  This is a natural part of someone with a growing list of friends that they may want to keep track of.

Now I don’t even have that many people I follow on twitter just 150 (nice round number, shame to have to add more) but still I wouldn’t mind being able to sort them, and in theory I may want to just message some of them about some events, say some local stuff that is happening here in Bloomington.

This is a natural progression and something that users are expecting, but how does one implement this given the complete fragmentation of the user experience given the tremendous number of clients that have sprung up around the great open API that Twitter has supported from Day 1? This presents a very different set of problems than a more closed network.  I suppose though that in the larger scheme of things as featuers are added to the service and API that because of the huge numer of developers and clients that good uses will catch on quickly as they have in the past.

Comments?

It’s true, today is the Usability Challenge 2008.  I have chosen this page:

Higher Education Resources

This is part of an ongoing project I am working on with the Lumina Foundation for education.  This page is a new way of visualizing and finding a large amount of information.

Lumina has amassed a large amount of publications over the last several years that all are related to their mission which is helping people achieve their potential though education.  People who work in this area directly with youth and adults who want to go back to college are called college access professionals, and my hat is off to these hard working people.  Of course there are plenty of researchers who also work in this are, usually in education departments.  I have met many in both groups.  What all these people including Lumina’s staff members rely on is high quality resources like the ones that have been gathered, but how does one search through these?

Instead of search all of the resources have been tagged (with multiple tags for each item, usually including the year of publication).  These tags have been presented in a tag cloud, where larger text means more things with that tag.  The really new thing is that if you click on one item, it shows you how many things are in that tag, and you may keep on clicking on tags to narrow your results.  The total number is shown at the top on view results tab.  When you are ready you can click on that tab and see all the items.  It is a very cool way of browsing, and the reaction of people once they understand how to use it is very positive.  The problem here is that it is a new convention, with very few affordances.  There is a “view demo” but most users don’t see it, and many users often have the volume down on their computer even when the video comes up.

The solution I am proposing for this particular page is a short lightbox popup that shows the user to click on a tag, then a second and then click view results, showing it graphically, textually and then quickly fading to a point on the screen with a question mark on it.  Clicking on the question mark will replay it slower and have the option for sound as well as givign a link for an even lengthier explanation (which would be around the length of the current demo).

It will be important to use cookies so that once a user has successfully clicked on the view results tab the lightboxed pop-up will no longer show, and that the whole strategy be evaluated regularly to see if it can be improved and when people understand it well enough we can eliminate the lightbox, but keep a pulsing question mark or something like that.

I am also emailing the results of this to Lumina so that it can be implemented. Usability Challenge 2008 is in the can.

I am part-way through Bill Buxton’s Sketching User Experience, and I’ve read part of the Experience Economy, and of course my course last year on Experience Design.  Add to that the UK’s Design Council finding that businesses that use design thinking and methods are more successful than their counterparts.  Of course I am totally fascinated by what is happening with NextD, and using design to inquire and innovate.

Certainly F@astCompany and BusinessWeek have both picked up on the idea of design, but I’m surprised that this isn’t more widely talked about.

Now add to the mix some of the papers that have come out of the HCI community of practice about research through design and I start wonder. It seems like design is being used in all kinds of disparate contexts, so disparate I wonder if there is any unifying thread to what is being called design?

I of course turn to Nelson & Stolterman’s The Design Way for answers.  They want the book to explain what design is, to instill design culture and design thinking, and I hope to find at least a preliminary answer to my question in this rereading of the question.

If I can answer more simply what design is in all these contexts, I would like to answer the question that has been riddling me for months now: what is the philosophical basis of design (if indeed it has one)? What can research by design rightly say?

All this come back to my original start point, how does design methodology and thinking really impact business? What is it that moves forward like so many think it does?  I think it has something to do with what design is, and where it comes from theoretically.

I am seriously considering applying for an internship with the well-known (at least in HCI circles) Nielsen/Norman group, I have read much of what both of Nielsen and Norman have to saw about usability, and Nielsen in particular is very anti web 2.0. Well more particularly web 2.0 for no reason. It must add value for your user. Don’t just “go 2 point oh” because it’s cool, but because it makes sense for your organization and especially for your users.

Because newer technologies are… get ready… newer they are untested and therefore best practices and usability standards have not yet been established. As an HCI consultant as well as a designer, what do I say to a client who wants to use some of these newer technologies?

It seems to me that most of us, including myself are technofetishists. Is that a word? I mean we are so enamored with the latest gadget, upgrade, iphone, ianything, graphics card, scripting language, platform independent language, open source environment, that we are totally willing to bend over backwards and accept things that make us do terrible things. Things that are terrible in terms of usability, the environment, and the rabid consumerism that is already so evident in the western world (and growing in other places too, don’t worry I won’t leave you out developing world and asia).

So usability in the age of UX, is it simply that we need to “focus on the user and all else will follow”? Do we need to a little more luddite?

To be continued

Aaron’s Current Capstone Presentation - Google Doc or on SlideShare

So I had to finally present to my colleagues last night (as referenced by Dave RoedlRoyer’s post at the Interaction Culture Blog) and got some great feedback on several fronts. One interesting thing Sam Shoulders brought up was to compare educational TV to educational games. It may be interesting to take a look at the differences between production of let’s say any ol’ cartoon, like transformers, and say Dora the Explora (or are you supposed to spell explorere properly?). That may produce some interesting items.

Essentially what Dave was saying in his post is that all games are serious, and teach people something. The difference between a “serious game” and just a game is that it was designed with the intent to teach, and that was explicitly made part of the game. Keywords: intent, explicit. All games teach, although it may not be what people think.

Some people think violent video games teach people to be violent, making it into a causal relationship. Kid A plays GTA, GTA in turn causes that kid to be violent. Perhaps we can put it in terms of influence, or that it sends the message that certain things are OK. I don’t really know, but it’s pretty clear from the millions of people who have played very violent games like say Contra, Duke Nukem, or pretty much any of the early space games (space invaders, galaga et al) who haven’t become violent (yet?!) that there is more to this question.

What’s the take home message here? Everything we make as designers embed values, judgments, prejudice… in short we embed a piece of ourselves and our culture in everything we make.

What does this mean for us? My reaction to this is, Hey Aaron, be the best man you can be! So that when you make your next game that explicitly teaches, it will make the world a better place.