Turkka Keinonen (FIN)
Multidimensional and contextual usability
Turkka Keinonen opened up the concept of usability, which is usually understood in very narrow and one-dimensional terms. Besides the task- and goal-oriented view of traditonal usability, there are several other contexts that are relevant in interaction design. Illustrating his lecture with cases from Nokia design research, Turkka pointed out some methods and tools that help to understand the user's contexts.
Users are messy, too
The task
Physical and social context
Lifestyles and motivation
The cultural context
Change
Turkka Keinonen, lecture at UIAH, Helsinki 30.11.2001. Notes by Minna Tarkka.
Turkka Keinonen and Juha Huuskonen
Continuing the session right after Juha Huuskonen, who talked about the messiness of software, Turkka Keinonen confirmed that the messy word applies also to the other side of human-computer interaction - the user. Users can take many different roles, in a variety of contexts.
Turkka has worked as industrial designer specialising in interface design, so his projects usually extend the screen into the product as object and its surroundings. His approach is a user-centred one, but the question is: how is the user defined for each project?
Turkka proceeded with a quick walkthrough of different contexts, presenting a couple of relevant concepts and examples, as well as reseach and design approachers for each of them.
In traditional usability, the user is seen as a cognitive system, whose mental and physical operations are in the focus. The context looked at is the task the user is to perform.
One of the most famous models for looking at use situations is Donald Norman's list of the 7 phases of action from intention to achievement of the goal. There are two gulfs in this list which present design challenges. The gulf of execution, moving from action specificaiton to its execution needs to be supported by 'mental instructions' for operation; and the gulf of interpretation, between perception of the situation and its interpretation, requires some perceivable feedback from the system.
Usability also has its own standard - ISO 9241 speaks of "effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specific context of use". In practice, this context usually means simply the task and nothing more, Turkka epxlained.
Usability is tested, preferably with real users and real tasks, via prototypes which range from paper protos to interactive screen simulations and software protos, and in the case of physical objects and environments, also to hardware protos with more or less realistically simulated environments.
In usability tests for mobile devices, many things were found only when functionality and environment was simulated in the test - the navi key got one more arrow; and mobile devices for automobile use were found easy to operate, but severely interfering in the main task of staying on the lane.
In looking at the physical context, issues such as anthropometric, phsyical task load, visual ergonomics, wearability - even environmental ergonomics and robustness against the environment are in focus.
For example, when developing mobile devices for sports actitivity, the team at Nokia created a more fine-tuned way to assess wearability: besides online-wearability there was offline-wearability, besides portability also 'baggability' - all of these based on user observation.
Social context involves questions of sharing and cooperation, and of ways and frequencies of interacting with other people. One tool for modeling social context is the sociogram, which starts from 'me 'outwards to the 10 daily contacts to appr. 100 active contacts and about 1000 people I've met.
When looking at the context of consumption, it may be useful to think of technology in terms of "domestication" - how new objects become parts of everyday life. In Silverstone's model, the new thing is first appropriated and possessed, then it gradually founds its role in the physical, temporal and practical respects, and eventually may turn out to be an essential part of the users social contacts. Mika Pantzar, on the other hand, has looked at the external (fashion, lifestyle) and internal drives relating to new technologies, where the users may have a more rational or passionate reasons.
The motivational context also involves similar questions of practicality and affectivity, and lead to a more result or play-oriented relation to technology. Russel has described affect in terms of two dimensions unpleasant - pleasant and quietness - arousal. Where would you put your projects on this scale? Turkka asked.
According to Patric Jordan, pleasure involves several aspects, ranging from physical to social, psychological to ideational. User engagement, on the other hand has been described by Brenda Laurel as depending of fthe factors of frequency of interaction, versatility of possibilities and the power of making things really happen.
In the e-design project at UIAH; the meaning and emotional significance of objects was mapped. The meaningful objects were 'links' or 'symbols', they could be seen as companions or challenges, as functional devices or simply as aesthetically pleasing.
Culture is an overall category of all of the above, and thus a many-faced concept. For purposes of design research and development, cultural aspect may be abbreviated as "a relationship between a person and context that may have an influence on design" - and these may be defined by contextual research and observational study.
Such studies were carried out by Nokia for example in India, finding out for example that phone calls are usually 'family calls' where each member talks to each, but also of language use (hinglish), perception of time and space among other things.
The context provided by change relates to the fact that design problems are 'ill-defined" problems. Solutions and problems are intertwined; when a solution is ready, the original context has changed, and the users will change it again. One method to map out possible uses in the changing world is to construct user scenarios, which narrative and visuals to envision possible solutions.
To conclude the heady session, Turkka presented the initial design
question again:
Users interacting with technology can be looked at in a variety of
contexts. The main thing is to decide which of the contexts are
relevant to you and the current project?
Chris Hales (UK)
Juha Huuskonen (FIN)
Turkka Keinonen (FIN)
Casey Reas (USA/IT)
Bill Gaver (UK)