What is user experience design? I suppose it is a way of differentiation amidst all other similar products, considering how technological imitation is a breeze, with the technological progress we have now.
It was only after this project that I started to appreciate the attention to details for a system to work out right, both technically, and even more so for the user experience. I don't know why; perhaps it is due to human nature of not seeing our own faults or the variance of human cognition, but the responses of users were not always what I had imagined. I initially thought content would be more important than aesthetics; surveys revealed this. However, when presented with the actual prototype, users started to place much emphasis on aesthetics and design rather than content. Looks like users of today really look for a 'wow' factor in products and not just the functionalities.
I felt that in-depth interviews were a great help as some interviewees provided very good and quirky ideas that would make the site a pleasure and surprise to use. I also found that there are advantages to measuring responses from both friends and strangers. With strangers, you get responses from people who think more differently from you (as friends can start having interests/ thoughts etc more similar to each other). But with friends you can get more frank responses if they do not like your site. Being polite, users may not wish to criticise your product, especially when they do not know you well.
During the user testing, I also noted that users tended to reply with very personal (which equates to uncontrollable) comments like how the colour happens to be their favourite colour so they love it, This got me thinking about how designing for user experience is a paradox as cognition of users are very subjective and specific; designing perfectly for one alienates the others. Hence, no one design can fit every single individual to a 'T' even within target groups. I think the best alternative would be to strike a balance between targeting a niche market and providing for the masses; by having design and features that are unique yet have 'potential' mass appeal. I say potential because we cannot ignore the importance of the 'in' crowd. Sometimes, user experience may not be as 'unique' as users would like to think. Something that originally would not have appealed to someone can suddenly become appealing as user experience is also influenced by external forces like peer and 'in- group' pressure (social forces). Hence, one way to go about designing for user experience can also be to target a niche market that is the 'in' and influential crowd as advanced users, and letting these advanced users lead and pave the way for majority of novice users who are compelled to want this same 'cool' product.
In the fleeting world of today, novelties come and go. It is hence a challenge to avoid letting the 'wow' factor come from only initial one-time surprises that fade with increased exposure. I felt that the customisation concept underlying SHmile itself contributes to a sustainable user experience in the long-run, giving it a timeless quality. Although we initially played with the idea of giving SHmile character through a smiley mascot, we realised that character is not a literal thing, but more metaphorical; like the characteristic 'feel' that the product gives.
All in all, as user experience can be such a subjective thing, this means that there can be more than one approach to user experience design, user testing and evaluation is of utmost importance, and lastly, do not be afraid of treading on unexplored territory or extracting new concepts within the familiar, as it is often the very novel concepts or simplest ideas building up on familiarity that power the design of successful products. Also, minimalist is the new black. So keep functions to the bare minimum for stimulation and pleasure! (think iPod without a radio function)
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Saturday, April 7, 2007
Reflections on User Research Smoke and Mirror reading
Well, the author has mentioned that card sorting, focus groups, guerilla, usability testing, and user personas are entirely subjective.
While reading through the article, I thought it might still be better to begin with some ‘scientific’ research to recognize the novice/ advanced users characteristics and their relative population before proceeding to user personas and then to the ‘subjective’ kind of testing. Otherwise, how else can we select a target population to get opinions from?
As much as user experience is a very personal thing, I still feel that no design can please EVERYone, so we’ll just have to make do with pleasing majority of the target audience. And the only way of finding who the majority are is still more ‘scientific’ methods like surveys first, before proceeding with the ‘subjective’ opinions from TARGET representations.
However, as I finished reading the article, I suddenly had a much clearer vision of what ‘user experience design’ really meant. Afterall, we have always been taught how to do things systematically and scientifically, with research to back it all up. So, I still needed some time getting used to it, but now it’s better than I first started out in this module. It’s inevitable that a human wouldn’t want to part with his/ her initial ideas, so it’s good that NM2208 has taught me to at least try. =p
Perhaps the writer makes a more extremist point because he knows it is human nature to want to go ‘scientific’, so we now have to unlearn what it is we learnt by going full-scale opposite direction before we learn to strike a balance. (as you can see, I am still for a balanced user testing).
“And since I provided my own researched examples of questionable research, my essay is more scientific! ;-)” To conclude, I also thought this writer wrote this article with his users in mind; what with the bothering with humour and easy-to-read sentence structures. Oh well, I suppose he had to, considering how he’s writing on that very topic itself =) His self- reflexivity makes for a more engaging read. User experience considered! =)
While reading through the article, I thought it might still be better to begin with some ‘scientific’ research to recognize the novice/ advanced users characteristics and their relative population before proceeding to user personas and then to the ‘subjective’ kind of testing. Otherwise, how else can we select a target population to get opinions from?
As much as user experience is a very personal thing, I still feel that no design can please EVERYone, so we’ll just have to make do with pleasing majority of the target audience. And the only way of finding who the majority are is still more ‘scientific’ methods like surveys first, before proceeding with the ‘subjective’ opinions from TARGET representations.
However, as I finished reading the article, I suddenly had a much clearer vision of what ‘user experience design’ really meant. Afterall, we have always been taught how to do things systematically and scientifically, with research to back it all up. So, I still needed some time getting used to it, but now it’s better than I first started out in this module. It’s inevitable that a human wouldn’t want to part with his/ her initial ideas, so it’s good that NM2208 has taught me to at least try. =p
Perhaps the writer makes a more extremist point because he knows it is human nature to want to go ‘scientific’, so we now have to unlearn what it is we learnt by going full-scale opposite direction before we learn to strike a balance. (as you can see, I am still for a balanced user testing).
“And since I provided my own researched examples of questionable research, my essay is more scientific! ;-)” To conclude, I also thought this writer wrote this article with his users in mind; what with the bothering with humour and easy-to-read sentence structures. Oh well, I suppose he had to, considering how he’s writing on that very topic itself =) His self- reflexivity makes for a more engaging read. User experience considered! =)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
