paper & pencil

camels and rubber duckies

great article from joel splosky on pricing and maximizing profits: Camels and Rubber Duckies

When you're setting a price, you're sending a signal. If your competitor's software ranges in price from about $100 to about $500, and you decide, heck, my product is about in the middle of the road, so I'll sell it for $300, well, what message do you think you're sending to your customers? You're telling them that you think your software is "eh." I have a better idea: charge $1350. Now your customers will think, "oh, man, that stuff has to be the cat's whiskers since they're charging mad coin for it!"

And then they won't buy it because the limit on the corporate AMEX is $500.

Misery.

The more you learn about pricing, the less you seem to know.

one of the links points to an earlier article on commoditization using computer companies as his examples: Strategy Letter V

Research Sound Bites

HFI lists the most "interesting, important and applicable" research findings they feel have implications for usability professionals.

some favorites:

Users will wait longer for better content. Users will wait between 8-10 seconds for information on the Web, depending on the quality of the information.

Experienced users won't wait as long as novices.

Ryan, G. & Valverde, M., Waiting online: A review and research agenda (2003).  Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy 13 (3), 195-205.

--

In community feedback environments, recommenders are influenced by prior ratings (including inaccurate ones).

To minimize the exposure bias of previous recommenders, avoid showing previous scores to new raters when possible.

Cosley, D., et al., Is seeing believing? How recommender interfaces affect users’ opinions (2003). CHI  5 (1), 585-592.

--

The use of scenarios can help to bring developers into the user-centered design process. (Hertzum, M., 2003)

Hertzum, M., Making use of scenarios: A field study of conceptual design (2003). International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 58, 215-239.

--

Interfaces are usable when they support human reasoning and learning styles: Designers fail to appreciate how humans rely on mental short cuts such as linking new information to a previously learned framework (called a "schema").

Chalmers, P.A., The role of cognitive theory in human-computer interface (2003). Computers in Human Behavior 19, 593-607.

--

Well organized information hierarchies can be as effective and satisfying as search engines.

Ma, S., & Salvendy, G., Graphical web directory for web search (2003). Behaviour & Information Technology  22 (2), 71-77.

--

Animation is effective when presenting complex concepts.

The acceptance and impact animation is enhanced when users are warned to expect it and allowed to start it when they want.

In e-learning environments, pairing narration with animation maximizes its effectiveness. Video of the narrator is not recommended.

Weiss, R., Knowlton, D., & Morrison, G.R., Principles for using animation in computer-based instruction: Theoretical heuristics for effective design (2002). Computers in Human Behavior 18, 465-477.

--

Lab and remote usability studies capture very similar performance information.

Remote studies allow for more diversity in participants. Lab studies allow the observation of non-verbal behaviors.

Users who are being observed by a facilitator are more diligent: They stick with a task about twice as long, and clicked three times more links than those who are not being directly observed.

Tullis T., et al., An empirical comparison of lab and remote usability testing of web sites (2002). Usability Professionals Association Conference.

5-user assumption

research paper by Laura Faulkner of the University of Texas, Austin on the benefits of usability testing with more users - Beyond the five-user assumption: Benefits of increased sample sizes in usability testing (pdf)

essentially the author says that people like Jakob Neilsen who had stated that testing with 5 users is enough did so at a time when usability testing was not widely embraced or funded in project. Now that usability testing is more frequently a major component of development, the number of users needs to increase in order to increase the number of usability problems found.

The more powerful argument for implementing software usability testing, then, is not that it can be done cheaply with, say, 5 test users, but that the implications of missing usability problems are severe enough to warrant investment in fully valid test practices.

benefits of personas

uie (jared spool) article Three Important Benefits of Personas

1. Helps to separate you from the work - is it natural "ground" yourself into the work (how you would use the interface) and personas helps designers be more objective and break away from that natural behavior.
2. Helps provide a shared vision through storytelling - putting the personas into a story (scenarios) helps designers communicate the details of the project to the team.
3. Helps solidify the shared vision through role playing - (I see this benefit as an extension of #2 and not separate)

but you have to create good personas to get the full benefits

To get the benefits, the personas have to have rich, relevant detail. They need to accurately represent the users the team is aiming for. And they need to have a solid foundation in the experiences of real users to be believable and meaningful.

in addition, the personas should be continually reviewed and modified throughout the project as your knowledge of the users grows. for example, results from usability studies should provide insights to help refine the personas. Personas should be treated as

living descriptions — constantly changing as they learn new things from their ongoing research, studies, and design exercises.