I'm thinking out loud a bit myself this morning.  Pulled a late night
work on chapters about the QOC method and the use of cause and effect
diagrams in UCD.  A key issue here is that we often speak of
"usability" as a single thing when it has many different attributes.

This is tricky since usability is a general term and usability has
many different attributes or dimensions, with predictability being one
of those.  Usability or more broadly user experience attributes can
interact with one another.  For example, in studies of what makes a
system usable, response time often bubbles to the top of the list
(actually, it is often in the top 3).  You could have a system that
everyone can learn easily (initial learning) but poor performance
(average response time or variability in response time) might make a
system that is usable in one dimension, unusable overall. The ISO
definition has effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction, the
basics, but there are many more dimensions to usability that have been
considered since the 1980s based on work by Whiteside, Bennett, Gould,
and other early proponents of usability engineering, some that overlap
broadly. So in the statement below, you could replace "usable" with
any one of a number of dimensions and compare it to predicability and
examine relationships among different usability attributes.
As Itamar noted, unpredicability can be good in some circumstances and
human factors engineers have done a lot research into factors that
affect vigilance in sustained-attention tasks.  Wylie and Mackie in
the late 1980s suggested that a system be injected with artificial
signals and then the operators would get feedback on their detection
performance.

One of the issues that hinders our fields is that we fail to think of
usability in our day-to-day work as have many dimensions with some
dimensions being more critical in a particular context than others.
The simplest example is a system where some people use a feature once
a month while others use it 50 times a day.  Many people speak of
consistency in a user interface as promoting usability but if you have
a bi-modal distribution, you may need two interaction methods to be
consistent with the way people work. The principles of being
inconsistent to be consistent is a difficult one for many corporations
who decree that "all our products will be consistent visually and have
only one way to perform a task (which gets into another topic of
redundancy which is another good debate).  Grudin published what I
think is a classic paper that got into the subtleties of consistency
(often considered an attribute of a usable system) and noted that to
be consistent with how people work, you might need to design systems
that have inconsistencies (as well as multiple ways to do things).
The Grudin paper uses old examples, but the issue is still as strong
as ever.  For a good read see The Case Against User Interface
Consistency by Jonathan Grudin at
http://research.microsoft.com/users/jgrudin/publications/consistency/CACM1989.pdf


This is a good topic since I think that an explicit definition of
"usability" is critical to each project that we work one; listing the
attributes of usability that are most critical to success of a product
(learnability, efficiency, prevention of errors, flexibility,
predictability, fun, memorability (critical for systems used
infrequently like tax software) satisfaction, performance, ....).  I
often hear people referring to "usability" and they are each defining
it differently which can create problems throughout the product design
and development cycle.

Chauncey


On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 1:25 AM, Robert Hoekman Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Not everything that's usable is predictable and not everything that's
>> predictable is usable.
>
>
> Examples?
>
> -r-
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

Reply via email to