First of all, let me admit that I never take written notes. Never
have. Not in classes and not in my practice. It isn't that I'm bad at
it (apparently I take excellent notes) but my neurological makeup
makes it a very bad idea; I learn almost entirely through my senses,
especially my ears. My statement on note-taking springs from two causes:
(1) on the few occasions where I've been forced to take notes, I
literally had no idea, later, what had happened. The paper was
undoubtedly much the wiser, I couldn't put anything on it in a context
that made it make sense to me...and I spent years working with
professionals on how to "get over" this "limitation" and my brain
still works that way...change didn't work (and I can't imagine why
anyone thought it would). On the other hand, I have a stunningly good
memory. But I rarely encounter anyone who is willing to consider that
there may be other ways of creating a record. In any case, Jared,
please let me beg off another try at incorporating note-taking again.
It's like asking a deaf person to listen more carefully.
(2) I find that note taking is a default that works against any
further examination of alternative methods of recording one's
reactions, on the spot observations, questions, etc. Often those are
better recorded through another means, but people don't look for any
other means because they'll just take notes. In any case, it's always
another distraction, and how many do you want to tolerate?
As far as terminology, this is one of those cases when I consider the
user's actual behavior to be the subject of the trial, although
obviously their behavior is in reference to the trial of the software.
Therefore, although I call the manipulators in a one-on-one software
test "testers" in order to emphasize their agency; I refer to them in
a contextual enquiry as "subjects" because it's their reality I want
to get into, not the software's. I can readily see arguments in
opposition, but these terms have always worked for me.
I tend to make my statement's definitive and contrary simply because
that tends to encourage active consideration, even if it comes in the
form of serious and substantial disagreement.
And as far as Will's question: yes, it depends...but that means you
have to consider alternatives. I admit I find it somewhat entertaining
that anyone would consider either Jared or me as neophytes -- and I'm
very flattered by the grouping: I have less experience than Jared and
I've been at it 15 years. I think I'll take it as a compliment
though...It's a long time since I've been called neo-anything :)
kt
Katie Albers
Founder & Principal Consultant
FirstThought
User Experience Strategy & Project Management
310 356 7550
[email protected]
On Feb 2, 2009, at 3:48 PM, Jared Spool wrote:
On Feb 2, 2009, at 2:12 PM, Katie Albers wrote:
I feel compelled to reiterate my note-taking plea here: Don't do it!
Note-taking splits your attention and tends to change the behavior
of the subject. It's aurally, visually and actively intrusive.
Note-taking is evil.
Use a tape recorder or a web cam or a small video camera you can
mount on the cubicle wall and aim, or similar (depending on what
behaviors you're particularly studying) but if at all possible,
don't take notes. Much of what you would take notes on can be
translated into sound simply by asking questions. Then schedule
time between sessions when you can jot down your notes and aides de
memoir.
I realize that contemporary note-taking is in some cases simply
unavoidable, but make sure that you really need to do it in this
case before automatically incorporating it.
I'd argue that note taking is very valuable and, when properly done,
very important to both the observer and the participant.
(As an aside: In this case, the "subject" is not the person you're
observing, it's the software you're studying. The formal name in
phenomenalogical ethnographic studies is "informant", but many of us
just use "participant". Or their first name, which feels less
impersonal.)
Trying to remember everything you see, especially in an 5 to 6 hour
session, also splits your attention. Tape recorders, web cams, and
video cameras change the participants behaviors as much, if not
more, than note taking.
When I'm doing field studies, I prefer to take a small audio
recorder. (I'm in love with the Olympus LS-10, though we often use
bulkier Marantz PMD-660s.) However, I still take my trusted
Moleskine large-size reporter's notebook, for which I take most of
my notes. I would not take notes on a laptop or palm-sized keyboard.
If you've never taken notes in a live interview before, I recommend
you practice it. It's a learned skill and practicing definitely
improves it. Rehearsing your site visit by watching fellow
colleagues, taking notes, then writing up your daily summary --
repeating that process a couple of times -- is a great way to work
the kinks out and get some practice.
Jared
Jared M. Spool
User Interface Engineering
510 Turnpike St., Suite 102, North Andover, MA 01845
e: [email protected] p: +1 978 327 5561
http://uie.com Blog: http://uie.com/brainsparks Twitter: jmspool
UIE Web App Summit, 4/19-4/22: http://webappsummit.com
________________________________________________________________
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
