Katie Albers wrote in another thread:

"Let's take a really obvious example: Every test I've ever seen shows that
people are measurably faster using a mouse-based interface than a
command-based interface. At an extremely high level of expertise both in
typing and in the app, people do, in fact, become faster using the
commands... but "membership" in this group is much smaller than the number
of people who believe they are in the group. Thus, we have people using
commands when the menus would be faster for them, and swearing by their
mothers and their puppies that the commands are faster..."

Hello Katie,

When you tested the menus, were those contextual (accessed via right-click
or, perhaps, data mouseover) or global (action bar at the top of the app)
menus?

I am working on the application, where command line interface seems to be a
more efficient way to perform tasks. Context: this is a data processing
application used by operators every day all day long, hundreds of commands
(hence unwieldy global menu structure), CLI is used with predictive typing
and "cheat-sheet" list of commands. I think in this case a combination of
CLI for all commands with *some* contextual menus should be more efficient.

Here is an interesting article by Richard Wareham suggesting that
"discussion-based" CLI is easier to learn due to high consistency, focus on
specific task and paucity of choices: http://www.osnews.com/story/6282; and
another one in the same vein "The Paradox of the Assisted User: Guidance can
be Counterproductive":
http://www.cs.uu.nl/docs/vakken/uem/2-vannimwegen%20et%20al.%20CHI%202006.pdf.
Quote: "Our research shows that a computer mediated task can take advantage
of interfaces that are designed from considerations that run deeper than
plain usability... Our findings, especially if extended to even more
realistic tasks can be valuable ... when ... making as little mistakes as
possible or speed are important."


Thanks,
Oleh Kovalchuke
Interaction Design is design of time
http://www.tangospring.com/IxDtopicWhatIsInteractionDesign.htm



On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Katie Albers <[email protected]>wrote:
Let's back up a step here...why does stuff have to be measurable? Is it no
longer possible to assess without numbers? On the whole (and yes, I
acknowledge that there are significant exceptions) the SMART methodology did
design no service. There are things we know or notice that are simply
ineluctable. To say something is "better" is an explicitly non-measurable
statement. There are decisions we make that are in spite of data to the
contrary...and they result in something "better".

Let's take a really obvious example: Every test I've ever seen shows that
people are measurably faster using a mouse-based interface than a
command-based interface. At an extremely high level of expertise both in
typing and in the app, people do, in fact, become faster using the
commands... but "membership" in this group is much smaller than the number
of people who believe they are in the group. Thus, we have people using
commands when the menus would be faster for them, and swearing by their
mothers and their puppies that the commands are faster. You can demonstrate
to them that they are slower this way and they will simply not believe you
(although some of the reasons" people come up with are really entertaining).
Take away their commands, and you will get a lot of people dropping out. If
one of the data points you're supposed to be designing to is speed of use,
do you take away the commands anyway? (Mind you, I don't think anyone in
this field will probably acknowledge being one of those who benefits from
menus, so it's almost impossible to get them to consider the possibility of
removing the commands anyway).

How do you reconcile data and design (in its broadest sense) here? Why do
you need to? Why do we have this aversion to simply admitting that people
have non-measurable, but critically important, preferences and we need to
acknowledge those and incorporate them into design? (Obviously, in the case
of commands, we do just that, but often that's more a matter of default than
decision.)

Katie Albers
Founder & Principal Consultant
FirstThought
User Experience Strategy & Project Management
310 356 7550
[email protected]
________________________________________________________________
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