I published a piece of research a bit reminiscent of this study in 1984 (well, I was only 4 years old, gotta give me a break) that I thought was full of holes. In being so self-critical, my professors had to frequently remind me that the scientific method is a building of a body of research over time (at least a lifetime, hopefully longer), and that there is "no beginning and no end" to the process (how very Zen). As I was bemoaning all the "coulda-woulda" with the study, one of my favorite professors laughingly reminded me that I had also failed to include in my bibliography, in his opinion, a few important research studies from, ahem, the 19th Century, which he believed directly contributed to my hypotheses as well as the established assumptions I had made (in 20-20, he was right). It took a while for me to realize that was his way of saying that my study was just a part of the mythical whole answer.
Curious to me was that my journal article, which seemed to have barely a blip of traction in relevant scientific community, to the best of my knowledge, was not cited and advanced until twelve years later, when a Australian group asked me for some details about it, and then a year later, completed/published their study which somewhat supported and somewhat did not support, my findings. Even though I was trained as a scientist-empiricist (and secondarily, a practitioner), and enjoyed the challenge of peer-superior review, in the past few years I myself have come to believe that there is no methodology that is truly empirical (including current neurosciences), and that all research is, perhaps at it's finest, quasi-experimental (e.g., Shadish, based on the seminal works of Campbell and Stanley: http://www.amazon.com/Experimental-Quasi-Experimental-Designs-Generalized-Inference/dp/0395615569/ref=pd_cp_b_1?pf_rd_p=413864201&pf_rd_s=center-41&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0528614002&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0R0Y6KNS6P5SH2J47FP0). I have no doubt many esteemed scientists, and my former professors, and contemporary HCI researchers, and the Surgeons (who were users and stakeholders) who helped me design a med-surg app a short while back, would unabashedly disagree with me on that. Long story short, I'm pleased as punch that Long and his team at NCAD did the research and published it, and that Jared brought it to our attention. I'm glad there have been a range of opinions per the method, process, sampling, operational definitions, independent-dependent variables, assumptions, conclusions, etc. I'm more than fine with no research study being 100% Tupperware tight ('cause that would mean there's an endpoint which messes up my Zen roots). I liked the study and think it's a really great stepping stone from prior studies (of any ilk, even N=1 Case Studies), and a really great stepping stone for future studies. I hope we can build on the Long / NCAD study before the next twelve years. That would be really cool a chapter in Personas, User Research, Design Planning and Strategy, and more. :::: Andrew Schechterman LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewschechterman E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 1-303-886-2440 ::::: On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Jared Spool <[email protected]> wrote: > > Robert Hoekman Jr wrote: > > Oh, definitely. I think the main issue is that designers dispute that >> they're fictitious, when they are, in fact, fictitious. Why bother arguing >> that red is blue? >> >> Instead of arguing that they're real, designers should try embracing the >> idea that personas are the "maps" in your analogy. >> > > Doc Baty wrote: > > I don't like the characterisation of personas as fictitious, since that >> conveys a perjorative sense of "being made up" >> > > I agree with Doc. > > A map of J.R.R. Tolkien's Shire is fictitious. > > A map of Manhattan is not. > > Personas, when done with the requisite research, are more like a map of > Manhattan. (Or, its communities, if we really want to push this metaphor.) > > Jared > ________________________________________________________________ > 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
