On another list recently, Carolyn Snyder pointed out that there are two purposes to user research:
1. Finding out about the product 2. Changing the product (I paraphrase). Jared seems to be focusing strongly on point 1. I somewhat sympathise with his point of view, in that I've not found that the eye-tracking stuff adds greatly to what I can find out from an ordinary observational test without eye-tracking. I'd prefer to focus somewhat on point 2, which to me is about influencing stakeholders to make them want to make changes based on what I've found. I have found that eye-tracking stuff can be rather helpful, in some circumstances, in helping stakeholders to understand what we've found and persuade them to act on it. If your work consists solely of the finding out aspect, then probably I'd agree that you don't need eye-tracking. If you are stakeholder/decision-maker, then I'd also probably agree that you don't need eye-tracking. For the rest of us, who want to make changes but need to influence other people to do so: it can be helpful. It's another tool in the toolbox, and I don't see why we shouldn't use it just because some people don't feel the need to use it. And I declare an interest: I have used data from eye-tracking in my talks on forms. I find that the illustrations help attendees to see what I've seen. Best Caroline Jarrett www.formsthatwork.com "Forms that work: Designing web forms for usability". ________________________________________________________________ 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
