A number of the discussions on this list are reminding me of the Ron Jeffries article "We tried baseball and it didn't work" - http://xprogramming.com/xpmag/jatBaseball
In other words, I can't help wondering that discussions around methods being great / rubbish boil down to past experiences with a method, rather than the inherent qualities of that method. In my next piece of research, I'm going to do remote unmoderated usability testing alongside classic face-to-face usability testing. Unfortunately I can't share the findings - another core problem with this sort of discussion - we are stuck in vagueness because NDAs prevent us from sharing findings like academics can. I don't think I agree with Jared's conclusions about throwing out eye-tracking and unmoderated usability testing (in lieu of more evidence, at least) - while eye tracking is inherently expensive, but I suspect remote unmoderated usability testing has potential to bring affordable usability testing to the masses. Anyone else care to comment? ________________________________________________________________ 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
