Scribd
Upload
26 views34 pages

Norman Principle

Uploaded by

kenbelga99
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
26 views34 pages

Norman Principle

Uploaded by

kenbelga99
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 34

CS305, HCI in Software

Development

Usability Goals, Principles,


Guidelines

(Introduction, Part 2)
Fall 2008
Usability Goals
• Effective to use (effectiveness)
– A general goal: how well does a system do what it
should do?
• Efficient to use (efficiency)
– Do things quickly, easily.
– Especially common tasks.
• Safe to use (safety)
– Protect people from hazards (usually not a SW issue)
– Help prevent user from making errors and recover
from errors
– Give users confidence
Usability Goals (2)
• Have good utility
– Has the right kind of functionality
– Supports users in accomplishing tasks
• Easy to learn (learnability)
– Includes how easy it is to learn advanced
features. (If hard, who bothers?)
• Easy to remember how to use
(memorability)
– Many systems used infrequently
How to Measure Usability?
• We want to achieve these goals, but how
do we know?
• Develop measurable criteria based on
previous goals. Examples:
– Time to learn
– Speed of performance
– Rate of errors over by users
– Retention over time
– Subjective satisfaction
User experience goals
– Satisfying - rewarding
– Fun - support creativity
– Enjoyable - emotionally fulfilling
– Entertaining …and more
– Helpful
– Motivating
– Aesthetically pleasing
Usability and user experience
goals
• How do usability goals differ from user
experience goals?
– How easy is it to measure usability versus
user experience goals?

• Are there trade-offs between the two kinds


of goals?
– e.g. can a product be both fun and safe?
Design principles
• Generalizable abstractions for thinking about
different aspects of design
• The do’s and don’ts of interaction design
– But at a high level. (Compare to guidelines later.)
• What to provide and what not to provide at
the interface
• Derived from a mix of theory-based
knowledge, experience and common-sense
Higher-level Principles
• Now, we’ll talk about the following:
– Visibility
– Feedback
– Constraints
– Mapping
– Consistency
– Affordances
• Ideas well-known (e.g. from Norman’s
Design of Everyday Things)
Visibility
• This is a control panel for an
elevator.
• How does it work?
• Push a button for the floor you want?

• Nothing happens. Push any other


button? Still nothing. What do you
need to do?

It is not visible as to what to do!


From: www.baddesigns.com
Visibility
…you need to insert your room
card in the slot by the buttons to
get the elevator to work!

How would you make this action more visible?

• make the card reader more obvious


• provide an auditory message, that says what to
do (which language?)
• provide a big label next to the card reader that
flashes when someone enters
• make relevant parts visible
• make what has to be done obvious
Feedback
• Sending information back to the user about
what has been done
• Includes sound, highlighting, animation and
combinations of these

– e.g. when screen button clicked on provides sound


or red highlight feedback:
“ccclichhk”
Constraints
• Restricting the possible actions that can be
performed
• Helps prevent user from selecting incorrect
options
• Three main types (Norman, 1999)
– physical
– cultural
– logical
Physical constraints
• Refer to the way physical objects restrict the
movement of things
– E.g. only one way you can insert a key into a lock
• How many ways can you insert a CD or DVD
disk into a computer?
• How physically constraining is this action?
• How does it differ from the insertion of a floppy
disk into a computer?
Logical constraints
• Exploits people’s everyday common sense
reasoning about the way the world works

• An example is the logical relationship between


physical layout of a device and the way it works
– See next slide for an illustration
Logical or ambiguous design?

• Where do you plug the


mouse?

• Where do you plug the


keyboard?

• top or bottom
connector?

• Do the color coded


icons help?
From: www.baddesigns.com
More Logically Constrained
Provides direct adjacent
mapping between
icon and connector

Provides color coding to


associate the
connectors with the
labels

From: www.baddesigns.com
Cultural constraints
• Learned arbitrary conventions
like red triangles for warning

• Can be universal or culturally specific


– For SW we’ve accepted certain conventions,
e.g. we know what to do with an icon

• Be concerned of cross-cultural conventions


and other ambiguities!
– Does an “X” mean “selected” or “not selected”
– Is a check-mark better?
Which are universal and which
are culturally-specific?
Mapping
• Relationship between controls and their
movements and the results in the world
• Why is this a poor mapping of control
buttons?
Mapping
• Why is this a better mapping?

• The control buttons are mapped better onto the


sequence of actions of fast rewind, rewind, play
and fast forward
– Is this a logical mapping (in most people’s minds)?
– Is there a mapping that makes more sense?
Mappings in the Kitchen
– Which controls go with which rings
(burners)?

A B C D
Why is this a better design?
Consistency
• Design interfaces to have similar operations and
use similar elements for similar tasks
• For example:
– always use ctrl key plus first initial of the command for an
operation – ctrl+C, ctrl+S, ctrl+O
• Main benefit is consistent interfaces are easier to
learn and use
• But… didn’t a wise man say this?
Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.
– A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds
(adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines)
When consistency breaks down
• What happens if there is more than one
command starting with the same letter?
– e.g. save, spelling, select, style
• Have to find other initials or combinations of
keys, thereby breaking the consistency rule
– E.g. ctrl+S, ctrl+Sp, ctrl+shift+L

• Is this desirable? Does it defeat the purpose?


– It may increase learning burden on user
– It may make them more prone to errors
– But it may still benefit frequent or experienced users
Internal and external
consistency
• Internal consistency refers to designing
operations to behave the same within an
application
– Difficult to achieve with complex interfaces

• External consistency refers to designing


operations, interfaces, etc., to be the same
across applications and devices
– Very rarely the case, based on different designer’s
preference
– Most successful in product families (e.g MS Office)
– Op. Sys. vendors may define style guidelines
Keypad numbers layout

• A case of external inconsistency

(a) phones, remote controls (b) calculators, computer keypads

1 2 3 7 8 9
4 5 6 4 5 6
7 8 9 1 2 3
0 0
Affordances: to give a clue
• Refers to an attribute of an object that allows
people to know how to use it
– E.g. a mouse button invites pushing, a door handle
affords pulling
• Norman (1988) used the term to discuss the
design of everyday objects
• Since then has been popularized in interaction
design to discuss how to design interface
objects
– E.g. scrollbars to afford moving up and down, icons to
afford clicking on
What does ‘affordance’ have to
offer interaction design?
• Notion of affordance is often over-used!
http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/affordances-and.html
• Interfaces are virtual and do not have affordances
like physical objects
• Norman argues it does not make sense to talk
about interfaces in terms of ‘real’ affordances
• Instead interfaces are better conceptualised as
‘perceived’ affordances
– Learned conventions of arbitrary mappings between
action and effect at the interface
– Some mappings are better than others
Activity 1.3
– Physical affordances:
How do the following physical objects afford? Are
they obvious?
Activity 1.4
– Virtual affordances
How do the following screen objects afford?
What if you were a novice user?
Would you know what to do with them?
Activity 1.5: Physical and Perceived
Affordances
• Take a cell phone, digital camera, or PDA
– Have laptop? Open a fancy SW app: Outlook,
Eclipse, etc?
• In a small group
– Identify any physical affordances the device has
– Identify any perceived or visual affordances the
software user interface has
• Write these down, be prepared to share or turn
in
A Good Example
• Kodak DC-290 digital camera
Adjusting Tabs in MS Word

• What’s the idea here? Problems?


• What principle(s)?
– Affordance
– Metaphor (more on this later)
Web Links
• What are the conventions that help you
recognize a link?
• Would you are argue this is an affordance?
– A perceived affordance – convention of a mapping
between action and effect
– Does it “afford” clicking on it?

• Examples of problems with this?


– Let’s look at: http://www.cs.virginia.edu

You might also like