(another excerpt from my upcoming book: "Breaking Through to the Other side")
Some of the principles or methods from software and web usability work are applicable to i-TV -usability, but there are also differences, as the following sections will show.
Workshops and focus groups about concept sketches and prototype drafts
The pre-testing activities such as workshops and focus groups will give extremely valuable insight into the viewers’ preferences, motives, values and general behaviour. Viewers can tell you how they watch different types of programs e.g.:
• Are they gazing (watching the program with some interest) or are they glancing (only looking from time to time) or constantly going forth and back between these two positions, prompted by the content or the intensity of the program or the flow on the TV?
• Are they watching TV alone? When watching with someone, are they with the same viewing partner(s) or with different viewing partners?
Workshops and focus groups give viewers a chance to speak about what makes them turn to a specific channel or content, and what makes them turn it off. It is very important to capture these thoughts and preferences in order to build appropriate services and programming.
Of course, you will not know to what extent the test persons are conveying a complete image of their real behaviour – and they may not be lying but merely trying to adapt to the inherent values of the interview process such as portraying themselves as socially acceptable, coherent people. The closer to the real viewing environment the study is conducted, the better the image will be.
Still, the information that viewers will give you in a focus group or workshop will provide you with ideas and set the development off on the right track. The alternative to using focus groups and workshops is to develop the application or program based on assumptions and anecdotes that the developers and producers hold about what the viewers want and what the viewers are able to do. These assumptions may prove to be true (or not), but you will not know for sure until the end of a costly development process. Using focus groups and workshops is a proven way to get more for the money invested in the development of applications and programs.
Thinking aloud about a prototype or a running program
The thinking aloud testing method is applicable for usability testing of i-TV applications. Viewers can deliver meaningful comments as they watch or use the i-TV program. However, some adjustments must be made from the way that this method is used in software and web testing, as it is harder to follow the TV test persons selecting and pointing.
On the web or in software, users primarily use a mouse-button and the alpha numeric keyboard to give inputs to the system (thus called input devices). In i-TV , the viewers use a remote control that has more than twenty tiny buttons. In most web and software applications the cursor as well as the input from the user is shown on the monitor, making the user’s input directly accessible to observers. This is rarely the case in interactive TV applications.
Also, observers (including test leaders) can usually not see the test person’s remote control clearly. This makes it hard to see or infer which buttons on the remote control are being pressed. It is much harder to see which part of the input device is being used than in a web test. It may also make it harder for the test leader to determine the status of the i-TV application and, for instance, to determine exactly where the test person is in the application (which pages are displayed) and which options are available.
To get around these differences, the test person will have to speak continuously about where she is pointing and which buttons she is pressing. If the test person does not remember to do so the test leader will have to remind her. This can be stressful to both parties and the test person may not be really prepared to comment on her actions if for instance she is confused by something in the i-TV application. Also if she is using this medium for the first time she may not know what to expect and she may not yet have words for the features or the content she is experiencing or missing.
By Thomas.
August, 20. 2004.
Permanent URL to Interactive TV user experience research
(excerpt from my upcoming book; "Breaking Through to the Other Side")
Usability is not the same as good design or trustworthy programming. Usability arises in the meeting between a user and the web site. The outcome of their meeting is fruitful if the user does not meet obstacles or barriers when performing her tasks.
If a web manager, the sender, was able to teach or personally guide all the users of that web site on how to use the web site to perform their tasks, success would be assured. Users, however, come to the web site pursuing their own goals on their own terms and without the benefit of a personal tutorial from the web manager.
The web manager faces the choice of either adjusting his web site to the users’ preferences, preconditions and requirements, or not getting the most out of his investment.
Characteristics of a usable system
A widely accepted and applied definition of usability comes from Jakob Nielsen’s book: “Usability Engineering” (published by Morgan Kaufmann, 1994). Originating before the World Wide Web became popular, this definition covers more than just the user interfaces found on the internet, and the definition consequently applies to IT systems in a broader sense.
According to that definition, a usable system should be:
• Easy to learn – the user should not need to pay much attention, use specific abilities or spend much time getting started;
• Easy to remember – the user should quickly and easily be able to access the system, whenever she wants to use it;
• Efficient – the user is able to perform relevant tasks;
• Reliable – the user can rely safely on the system and its solutions; and
• Satisfactory – the user likes the process and enjoys the experience.
The definition above describes usability as one of many qualities of a successful system, e.g. that the system is socially acceptable as well as accessible. The user must be able to deposit and receive information from the system whenever and wherever the user wants to and in a form acceptable to her.
The importance of each of the criteria varies from system to system – in a nuclear power plant control system Reliability means more than Satisfactory, and vice versa in a computer game.
According to the International Standard Organisation, ISO, usability is the "effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction with which a specified set of users can achieve a specified set of tasks in a particular environment." (See also the paragraph on ISO 9241-11).
Characteristics of a user experience
A variety of elements contribute to the user’s experience including offline elements (e.g. media and marketing, shops and sales, support and delivery) and online elements like usability.
The focuses here is on the following criteria for the user experience on the web:
• The web site is easy to find on the internet;
• The web site is quick to enter;
• The web site meets the user’s requirements;
• The user can easily and quickly use the web site to solve her tasks in a satisfactory way; and
• The user wants to use the web site; and possibly re-use it again and again.
This definition focuses on the user’s ability and desire to perform her tasks by using a given web site. Can and will the user in fact perform her tasks on this web site? This is the question which decides the value and nature of the experience of the web site – to the user and consequently to the sender.
Today’s internet is rich in information and each individual web site will only be able to succeed if it grabs and maintains user attention. This aspect of engaging the user is not always included in the concept of usability. Often times the definition of usability is restricted to the users’ abilities to use the web site when in fact, a broader concept is needed. A qualitative assessment of the user experience should include a web sites’ ability to present and communicate information, create know-how, and give meaning to the user.
Several criteria are decisive for a user to choose to enter the internet and use a specific web site to perform her tasks. The concepts of usability and user experience both apply, making it hard to distinguish between the two. Here the general concept is usability but in many cases the term ‘user experience’ can be applied as well. Prominent aspects in both cases are:
• The user’s perception of being able to manage her communications;
• The content quality (including its relevance, actuality and trustworthiness) to the user; and
• The functional and visual appeal of the web site.
The content may be ever so relevant and interesting to a user, but if she cannot find it on the web site, then in practise the content does not exist in the world of that user. If users find it hard to operate the web site, or cannot manage the web site functions, they will blame the web site – even though the content or functionality that they seek exists.
By Thomas.
August, 9. 2004.
Permanent URL to Characteristics of usability and user experience
"After all, usability really just means that making sure that something works well: that a person of average (or even below average) ability and experience can use the thing - whether it's a Web site, a fighter jet, or a revolving door - for its intended purpose without getting hopelessly frustrated."
- Steve Krug, Don't Make Me Think, 2000, p. 5
"Usability is de facto interdisciplinary, the bastard step-child of experimental psychology, information science, engineering, computer science, organizational psychology, business management, technical writing, and various other disciplines you might include. "
- Randolph G. Bias, Associate Professor, The University of Texas at Austin
By Thomas.
August, 6. 2004.
Permanent URL to Usability definitions I love
Powered by Movable Type
Copyright 2004, Thomas Visby Snitker
Syndicate: RSS 2.0 excerpt | Atom full text