I’m sure at some point we have all used products that we thought had poor usability. Did they really? Or were we blind to see the true operation of a certain product? I know there are a lot of products out there that are blatant poor designs but others are just being used improperly. Looking at the website with all of the “problem products” was pretty entertaining. Yes, there are some bad designs on there, but who says there isn’t some user error? Does everything we use in our daily life need to have huge red letters instructing people on the proper operation of a tool/product/device? People with a lack of how things work and are not willing to learn seem to claim “poor design” because it’s the easy solution. A good example from the site of “problem products” is the post about the three doors. There are three doors and the poster was freaking out about how to know how to open the center door. Sure, you could put a push handle on the non-hinged side of the door or you could just be more aware of your surroundings, look up, and see where the door is hinged and open it. Am I alone here?
The type of usability testing I’m going to use is document markup. I think this is the most effective test because it will give me an indication of where my directions might not be clear or where people get stuck. This is important for my instructions because the finished product is the most important part and all the steps to get there are important. If one step is misunderstood or skipped, the end result will not be the same. To perform this test I will ask my roommates to try my instructions and complete the task. This will enable me to get direct feedback from someone who knows how to cook and someone who is a novice at cooking. Their feedback will be very useful in constructing both sets of instructions.
Nah, we don't
I don't think you are alone in thinking that many products aren't poorly designed, but used improperly by people. However, going back to the van seat lever example from instructor blog #6, I have actually done just what it describes. Of course, I felt like an idiot, and once I got myself back sitting up straight, I tried to figure out where I had gone wrong. I realized I hadn't even thought about the fact that this lever might not push the seat back. Instead, my mind had automatically thought back to all other seats that I had pushed back and on those, I had used a lever located in the exact same spot. I think usability most times should be like the readings last week stated, invisible. While most of us aren't idiots and could obviously just look at where the hinges are, that isn't the foremost thing on our mind so we don't think to do it.
No ... in fact, if we don't need to be told, it's good design.
We don't need to be told everything, but good design should making using a product intuitive, and therefore, eliminate the need to be told how it works. As you explain, "most of us aren't idiots and could obviously just look at where the hinges are" but "that isn't the foremost thing on our mind" which is right on. When we're going to use an object, i.e., the seat lever, the foremost thing on our mind is finishing the task at hand, not how we're going to operate the tool that's supposed to fix the first problem. In a past writing class, we read a book called the "Design of Everyday Things" that pointed out several unintuitive designs that made everyday tasks harder and those that were intuitive and made things easier. One of the best examples was doors and the way they're handle is designed. If it's got a handle that sticks out, you're going to naturally pull on the door, whereas if it has a long bar across it horizontally, you're going to naturally push the door. This is good design; you don't have to stop and look at the hinges on the door -- and you shouldn't have to. Companies pay entire departments to research this sort of thing and then execute it.
Kristin
Van seats
As a matter of fact we do need to be told everything. "We" being Ms. "What-do-you-mean-my-coffee-is-hot?" and Mr. "Eating-nothing-but-junk-food-can-make-me-fat?". As IB#6 points out, often usability testing is pretty common sense but then again baddesigns.com proves otherwise. I totally agree with lpetrovi that there are some products that could be easily improved if the designer had actually taken the time to use the product themselves. This goes back to considering your audience. if the majority of your audience is used to the seat recline lever being under the seat and you put the seat lifting lever there, you obviously have not considered your audience and are going to have some confused people. This isn't to say that all van seats should be identically constructed to avoid confusing the user but if you are going to do something that might be considered abnormal to the majority of you audience, you need to make sure you make them aware of the differences.
Andy
Audience
It’s almost like we should be coming up with three different sets of instructions, one for novices, one for experts, and one for the people who can’t put their shoes on the right feet. I also looked through site and the writer had a few good points, but mostly, he seems upset he had to use an ounce of brain power to figure out the world. He brought up how he could never figure out which string to pull on the ceiling fan to make the light turn on. I have been using ceiling fans my whole life and as far as I can tell everyone has been the same, I thought he would have caught on by now. The reality is that this is another audience that needs to be considered (usually in the warning labels).
Write for many not the few
So now we are back to treating users as idiots instead of novices. Well I think we should not fall into this trap some people want us to fall into. Unless we are protecting ourselves from lawsuits then by all means write the stupidest warnings and instructions we can think of so that even an infant could operate it. Unfortunately there will always be that one person and I am pretty sure we all just thought of that person in our heads right now that will have problems no matter how clearly our instructions are written out. To that I say they need to learn how to read instructions. If many of our novice users understand the instructions then that is excellent. If we cater to a few then we alienate the majority and that is not a good idea.
Whos buying?
I agree with you about some people interpreting certain things incorrectly or even being oblivious to what is going on. As Jeff said, the majority of the people should and will understand what is going on, but there always has to be that one person or group who can pick out the flaws in any situation. Some people don't understand that a lot of research and development has gone into things to make it usable, durable AND possibly even aesthetically pleasing.
I think you chose a good usability test for your instructional task. Some people may be worried about getting confused halfway through and potentially ruin an expensive piece of meat. You might want to have them do a pre-cook markup first. Also, are you planning on purchasing the filets for your roomates to complete the feedback? I think that would be a nice thing to do if you are going to have them complete the usability test.
not me
First of all, I’m not buying my roommates food for the usability test. I can, however, set them up with good prices on meat
It’s true that asking someone to test my instructions is not cheap, but there is a chance they will like the outcome and begin to enjoy cooking. People should see this as an opportunity not a burden. This is similar to you home brew instructions. Perhaps someone who was uneasy about making their own beer will try your instructions and fall in love with the art that is beer making. The cost won’t be an issue then.
It may be discouraging
That will be the main problem with mine. The money upfront may discourage people from trying to brew their own beer. I am trying to source as much equipment from local stores to reduce the price and inconvenience of buying from the internet. The beer kit itself is the most expensive part of the entire process, but it is still relatively cheap compared to buying the same quantity at the beer store. If people get into it, ideas and options are limitless. I find it to be a pretty fun process, and a good end result is very rewarding. Hopefully my instructions will encourage someone else to start their own, as well as give them a much better instruction set to follow.
Correct usability test?
I think that is a very effective strategy for you to use your roomates as the subjects for your usability test. However, why aren't you utilizing the thirty people in this class who have recently read up on how to write a set of instructions? I just think that if you came up with a set of questions to ask all of us about your instructions and ask for our feedback, you would improve your instructions to the greatest degree. I'm not implying that your roomates can't read instructions, but I think you have rescources that would allow you to get a better grade in this class.
Mike Sheridan
2 Types of Testing
You mentioned that you are using your roommates for your instruction testing. Did you consider somewhat of a laboratory testing plan? Since you will potentially be nearby while your roommates are testing your instruction set you could observe how they are doing. I think that maybe if you used a little of this along with your plan of using document markup you could get two types of results. You could see where some steps took them longer and possibly need rewording or more detail. You will also get their markings on places where they had problems. I think with both types of testing you could find even more ways to improve your instructions.
-Chris