The Guideline project is concerned with the interface and interaction issues of consumer product control and display devices. The main objective of the project is to produce interface design guidelines for emerging or advanced consumer based products for interaction and product designers. The information for the guidelines is being produced using two different approaches; these are empirically based guidelines produced within the project, using software based prototypes of three anticipated advanced interfaces, and information gathered from relevant human computer interaction (HCI) literature. This paper presents an account of the project as a case study and documents some of the findings that have emerged so far

John V.H. Bonner (7150916)

English

Loughborough University Institutional Repository

   This item was submitted to Loughborough’s Institutional Repository by the author and is made available under the following Creative Commons Licence conditions.      For the full text of this licence, please go to: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/  1205.2 BonnerIDATER 97  Loughborough UniversityIntroductionThe Guideline project is concerned with theinterface and interaction issues of consumerproduct control and display devices. It is athree year programme funded by theEngineering & Physical Sciences ResearchCouncil.  The main objective of the project isto produce interface design guidelines foremerging or advanced consumer basedproducts.  As electronic consumer basedproducts pervade more and more intodifferent aspects of social life, for examplepersonal digital assistants (PDAs), VCRs andmicrowaves, the user/product interaction isbecoming more complex.  This project,therefore, aims to gather information togetherthat will assist interaction designers andproduct designers to design products whichretain effective and usable interfaces. Theinformation will be provided in the form ofdesign guidelines which are being producedusing two different approaches, these are:• empirically based guidelines producedwithin the project using software basedprototypes of anticipated advancedinterfaces• information gathered from relevant humancomputer interaction (HCI) literature andconverted into design guidelinesWe have two collaborating partners in theprogramme, Electrolux and Raychem.  Tosupport Electrolux in their own developmentprogramme we are initially focusing on awashing machine interface as one of the mainDeveloping advanced interface design guidelines fromsurvey based and empirical researchJ V H BonnerTeesside UniversityAbstractThe Guideline project is concerned with the interface and interaction issues of consumerproduct control and display devices.  The main objective of the project is to produce interfacedesign guidelines for emerging or advanced consumer based products for interaction andproduct designers.  The information for the guidelines is being produced using two differentapproaches; these are empirically based guidelines produced within the project, using softwarebased prototypes of three anticipated advanced interfaces, and information gathered fromrelevant human computer interaction (HCI) literature.  This paper presents an account of theproject as a case study and documents some of the findings that have emerged so far.‘evaluation’ tools for our research.  Raychemare interested in the successfulimplementation of a user centred approachto product development and are thereforeinvolved in the design and appropriateimplementation of the guidelines which willbe used by designers and non-designspecialists.  They are also providing supporton display technology.  We are using otherorganisations to assist in producing effectivedesign guidelines.This paper presents an account of the projectso far as a case study.  The work is still inprogress and therefore some research avenueshave yet to be explored.  As this is a case studyand reports only the activities that have beenundertaken in the project, this paper is moredocumentary rather than providing anyacademic critique at this stage.  The stages andprocess of the project are describeddiagramatically in Figure 1.Literature review and building of databaseThe project began in March 1996.  We havecompleted a comprehensive literature reviewwith over 1000 references related to thedevelopment of advanced interfaces (about80% of these are full references).  The basicstrategy was to conduct searches in five keyareas; these included:• basic ergonomics principles that can beused and understood by designers in thecontext of interface design;• research work in the fields of HCI,121Bonner 5.2IDATER 97  Loughborough Universityergonomics and industrial designconcerned with innovative input andoutput devices that can be applied toconsumer products;• issues related to the successful andunsuccessful implementation of guidelinesinto organisations;• the evaluation of prototype interfaces; and• gaining an awareness of other relatedresearch programmes both national andinternational.All abstracts from papers along withsummaries of other source material wereentered into a database, resulting in a broadranging interrogation resource tool where keytopic areas can be retrieved from the databasefor the development of guidelines.  Althoughthe information domain was large, we decidedto adopt a divergent approach to datacollection, in order to develop a broadoverview of the subject area and capture asmany related topics as possible.The database includes topic areas such as:• Haptic interaction (three dimensional formand touch): graspable controls, controltactile feedback, touch sensitive devices,morphing interfaces• Auditory interaction: auditory icons orearcons, music, voice control andrecognition• Kinaesthetic interaction: pointing andmanipulating within a 3D virtualenvironment, field sensing devices, fingeroperated controls, flying mouse, gesturecontrols, glove controls, joysticks, pencontrols, virtual input devices, eye inputdevices, using facial expressions as an inputdevice, full body interfaces, headmovement interaction• Dynamic visual interaction: animatedimages, scroll sliders, facial expression asan output device, graphic representationof complex information• Static visual interaction: graphiccomposition, iconic representation,pictorial space, text based dialogues,hypertextOne of the important tasks that we undertookwith the literature review was to identify gapsin research.  These gaps were determinedlargely by identifying information that we feltwas needed and could not be found or otherauthors had identified as lacking.  There isFigure 1. Production of advanced interfacedesign guidelines methodologyLiteraturereviewGeneralPrinciplesPilotGuidelinesEmpiricallybasedguidelinesDatabaseStudiesof novelinterfacesGuidelinesEvaluationPrototypedesignTest sitesDraftGuideline setsGuidelineStructureProductionIterativeReviewDevelopment1225.2 BonnerIDATER 97  Loughborough Universityvirtually no published information or designguidelines1, 2 on intelligent or adaptiveinterfaces for consumer products but areasonable amount on computer basedapplications 3,4.  However, many of thesepapers tended to focus on the architecture ofthe intelligent interface rather than usabilityissues.  Further attention needs to be placedon precise definitions and a deeperunderstanding of terms such as interaction,intelligent and adaptive interfaces.  We foundlittle information about consumers as usersof products and the similarities or differencesbetween them and computer users.  There isvery little development work in the publicdomain focusing on advanced interfaces forproducts for example using state-of-the-artdisplays to convey information5.  Although,some attention has been given to thedevelopment of design guidelines for userswith special needs. 6,7,8,9Development of guidelines based on theliteratureOnce a reasonable body of material had beengathered, a critical review of the literature wasundertaken at two levels.• General ergonomics principles that willunderpin the guidelines and provide acontext in which they can be developed.• Literature related to innovative or novelcontrol or display devices that could beconverted or used as interaction designguidelines for industrial designers.The first critical review was important toextract from the literature a set of generalprinciples that designers could understandand use.  This would set the guidelines intocontext by outlining a ‘user centred’ approachto the design of advanced interfaces.  Thegeneral principles would also bring a commondesign approach to the guidelines as designershave many different viewpoints and strategiesto designing a product.10,11The second critical review was aimed atseeking any published literature which wouldprovide a picture of the types of existing andemerging devices that are being developed.It quickly became apparent that this type ofinformation was more readily available inconference proceedings and other more ‘grey’sources such as the World Wide Web.  Muchof the material has contributed towards thedevelopment of pilot guidelines and can beviewed as ‘raw’ guideline material.Development of empirically basedguidelinesTo supplement the guidelines producedthrough the HCI literature, this project is alsoproducing empirically based guidelines.  Therationale for this is threefold.  Firstly, we feltthat we could monitor and therefore learnabout the process of designing and evaluatingadvanced interfaces by going through theprocess ourselves.  This process would enableus to produce process based guidelines andalso provide first hand experience of how theguidelines should be structured.  Secondly, itwould provide an opportunity to exploreemerging interaction styles from a humanfactors perspective and thirdly we would beable to assess different prototype evaluationmethods that are best suited to interfacedesigners. The intention is that the results ofthe user trials will be generic enough apply toa wide range of other consumer products.Decisions about what type of advancedinterface should be evaluated was dependentupon identified gaps in the literature,anticipated technological trends found in theliterature and also discussions with Raychemand Electrolux.  This included reviewing thefindings from consumer survey reports onwhite goods.  From this some general userrequirements could be established.Three types of interfaces were developed onthe basis of these constraints above.  Allprototypes were principally based on allowingconsumers to customise and select defaultwashing programmes.  The selected interfacesare:• Control devices for setting ‘vague’ washingparameters using abstract graphical imagesto present program selections.  Some ofthe questions that have been posed are:How do users interact, perceive andunderstand graphical abstractrepresentations of product functionality?Do users feel confident about selectingvague settings (e.g. changing temperaturesettings using colour representation rather123Bonner 5.2IDATER 97  Loughborough Universitya larger number of designers, including afurther design centre in Electrolux and adesign group at NCR in Scotland. This will helpwiden the scope of design issues demandedfrom the guidelines.  Each test site is providingabout six to eight interaction design questionsthat may help answer their own current designissues and problems.In response to these questions, a small set ofguidelines are returned to the designers whichattempt to answer the original questions.  Afew weeks later a questionnaire is sent to thedesigners to establish their relevance,appropriateness and changes which should bemade in order to improve the guidelines.  Thisprocess will be iterative.  This approach allowsa ‘user-centred’ philosophy to be applied tothe design of guidelines themselves.Guidelines, by their nature, are often difficultto develop and use 13, 14.  The most commonproblem being the ability to provide guidelinesat the correct level of support: they are oftencriticised for being either too general or toospecific.  While the difficulty can never beameliorated completely, attempts have beenmade to structure the guidelines to overcomethis and other problems as much as possible.The first stage was to develop a ‘descriptor’model at a small workshop with designersfrom Electrolux to examine this problem.  Theaim of the workshop was to devise a high leveltaxonomy that would accommodate existinginteraction styles as well as those yet to bedefined.  The workshop resulted in a simplenine celled matrix.  However, under closerscrutiny this proved to be too simplistic andnot robust enough to explain all interactionstyles.  The second ‘descriptor’ model hasbeen more successful in attempting to defineadvanced interfaces and interactions bycategorising devices at a ‘sensory’ level.  That than numerical values)• Touch screen, finger controlled ‘directmanipulation’ (e.g. moving symbols oricons on a display panel to ‘design or build’a washing programme).  Some of thequestions posed are:  How effective is it tomanipulate icons on a touch screen panel?What are effective feedback mechanismsfor touch screen controls?  This interfaceexample is given in Figure 2.• Using the addition of auditory displays todescribe washing programs.  Some of thequestions posed are: What level oftolerance users have of auditory displays?What do users understand and prefer todifferent types of auditory displays?A ‘contemporary’ washing machine has alsobeen produced in software prototype form toact as a control during the evaluation.  Thepilot studies have been completed and the firstround of empirical studies will start in June1997.  There will be two experimental trials(excluding the pilot).  A range of structuredevaluation methods will take place notingactions such as errors, behavioural patternsand user perceptions.  The findings of the trialsalong with the design and developmentprocess will contribute to the guidelines.Production of guidelines content andstructureThe next stage, which is still being undertaken,was to ask designers, at the two test sites(Electrolux and Raychem), what type ofinformation they would like so that we coulddeliver appropriate and relevant guidelines todesign projects currently underway asguidelines are rarely developed in this way 12.Each test site includes a small group of productdesigners who require ergonomicsinformation during their design activity.  Thenumber of test sites has increased to includeFigure 2. Example of 'direct manipulation' touch screen for a washing machine control panel1245.2 BonnerIDATER 97  Loughborough UniversitySyntax levelSemantic levelTask levelHaptic interaction AuditoryinteractionKinaestheticinteractionVisualinteractionis to say, the primary human sensory organwhich is used for the device governs itsclassification.Obviously many devices can fall into one ormore categories where more than one senseis used extensively.  This ‘descriptor’ modelwas also limited in that it focused on isolateddevices and does not relate to complexinteractions, for example multi-modalinteraction or how the interfacecommunicates its functionality.  What isrequired is a model of interaction describingthe user’s conceptual model of the interfaceas well as describing the physical actions.Furthermore, this model would have to maponto the design process in order to be usedeffectively.  Currently, a simple taxonomycategorising guidelines by interaction level andmain interaction sensory channel is proposed.This is presented in Figure 3.  This taxonomyhas yet to be validated using the test sites.Undoubtedly this will alter over time.  Oneobvious problem is the lack of design contextin which the guidelines could be used.  Ourresearch, so far, suggests that some form ofselection activity should take place before theguidelines are used.  This selection activityshould establish the designer’s needs for theguidelines before any are suggested.Future workWe are currently at the stage where the firstversion of the draft guidelines are beingevaluated.  Once we have received sufficientfeedback, a second generation of guidelineswill be produced.  It is also anticipated thatadvanced interface prototypes will bedeveloped using the guidelines moreextensively later on in the project in a morecontrolled environment. One solution may beto use student projects as a mechanism forassessing the guidelines using a set interfacedesign project.  Furthermore, we areattempting to devise a field experiment wherewe can assess differences in design outputbetween design projects that have used theguidelines against a design project withoutthem.SummaryProviding usable guidelines is both challengingand ambitious and the work so far hasproduced some issues that will have to beconsidered.  The topic area has proved to bevery wide and diverse, making themanagement and categorisation of such datadifficult.  The limitations of guidelines mustalso be a part of the development strategy andit should always be recognised that designguidelines should be a part of a larger tool set.The problems are further compounded in thatproduct designers traditionally tend not todevelop design solutions using highly formalmethods.  This makes the introduction ofguidelines more difficult as stages in designdevelopment are less rigid.Designing and developing advanced interfacesfor the purposes of the project has beeninvaluable and provided a useful insight intothe process.  There have been many occasionswhere we have had to make intuitive designdecisions because design guidelines were notavailable.  This has helped in understandingwhat type and when guidelines should beprovided.Figure 3.  Current taxonomy for guidelines125Bonner 5.2IDATER 97  Loughborough UniversityReferences1 Hoffberg, L. I.  Designing user interfaceguidelines for time-shift programming ona video cassette recorder ( V C R ). HumanFactors Society 35th Annual Meeting,  SanFrancisco, California, 1991, vol 1, pp 501-504.2 Schumacher, R. M., Hardzinski, M.L. andSchwartz, A.L.  Increasing the usability ofinteractive voice response systems:Research and guidelines for phone-basedinterfaces.  Human Factors, vol 37, no 2,1995, pp 251-2643 Chignell, M.H., & Hancock, P.A. IntelligentInterface Design.  In Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, Helander, M (Ed),New York: Elsevier, North Holland, 1988.4 Sullivan, J.W. & Tyler, S.W. (Eds) IntelligentUser Interfaces. ACM Press, New York,1991.5 Black, A., & Buur, J. Making solid userinterfaces work, Information DesignJournal, vol 8, no 2, 1996, pp 99-108.6 Casali, S.P. Computer access by personswith disabilities: existing solution,remaining obstacles and the role of humanfactors. Proceedings of Interface ‘93,Raleigh, North Carolina, 1993, pp 137-142.7 Sandhu, J. Design for the elderly: user-based evaluation studies involving elderlyusers with special needs,  AppliedErgonomics, vol 24, no 1, 1993, pp30-348 Linn, J.J., Williges, R.C. & Beaudet, D.B.Accessible remote controls for older adultswith mildly impaired vision, In: Design forthe Global Village, Proceedings of theHuman Factors and Ergonomics Societies39th Annual Meeting, San Diego,California, 1995, vol 1, pp. 148-1529 Ward, J. T. Human factors design guidelinesfor the disabled, Perspectives. Proceedingsof the Human Factors Society 33rd annualmeeting, Denver, Colorado, 1989, vol 1 pp490-492.10 Gillan, D.J. & Breedin, S.D. Designers’Models of the Human-Computer Interface,In Proceedings of ACM CHI’90 Conferenceon Human Factors in Computing Systems,1990, pp. 391-398.11 Gould, J.D. & Lewis, C. Designing forusability: key principles and what designersthink, In: Readings in HCI: A multi-disciplinary approach Baecker, Buxtonand Kaufmann, Publishers,  California,1987, pp. 528-53912 Bastien, J. M. A and Scapin, D. L. Howusable are usability principles, criteria andstandards?, Symbiosis of Human andArtefact: Future Computing and Designfor HCI,  edited by Anzai, Ogawa & Mori,Elsevier, Amsterdam, vol 2, 1995, pp 343-34813 Tatzlaff, L. & Shwartz, D. R. The use ofguidelines in interface design. In S. P.Robertson, G.M. Olsen, & J. S. Olson (Eds),Proceedings of ACM CHI’91 Conference onHuman Factors in Computing Systems,1991 (pp. 329-333).  New Orleans,Louisiana: ACM14 Mosier, J.N., & Smith, S.L. Application ofguidelines for designing user interfacesoftware. Behaviour and InformationTechnology, 5, 1986, pp 39-46

Developing advanced interface design guidelines from survey based and empirical research

https://repository.lboro.ac.uk/articles/Developing_advanced_interface_design_guidelines_from_survey_based_and_empirical_research/9341891/files/16950611.pdf

Developing advanced interface design guidelines from survey based and empirical research

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Loughborough University Institutional Repository