Comments:
Stephen Morrow:
http://chiblog.sjmorrow.com/2011/01/reading-1-hci-methods-for-including.html
Derek Landini:
http://dlandinichi.blogspot.com/2011/01/reading-1-hci-methods-for-including.html
Reference Information:
Title: HCI Methods for Including Adults with Disabilities in the Design of CHAMPION
Author: Suzanne Prior
Venue: CHI 2010
Summary:
Recently, the number of adults with Complex Communication Needs (CCN) has been rising. The CHAMPION project is researching ways to incorporate adults with CCN in the design of software to make it more user friendly for them. Traditional HCI methods were adapted in order to be used with adults with CCN. One example is the matter of informed consent. Due to the inability of some adults with CCN to give informed consent, a modified method involving an informed consent form with yes or no questions was adapted.
A focus group of adults with CCN utilized clicker5 (powerpoint with voice output of objects on the screen) and paper prototypes of a GUI interface to discuss where they saw room for improvement in the software. These adaptations of HCI methodologies resulted in obtaining useful suggestions from adults with CCN and may lead to a better incorporation of adults with CCN into future software design.
Discussion:
I find this paper interesting because it deals with an important issue that I would most likely never think about if someone else did not bring it to my attention. With the rising number of adults with CCN, utilizing them in the design process is not only the morally right thing to do, but could also be fiscally beneficial. One fault i found with this paper was the large use of acronyms. While the acronyms became obvious the farther down the paper I read, at the start I found myself constantly looking back to remember what each acronym stood for. While I understand that acronyms are efficient, looking up was tedious and broke the flow of the paper. In the future I think it would be beneficial to show how much a software company could increase their sales of a product if it were more user friendly towards adults with CCN.
I never really considered that the article was difficult to read because of the use of acronyms. That a rather interesting point, I suppose that when I read them I replace them with what they stand for. If there was empirical data to show how these kinds of studies increased sales would that have qualified the article more for you?
ReplyDeleteI didn't feel like the goal was to make a product more profitable, but to make the technology more user-friendly. However I can see your point- it won't do anyone much good if they improve the technology and no one buys it.
ReplyDelete