Usability In The News

Do You Have That Portable in a Midsize?

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Tue, 13 May 2008 08:28:34 -0500

New form factors may require new UI's ...

"Thirty-six years ago, Alan Kay, a computer scientist, published a rough sketch of his Dynabook portable computer, establishing the ideal of ever more intimate personal computers.

During the next decade, Mr. Kay’s tablet design, at 9 inches by 12 inches by 3/4 inch, morphed into today’s ubiquitous laptop form-factor — a term used by consumer electronics specialists to describe the different sizes of various gadgets.

Since then, there has been a proliferation of gadgets of every size and shape, but to date only one other form-factor has established itself as a generic one: the palm-size or hand-held device that began as the Palm Pilot personal digital assistant designed by the Palm Computing co-founders Jeff Hawkins and Donna Dubinsky. An endless array of popular products, from BlackBerrys to iPhones, are descended from the Palm.

This portable world is now neatly broken into gadgets that fit comfortably in your pocket and devices that snuggle equally comfortably on your lap.

Is there room for a third category? Perhaps a new class of consumer gadgets that fits somewhere between hand-held and laptop?

For want of a better description, I propose that we label this jacket-pocket form-factor the iMoleskine, after the Hemingway-esque notebooks that writers favor.

To date, the best example of the proto-Moleskine future is the Amazon Kindle book reader, which is the size of a paperback book. A quirky first-generation effort, the device has been criticized as having an odd user interface design and a flickering display. Because of the company’s endless front-page promotional efforts on its Web store, however, the Kindle seems headed for nichedom.

Intel certainly wants us to believe that there is more room in the middle.

Last month, at a splashy forum in China for developers, the company initiated its effort to create a category for Mobile Internet Devices, or M.I.D.’s, for those of this middle size. If you remember Microsoft’s abortive effort around the Ultra Mobile PC brand in early 2006, you will have a good sense of the size of an M.I.D. (though it wasn’t called one). Introduced with a painfully hip viral marketing campaign called Oragami, the initial round of U.M.P.C.’s landed with a resounding thud. Entering text and moving the pointer on the screen were laborious, and text was so tiny as to be unreadable.

Still, Intel has persevered, arguing that there is a “use case” — the technology industry loves jargon — based on the intersection of increasingly accessible broadband wireless networks and the Web. We are going to want the Web wherever we are. Think location, location, location.

As a consequence, the Intel executives assert, the tiny cellphone display, which was ideal for viewing an 11-digit phone number or several lines of e-mail or text messaging, will be relentlessly stretched like taffy in all directions.

A cynic might argue that the real reason for Intel’s sudden enthusiasm for the M.I.D. stems from the reality that its recently introduced Atom microprocessor is stuck in a no man’s land between laptop and cellphone chips. It will be another two years before Intel has a chip that will bring the Windows-compatible world to the palm of your hand. So, what to do for now, if your chips are too power-hungry to squeeze into the cellphone market, currently dominated by microprocessor chips licensed from ARM, the British chip company? If you have lemons, make lemonade!" (Continued via Yahoo! Finance) [Usability Resources]

Self-service and the (possible?) recession

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Tue, 13 May 2008 08:24:34 -0500

Usability may become one of those self-service outcomes ...

"Is this country teetering on the edge of a recession?

Depends on who you talk to, I guess. If you believe this doomsday YouTube rant by the always-animated Jim Cramer, host of MSNBC’s “Mad Money”, (and if I were you, I’d check it out because it’s pretty darn funny toward the end) then you’re probably ready to make a run on the bank and hide in your bomb shelter.

... What she worries about is a downturn in the quality of self-service deployments as companies eager to cut costs in a tight economy might decide to shortcut certain design processes and make a beeline straight for assembly and deployment. Design is something Bodine says some kiosk manufacturers have a hard enough time focusing on in a good economy – in a sub-standard one, she says it’s almost certain to suffer.

“I spend a lot of time looking at the kiosk industry, and compared with other self-service technology channels like the Web, the kiosk industry is really far behind in terms of understanding some of these design processes and methodologies,” she said.

Specifically, she’s referring to methodologies that focus on identifying and pleasing the prospective kiosk user, such as conducting ethnographic research, usability testing, focus groups and analytics. Unfortunately, she says some kiosk deployers and manufacturers have such a tenuous grasp of R&D that they don’t know which methodologies to use.

“If you want to know if your system is easy to use, you can’t run a focus group to find that out. That’s something that I do see in the kiosk industry a lot,” she said. “They use focus groups for everything because it’s really the one primary tool that they understand. Instead you should either be conducting an expert review…running a usability lab test – there are a lot of ways to evaluate usability, but not through a focus group.”

Bodine fears the economy may drive some companies to eliminate usability testing altogether and rush substandard deployments to market. She says this approach could seriously hurt the industry." (Continued via Self-Service) [Usability Resources]

Usability of Content is Plain Language

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Mon, 12 May 2008 07:56:31 -0500

The importance of plain language ...

"An exciting thing happened in the USA on 14th April 2008. It didn't quite manage to make it onto the national news - that day, we were mostly hearing about the Pope's visit to the USA. Any ideas? Any clue from my title? Give up?

USA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PASSES PLAIN LANGUAGE ACT
The answer is that the USA House of Representatives passed the Plain Language in Government Communications Act of 2008. It achieved bipartisan support, passing with a massive majority of 376-1. The lone opponent, the aptly-named U. S. Congressman Flake, issued this commentary on the topic: “Bad bill. Voted no”.

It's not a long Act. Its key sentences are its purpose:

"The purpose of this Act is to improve the Federal Government's effectiveness and accountability to the public by promoting clear communication that the public can understand and use".

and the definition:

"The term `plain language' means language that the intended audience can readily understand and use because it is clear, concise, well-organized, and follows other best practices of plain language writing".

and the time requirement:

"Within one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, each agency -- (1) shall use plain language in any covered document of the agency issued or substantially revised after the date of the enactment of this Act"

OK, OK, it's not necessarily the easiest thing to read. (Plenty of in-jokes available here about the irony of a Plain Language Act itself having some obscure words in it). And it's not even really the law yet. The Senate has to have its go as well, and then the President. But the point is that Plain Language is back on the agenda of our sole super-power again.

PLAIN LANGUAGE MATTERS
Have a look at that 'purpose' sentence again: "that the intended audience can readily understand and use". Sounds very much like usability, doesn't it? And did you spot "clear, concise, well-organized"? Isn't that just what we strive for in our designs? That isn't a coincidence. There is a widely held misunderstanding that plain language is about following a specific set of rules for writing. It isn't." (Continued via Usability News - Caroline's Corner) [Usability Resources]

Design Strategies for Sustainable User Behaviour

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Mon, 12 May 2008 07:55:24 -0500

A new journal and article ...

"User-Centred Design for Sustainable Behaviour
Time for a small celebration. A paper that Renee Wever (also from TU Delft), Casper Boks (NTNU Norway) and I wrote together has been accepted for the first issue of the new International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, published by Taylor and Francis. It is entitled 'User-centred Design for Sustainable Behaviour' and in it we explore the possibilities of using product design to nudge users towards more sustainable product use. Most 'traditiona'l eco-design approaches have focused on cleaner production and creating more efficient products (using less resources), but less attention has been paid at how to include the users in this picture.

Getting users to behave 'green'
Many modern cars prevent us from making mistakes that will cost us a lot of time and effort. For example, they make it impossible to lock the driver-seat door from the outside without using the key. This prevents you from leaving your keys inside the vehicle and locking yourself out. In other words: the car prevents you from producing unfavorable side-effects. In this paper we explore the possibility of influencing user-product interaction through the design of the product with the aim of improving the sustainability of product use.

Four design strategies
We provide a typology of four user-centered design strategies for inducing sustainable behavior.

* Functionality matching: adapt a product better to the actual use by consumers and thereby try to minimize negative side effects;
* Eco-feedback: the user is presented with specific information on the impact of his or her current behavior, and it is left to the user to relate this information to his or her own behaviour, and adapt this behaviour, or not;
* Scripting: creating obstacles for unsustainable use, or making sustainable behaviour so easy, it is performed almost without thinking about it;
* Forced functionality: making products adapt automatically to changing circumstances, or to design-in strong obstacles to prevent unsustainable behaviour.

The four strategies are supported with examples from packaging, automotive and consumer electronics." (Continued via the product usability weblog) [Usability Resources]

Sustainable User Behaviour

UPA 2008 (Baltimore, MD, USA)

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Mon, 12 May 2008 07:53:15 -0500

Still time to sign-up ...

"The international UPA 2008 conference will be held in Baltimore on June 16-20, 2008.

This is a great conference for people new to usability as well as for experienced practitioners. You will meet wonderful people and get lots of practical tips and ideas. Monday June 16 and Tuesday June 17 are tutorials and workshops, while the main conference runs Wednesday June 18 through Friday June 20.

The theme of this year’s conference is “The Many Faces of User Experience: Usability through holistic practice.” Many types of professionals touch the user experience of a product. Marketing specialists, graphic designers, computer scientists, business analysts, psychologists, information architects, technical writers and others bring valuable perspectives to usability and user experience. UPA 2008 invites you to share perspectives and learn from the experiences of other practitioners.

This year’s conference will feature a special full-day program on usability in e-Government on Tuesday, June 17. There will be panel sessions on the status of usability in the U.S. Federal Government and in other governments around the world, small group discussions, and presentations and case studies on a wide range of topics.

UPA 2008 will also introduce a new topic called Managing User Experience. It includes sessions geared towards user experience managers, directors, or team leaders." (Continued via User Experience Network) [Usability Resources]

The Popup Scrollbar Concept

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Sun, 11 May 2008 07:38:09 -0500

The usability of a popup scrollbar - a video ...

"As you may remember from our series on common usability terms, I have a lot of interest in graphical user interface concepts. In addition, I applaud anyone trying to improve existing concepts, people that try to think beyond set conventions to come up with an improved version of that concept, or a new concept altogether. Thorsten Wilms took on the well-established concept of the scrollbar, and came up with a few interesting tweaks.

His idea is one of those things that are hard to explain by textual means - hence the video he made, which he put on YouTube for us all to see.

While I applaud the efforts made by Wilms (I already noted his email to gnome-usability), I have difficulties seeing the exact problems this new type of scrollbar tries to resolve. When observing my friends, who are almost all decidedly not computer savvy, I see that they use the scroll wheel for minor scrolling, and the 'scroll blob', as I like to call it, for heavier scrolling (like jumping to specific sections of a page). Of course, this is completely unscientific, but I think it's rather representative for most people out there. I've never seen anyone frantically turning the scroll wheel, only to be amazed by being pointed to the scroll blob - or vice versa. In other words, what problem does this new type of scrollbar address?

The only thing I can see is that when the scroll blob becomes too small, the act of being able to click and drag in the entire scroll bar to scroll can be quite handy. However, I would argue that scroll blobs becoming too small is not an inherent problem of the current scroll bar concept itself, but of the underlying toolkit instead: scroll blobs should always remain big enough to remain an easy target: you know, usability's favourite dead horse, Fitts' Law. In other words: this is a low-level problem, that you really shouldn't try to fix with a high-level solution.

This leaves us with the ever important question of whether or not to embrace a new UI concept: is the problem that the new concept tries to address big enough to justify learning that new concept? Seeing the relative complexity of Wilms' scroll bar, I tend to answer that question with 'no'." (Continued via OS News) [Usability Resources]

The Popup Scrollbar

BayCHI Monthly Program

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Sat, 10 May 2008 08:42:28 -0500

Tuesday, May 20, 2008: Monthly Program (BayCHI) ...

"7:30-9:30 pm
Information Visualization for Insight and Communication (Co-Sponsored with Stanford Symbolic Systems)
Ben Shneiderman, University of Maryland HCI Lab

Information Visualization for Insight and Communication (Co-Sponsored with Stanford Symbolic Systems)
Ben Shneiderman, University of Maryland HCI Lab

The rise of interactive information visualization tools provides researchers and analysts with remarkable capabilities to support discovery and communication. They begin with an overview, zoom in on areas of interest, filter out unwanted items, and then click for details-on-demand. The growing commercial success stories such as Spotfire, SmartMoney's Map of the Market, and The Hive Group are only the start. Research prototypes for large time series data are being applied to financial, medical, and genomic data. At the same time, data sharing web sites such as ManyEyes or Swivel and journalistic triumphs, such as the excellent interactive presentations of the New York Times, are helping to promote widespread interactive visual literacy.

This is the first of four lectures in the Stanford Symbolic Systems Distinguished Speaker series, with more lectures on May 21, 22, and 23.

Ben Shneiderman is a professor in the Department of Computer Science, founding director (1983-2000) of the Human-Computer Interaction Laboratory, and member of the Institute for Advanced Computer Studies at the University of Maryland at College Park.

He is a fellow of the ACM and received the ACM CHI Lifetime Achievement Award in 2001. His comprehensive text Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction (Addison-Wesley) came out in its 4th edition in April 2004 with Catherine Plaisant as co-author.

Since 1991, his major focus has been information visualization, beginning with his dynamic queries and starfield display research that led to the development of Spotfire. Dr. Shneiderman developed the treemap concept in 1991 which continues to inspire research and commercial implementations. The University of Maryland’s Treemap 4.0, developed in cooperation with Catherine Plaisant, has been licensed by the HiveGroup and remains available for educational and research purposes. Later information visualization work includes the LifeLines project for exploring a patient history, and its successor project, PatternFinder, which enables search across electronic medical records. Searching for patterns in numerical time series data was enabled by three versions of TimeSearcher, which was applied for stock market, auction, genomic, weather, and other data." (Continued via BayCHI) [Usability Resources]

New report analyzes usability of personal navigation devices 45 products tested from 23 brands

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Sat, 10 May 2008 08:37:16 -0500

A usability report of a different type ...

"Jakajima, an independent provider of business intelligence to the Telecom, IT and Consumer Electronics markets, today has announced the availability of a new report, “usability and performance benchmark for navigation devices”.

In this unique report, 45 Personal Navigation Devices (PNDs) from 23 manufacturers have been tested to benchmark their usability. Among others, the test protocol includes the number of button pressed before a route calculation starts, the speed of calculation for a destination and the speed of recalculation if a manoeuvre has been missed among others.

“There was a real lack of this kind of comprehensive benchmark on the market”, said Pieter Hermans, CEO at Jakajima. “Consumer and specialized media are doing testing of PNDs from time to time, but it has never been on such a scale with such precise test protocols. What is the difference between the usability of PND A and PND B; between brand Y and brand Z is really what this report is all about. We believe the whole navigation industry can benefit from it. Buyers in the retail can better understand what they sell and navigation manufacturers can see where they stand against each competitor and the market as a whole”.

All PNDs are not made equal
Along the 75 pages of this report, one true fact emerges, not all PNDs are made equal. There are many disparities. Average calculation times are spreading from 3.8 seconds for the fastest device to over 1 minute for the slowest. It is pretty much the same for the recalculation speed when you miss a turn. If you use a Becker Traffic Assist 7927 you have an average recalculation time of 8 seconds, while it is 20 seconds if you have a Medion GoPal P4425. With a 20 seconds re-calculation time, driving at 90km/h, means you will have covered half a kilometre before getting new instructions.

TomTom and Garmin
This report also highlights significant differences between the two leading PND brands, TomTom and Garmin. TomTom does a good job with its user interface with an average of 4 buttons less – to be pressed to launch a routing - than Garmin. Calculation time is also slightly quicker, around 3 seconds less for TomTom than for Garmin. However, Garmin does a better job for recalculation with 1 second less than TomTom. But many differences are also noticeable one a product basis; for example the Garmin Nuvi 250 and Nuvi 360 are quicker to calculate a route than the TomTom One XL and the TomTom One XL Europe." (Continued via The Location Based Service) [Usability Resources]

Circular Menus and Usability

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Fri, 09 May 2008 08:39:11 -0500

Circular menus. Ever heard of them? I'm not sure if they have an "official" or "common" name, but this name is pretty descriptive.

Circular menus are superior in usability to the typical rectangular slide-out menu. Why? Because, ideally, each menu item is the same distance from the initial pointer position as each other item. Look at the iPod buttons, for example. Play/Pause, the most common function, is in the middle, and the other functions are equal distances from there.

Also check out the SecondLife context "spin menu". The pie pops up surrounding the cursor, and all the available options are an equal twitch away from the center.

Submenus? Just expand the circle. For example, here's a quick mockup I made converting much of my current FireFox context menu into a pie menu:" (Continued via Tech Knack) [Usability Resources]

Circular Menu

Luke Wroblewski on Form Design

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Fri, 09 May 2008 08:29:18 -0500

A good audio discussion on forms design ...

"I recently had the pleasure of talking with Tom Crawford, CEO of VizThink, about my Web Form Design book and its relevance for the visual thinking community.

Check out the podcast with video on the VizThink site.
Download the audio as an mp3 (21.6 MB)

In the interview we discuss:

* Why web form design is important
* If form design is everywhere, why are there so many bad forms?
* What are some of the common mistakes web form designers make?
* What are the Top 3 tips for improving web forms?
* Why do good designers create bad forms?
* What is the disappearing form?
* How does web form design relate to visual thinking?" (Continued via Functioning Form) [Usability Resources]

Raising the standard of websites worldwide: BSI and Magus launch a new specification

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Fri, 09 May 2008 08:25:11 -0500

New specs for corporate websites ...

"BSI British Standards and UK web compliance expert Magus, recently launched at Internet World a Publicly Available Specification (PAS) which aims to improve the effectiveness of corporate websites through a new best practice approach to the application and management of website standards. PAS 124: “Defining, implementing and managing website standards” is available for download from today from the link below.

Simon Lande, CEO of Magus, commented: “As the web continues to develop as a critical business medium, so does the importance of maximising website effectiveness. But our experience shows that businesses are actually reducing the impact and value of their web presence, despite the millions invested each year, because they are not implementing website standards successfully.”

The specification is organised around the three key processes of effective website management: defining, implementing and managing website standards. The standards definition process is supported by a detailed guide to the categories of website standards that organisations need to consider. The key business benefits for managing websites within the PAS 124 framework include:

- Brand protection: reinforcement of the brand online by ensuring consistency of brand presentation and messaging; protection of the brand and company reputation by ensuring a consistent, high quality user experience.
- Risk management: minimisation of online risk through compliance with legislative requirements; securing appropriate protection of intellectual property under a defined legal jurisdiction.
- Improved financial return: protection of investment in web-related projects by ensuring quality and performance is maintained; reduction of development and maintenance costs; provision of access to the widest possible market, by ensuring compliance with accessibility guidelines and compatibility with target user platforms; and optimisation for targeted customer acquisition due to the effective localisation of content.
- Improved workflow: reduction of time to market for web projects through streamlined development and maintenance processes; communication and enforcement of best practice across web teams and the organisation as a whole.
- Performance measurement: provision of objective targets against which performance can be tracked and measured." (Continued via Usability News) [Usability Resources]

Simplicity in Your Mind

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Thu, 08 May 2008 08:03:04 -0500

There is increasing interest in the simplification of information technology (IT). The IT industry is recognizing the need to simplify software technology as businesses express their increased interest in governing the return on their IT investments. Two goals are surfacing as explicit mandates to which all software vendors are responding:

* lowering the skills required of software users
* increasing their productivity

Although this simplification mandate is most essential to small- and medium-sized businesses, where people with high-end technical skills may not be affordable, an awareness of the damage complexity inflicts on users is spreading to the enterprise market as well. Commoditization pressures make it necessary for the IT industry to reduce skills requirements as well as service and maintenance costs.

This article postulates that we cannot address the issue of simplification exclusively by analyzing the physical and computational parameters of technology. Instead, we must understand the goal of simplification in light of the knowledge, tasks, and processing-load demands on its users. We can approach simplicity as an engineering endeavor by controlling the impact on these three usage dimensions.

Software’s Complexity Complex

Software, like any other technology, has an intrinsic tendency to become more and more complex. In response to market forces, software developers struggle to differentiate products from those of their competitors by making them more and more functionally sophisticated. This has become a major problem for software vendors.

What are the dimensions of simplicity in software technology? Can those attributes be engineered? What do we mean by simplifying technology? What is simplicity?

Technology, unlike science, must be understood in light of its usage elements. To understand technology, we need to understand the individuals who use it. We cannot define complexity in technology solely in terms of objective physical parameters. If we accept the assumption that technology intrinsically involves human endeavor, we must accept the ergonomic, social, and mental agents that both build it and consume it. We must accept that its makers construct the complexity in technology.

The impact on technology of the physical and biomechanical properties of our bodies is well understood. The physical characteristics and limitations of our bodies constrain the optimization of users’ sitting postures and hand/arm alignment while physically interacting with hardware devices. For the most part, however, when it comes to information technology, complexity is in the mind." (Continued via UXmatters, Lucinio Santos) [Usability Resources]

Rubbing as a Zoom Gesture

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Thu, 08 May 2008 07:58:39 -0500

New gestures just around the corner ...

"At Alex Olwal's web page you can watch video and download a CHI 2008 paper describing research on rubbing as a gesture for zooming. Rubbing up and to the right zooms in, up and to the left zooms out.

Their evaluation showed that it was better than other single-finger methods for zooming, though fatigue can be a problem if the screen surface isn't smooth.

They also tested two variations on combined two-handed tapping and zooming techniques (e.g. one hand points or zooms and the other can tap to select).

Their focus was on touchscreens that report only a single finger for applications like public kiosks.

The paper is "Rubbing and Tapping for Precise and Rapid Selection on Touch-Screen Displays" by Alex Olwal, Steven Feiner, and Sanna Heyman." (Continued via Touch Usability) [Usability Resources]

Rubbing Gestures

Bite-Sized UX Research

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Thu, 08 May 2008 07:49:47 -0500

Best bang for buck with UX research ...

"It’s not uncommon for projects to lack the time, money, or resources to conduct ideal user research activities. There are many reasons why this occurs:

* Sometimes we’re brought onto a project late.
* Perhaps we’re new to an organization that doesn’t really get UX.
* Maybe a company is rushing to bring a product to market for some reason—and there are plenty of good and bad reasons this might be so—and there simply isn’t time to “go big”.
* Perhaps your client or organization is following an Agile development methodology.

At such times, it can be tempting to just throw up our hands in dismay and do nothing or lament the fact that everything isn’t perfect. But the simple fact is that, as UX professionals, we can always add value, at any stage in a project—even if a project team can’t act on our advice straight away.
Focus on Winning Small Victories Often

Regardless of the cause for your company’s resource crunch, focus on getting small wins as often as possible throughout your involvement in a project. This is a fairly common piece of advice that crops up time and time again, but it’s very much worth repeating. And it applies just as readily to both situations where time is short and those when there’s just not enough of you to go around.

This advice is equally valid for UX professionals who find themselves in new positions as the sole user experience person. It’s common for new hires to ask: “How do I sell the benefits of UX?” The answer is generally something along the lines of: “Focus on small wins.” In other words, don’t waste your energy putting together a series of case studies on how other people have created value at other organizations. Instead, do something positive and tangible—however small—and it’ll carry a lot more weight.
Go for Impact

Concentrate on getting bang for your buck. Depending on your circumstances, you may not get many opportunities to demonstrate the value of UX, and when time is short, there can be a tendency to just do something—anything. It’s an urge you should try to resist. If you want to have a greater impact, ask your project team—the project manager, the development team, and the business stakeholders—a few pointed questions before you get started:

* What are the critical features of the Web site or application?
* What features would be hardest for the developers to change once they’ve developed them?
* What are the areas of greatest ambiguity in terms of user requirements, audience groups, or competitive offerings?

And then ask a few more questions:

* How can I best document my user research findings, so the project team can used them?
* Do we have time for iterations? And if so, how many?

With this information, you can start planning some activities that focus on the most important elements of the project—the critical features for success; the features that are hardest to change; or the gray areas of the project—and deliver some real value.

It’s all very well to say “do something small,” but what, exactly, can you do?" (Continued via UXmatters) [Usability Resources]

How Little Do Users Read?

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Wed, 07 May 2008 08:42:36 -0500

Webpage readers read very little ...

"Summary:
On the average Web page, users have time to read at most 28% of the words during an average visit; 20% is more likely.

We've known since our first studies of how users read on the Web that they typically don't read very much. Scanning text is an extremely common behavior for higher-literacy users; our recent eyetracking studies further validate this finding.

The only thing we've been missing is a mathematical formula to quantify exactly how much (or how little) people read online. Now, thanks to new data, we have this as well.
The Research Study
For full details, see the following academic paper:

Harald Weinreich, Hartmut Obendorf, Eelco Herder, and Matthias Mayer: "Not Quite the Average: An Empirical Study of Web Use," in the ACM Transactions on the Web, vol. 2, no. 1 (February 2008), article #5.

In the study, the authors instrumented 25 users' browsers and recorded extended information about everything they did as they went about their normal Web activities. What's important about this study is that it was completely naturalistic: the users didn't have to do anything special.

One downside of the study is that the users had above-average intelligence, with several being university employees. This might not be a problem in the long run, however. If, for example, we compare data we collected in 2008 for our Fundamental Guidelines for Web Usability seminar with a similar study we ran in 2004, we find that 2008's average behavior is close to that of 2004's higher-end users. Thus, even though Weinreich et al.'s data represents high-end users, it's likely to be fairly representative of broader user behavior in the future. In fact, the authors collected their data in 2005, so the recorded behaviors might already be fairly common.

In any case, the research yielded several interesting findings, and the full paper is well worth reading.

Among other things, the authors found that the Back button is now only the 3rd most-used feature on the Web. Clicking hypertext links remains the most-used feature, but clicking buttons (on the page) has now overtaken Back to become the second-most used feature. The reason for this change is the increased prevalence of applications and feature-rich Web pages that require users to click page buttons to access their functionality.

Of course, Back is still the user's lifeline and is so frequently used that supporting it remains a strong usability guideline.
Real-Life Reading Behavior
Harald Weinreich graciously provided me with the dataset detailing 59,573 page views.

From this data, I removed the following records:

* 10,163 page views (17%) that lasted less than 4 seconds. In such brief "visits," users clearly bounced right out without truly "using" the page.
* 2,615 page views (4%) that lasted more than 10 minutes. In these cases, users almost certainly left the browser open while doing something else.
* 1,558 page views (3%) with fewer than 20 words on them. Such pages are probably server errors or disrupted downloads.

After cleaning the dataset, I was left with 45,237 page views for my analysis." (Continued via Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox) [Usability Resources]

How Nokia Users Drive Innovation

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Wed, 07 May 2008 08:38:48 -0500

The site generates more than 1 million page views and about 200,000 downloads a month, according to Nokia. Thousands of users contribute comments. "We are having the positive problem of how to manage all the feedback," says Tommi Vilkamo, manager of Beta Labs, who also writes a blog in which he responds to reader comments.

Vilkamo's plan is to turn blogging responsibility over to software developers, so they have direct contact with customers. "Before, there were too many middlemen between developers and users," he says.

For Nokia, the benefit of free applications such as Sports Tracker is getting owners to take fuller advantage of the computing power of their handsets. Judging from the number of people who not only downloaded the program, but also uploaded routes and photos onto a sharing site, the strategy is a success.
Mapping Your Photo Diary

By monitoring the sharing site, Nokia developers have also been able to see how customers are actually using the software. One surprise is that some people used it just to record how they spent the day bumming around town, or skateboarding in the neighborhood. Recently, one user who identified himself as Ferdinandt shared live data of himself apparently traveling by boat off the coast of the Netherlands.

People are also taking advantage of the fact that the software records location information when users snap a photo with the handset camera. Users upload maps embedded with photos they took along their route to a sharing site Nokia established for the purpose, creating a multimedia diary of their day's voyage.

As a result, Nokia developers are realizing that aiming the application at amateur athletes was too narrow. They are thinking of rebranding the application as a kind of life-tracker. Based on the response to the software on Beta Labs, that may well help drive users to Nokia's Ovi Web portal (also in beta testing), which is the basis of Nokia's attempt to carve out a big piece of the evolving, mobile Internet. "It shows people they can do much more (with their handsets) than just make phone calls," says researcher Kaasinen." (Continued via Business Week) [Usability Resources]

Nokia Concept Phone

10 Tips to Increase Intranet Use

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Wed, 07 May 2008 08:26:34 -0500

Making an intranet usable ...

"In addition to simply providing access to documents and procedural information, an intranet has the potential to unify a corporate culture, emphasize core company values, and develop a sense of community among employees. Unfortunately, some intranets have simply grown organically as a collection of disjointed web sites or departments and are only used as document repositories for the different groups. The value of the disjointed experience to users of the site is limited. As a result, fewer and fewer employees use the intranet and fall back on other modes of obtaining what they need to do their job.

Companies that are looking to fix this situation and improve their intranet face a fundamental problem – employees just aren’t use to going to the intranet. Even if the content is improved, usability is updated, and the intranet offers more value overall, if employees don’t visit the site, it’s like a tree falling in the woods. Our experience with a number of intranet re-design projects has revealed a set of best practices or features that drive interest and repeat visitors to the site. These best practices include a set of considerations for site navigation, features, functionality, content and style. Many of the features are appropriate for an intranet home page, but they can also be interspersed throughout the site. The key is to apply the strategies and variations that work best within the context of the site.

It’s Not All About the Firm
Employees have interests outside the company and want to feel connected with what’s going on in the community around them. If you don’t provide content that interests them on the intranet site, they will go elsewhere for it. Enable employees to stay up-to-date with their interests by incorporating regional news, stock tickers, sports scores and other news right on the intranet. Even silly features like quotes or photos of the day provide a quick diversion of interest and a draw to come back. Bulletin boards for employees to offer items for sale or trade are also popular.

Make the Mundane Great
There are basic tools that employees need all the time – conference room locators, people finders, printers, cafeteria menus, etc. If it is difficult to use the essential tools, employees are unlikely to give other features of the site a chance. Focus on the usability and experience of these tools. If they work great, employees will appreciate them and be forgiving with other sections of the site that may still be a work in progress.

Design It!
Looks are important. The visual design of an intranet should not interfere with the usability of the site and findability of content, but just because it’s an intranet doesn’t mean it has to be bland. In fact, during interviews with employees about out-dated intranet designs, they will often say that the design reflects poorly on the company as a whole. In addition, an out-of-date design gives a connotation that the content in the site is out of date as well. Evaluate several options for visual design, imagery and style for the site, hire designers if necessary, and re-evaluate the look on a regular basis.

Let Them Interact & Contribute
People find user-generated content valuable. On consumer sites for example, user ratings and reviews are often ranked as among the most valuable features. Similarly, on intranet sites, employees are interested in hearing about the opinions or experience of others. For example, how have others used a particular set of sales materials? Or, what kind of problems do customers run into during implementation? Even if a robust discussion option isn’t feasible, simple polls or quizzes are engaging and drive repeat visits. People want to see if their answer is the same as everyone else!

Offer An Easy Way Back
Employees may be wary of IT policies that dictate what their browser home page should be. In absence of such a policy, it is likely that browser home pages will vary widely. To remind employees that they can switch, provide an explicit link on the intranet that allows visitors to make the intranet their default browser page. Minimally, provide a link that allows employees to quickly bookmark the site for easy access.

Don’t Be Scared of Video
In today’s TV culture, people are used to watching video rather than reading. Leverage the inclination for this type of content by providing key messages using video or other dynamic multimedia. Keep bandwidth considerations in mind, however, so as not to overload the technical infrastructure. For bandwidth intensive content such as video, the best practice is to offer the content on-demand, requiring the user to press play to start the video if they are interested." (Continued via TMCnet, Michael Hawley) [Usability Resources]

The five tools of the professional software designer

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Tue, 06 May 2008 06:56:37 -0500

A baseball analogy for designing software ...

"Any designer worth their salt knows that borrowing shamelessly or outright stealing are often touted as key skills. In the spirit of that concept (without outright endorsement) I'm going to apply that type of thinking to a post one of peers created recently. Which relates some of which we know about baseball and assessing skills to concepts around software architecture.

You can read this great post here and I'll pull Larry's concepts on baseball which are great guidance for anyone. (Well done Larry!).

From Larry's blog:

This series was inspired by the book Management by Baseball.

In baseball scouting one of the biggest compliments that a player can receive is to be called a "5 tool player". This is a reference to the skills that make up a good, all around baseball player:

1. Hitting for power: When at the plate the player can hit the ball with a lot of power, home runs and doubles are very common. Runs Batted In (RBI) and Total Bases (TB) are common stats to measure the power that a player shows.

2. Hitting for average: Hitting for power is only one dimension of the performance at the plate (sometimes a player that hits for power will strike out a lot). When a player hits for average, that means that they reach base more often when they have a plate appearance. Batting Average (BA) and On Base Percentage (OBP) are common stats to measure how well the player does in this skill.

3. Base running skills: How well does the player handle himself when they reach base. The obvious thought is how fast the player is in running between bases, but many of the best base runners are not the fastest, they are smart about the leads they take and are effective at breaking up a double play. Stolen Bases (SB) is the most common stat for this skill.

4. Fielding: Good fielding is essential for a team to succeed. Sometimes players can be great at the plate, but will be called a "defensive liability" meaning their fielding is sub-par. Fielding Percentage and errors are 2 stats to measure this tool.

5. Throwing: how well does the player execute throws once they have fielded the ball. Double plays turned (for infielders) and Assists (for outfielders) are stats for this skill.

So...how can we apply this to the 'design' process of software or experiences? Here are the skills I think are important. Everyone can practice these skills but professional designers have had some kind of formal grounding or education and experience in these areas. I've got four. What do you think?" (Continued via Design Thinking Digest, Larry's Blog) [Usability Resources]

New Usability Guide: Time to tune up your Website?

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Tue, 06 May 2008 06:51:12 -0500

Download paper on website usability ...

"This week digital marketing consultancy, Coast Digital, published a new 24-page guide on the subject of usability. The guide is designed to help businesses unlock their website’s commercial potential by resolving usability issues.

As increasing volumes of business move online there’s never been a better time to ensure your website is in good shape. Establishing good usability is a key success factor; it’s essential for achieving sales; conversions and positive branding; and represents a huge commercial opportunity.

Time to Tune Up your Website? offers advice to make websites work more efficiently and effectively. Packed with essential do’s and don’ts and guidance on selecting the right type of usability analysis, the publication also includes advice on how to drive up revenues without spending more on advertising.

Robin Moore, usability consultant at Coast Digital comments: “The internet is a highly competitive space. If you’re seeking to optimise website performance, usability should be a key consideration. Our guide will help businesses to understand its potential and assess the issues for themselves." (Continued via Usability News) [Usability Resources]

Joshua Porter on simplicity as a design goal

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Tue, 06 May 2008 06:47:19 -0500

In case you missed this one ...

"Joshua Porter, a user interface designer, wonders whether simplicity is a bad design goal, and expresses his ideas in a thoughtful post.

Most designers place simplicity above all else. We value simple things because they do all the things we need easily and none of the things we don’t. Simplicity is harmonious. Even Leonardo Da Vinci said “simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” This is one of my favorite quotes, and it plays on the idea that being simple isn’t banal, it’s elegant.

Don Norman recently ignited a discussion about simplicity in his piece Simplicity is Highly Overrated. He observes that although designers treat simplicity as the ultimate goal, many consumers, when faced with a purchase decision, choose complexity instead. He uses examples from shopping in South Korea: people there choose complex, feature-laden electronics and SUVs over simpler ones. Norman says that people choose complexity because they assume a complex product is more capable.

Porter rethinks the discussion as not one about simplicity but as one about the psychology of trade-offs:

Users face a trade-off when they must make a choice between a simple product or a complex product with more features. If they choose the product with fewer features and eventually need some functionality that is missing, they’ve made a bad choice. However, when users choose the complex product with more features, they don’t have to make this trade-off. The complex product is more likely to have the feature users may need in the future.

People are reluctant to make trade-offs because they can’t predict what functionality they will need in the future. Choosing a product with fewer features is a trade-off that could hurt them down the line. When users don’t understand the advantages of each feature, such as when a user is buying her first digital camera, they are much more likely to avoid making a trade-off by choosing the feature-laden product.

When users choose a feature-laden product, they may not be exhibiting a desire for complexity. Instead, users are anxious about predicting their future needs. The black/white distinction of “choosing complexity over simplicity” seems too blunt an instrument to describe the behavior we see from users. Schwartz’ theory suggests that people in this type of situation don’t know enough about the features of a product or their own needs. The result is that users avoid making a trade-off by choosing the one that looks like it has more features." (Continued via Putting people first, UIE) [Usability Resources]

Whole-Body Gaming

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Mon, 05 May 2008 08:00:12 -0500

New software makes it easier to build games controlled by a user's body position ...

"The massive success of the Nintendo Wii proved the appeal of motion-controlled gaming. Now Softkinetic, a company based in Belgium, is working to let video-game players use a wider range of more-natural movements to control the on-screen action. Softkinetic's software is meant to work with depth-sensing cameras, which can be used to determine a player's body position and motions. "You don't need a controller in your hand," says CEO Michel Tombroff. "You don't need to wear a special outfit. You just come in front of the camera in your living room, and you start playing by moving your entire body."

Attempts to commercialize gestural interfaces date back to at least the late 1980s and the Power Glove, an accessory for the original Nintendo Entertainment System. Many such systems, however, have been defeated by the need for awkward, bulky accessories; others just didn't work that well.

The Wii controller was the field's first success. But the motions it requires can sometimes feel stiff and unnatural, and it's sensitive only to gestures made by the hand in which it's held. Depth-sensing cameras, on the other hand, can pick up gestures made by a variety of body parts, Tombroff says. They can also be tuned to pick up motions more precisely. Designing programs that work with the cameras, however, is difficult: translating depth measurements into a map of a human figure, and determining what motions that figure is making, are computationally daunting tasks. This is where Softkinetic comes in.

Softkinetic's technology started out as research at the University of Brussels, in Belgium, aimed at exploring the user interfaces made possible by stereoscopic cameras, which sense depth by using two input sources, in much the way that the human brain perceives depth by comparing data from two eyes. The group created Softkinetic in mid-2007 and has adapted its research to work with newer depth-sensing cameras as well. Tombroff explains that the newer cameras have better commercial prospects because they've done away with the need for two input sources. As a consequence, they're smaller, with cheaper parts, and easier to incorporate into existing devices such as laptops." (Continued via Technology Review) [Usability Resources]

Solid Motion

Simplicity: Functionally and Visually

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Mon, 05 May 2008 07:52:33 -0500

Reducing buttons does not make product easier to use ...

"Simplicity is something to strive for apparently. Muji does it. Philips does it. Paris does it. It just might become the 'user-friendliness' of this decennium: an appealing, but somewhat vague notion of 'goodness' in interaction. We all agree: it should be there, but no-one is exactly sure what it is. Or is really sure, but everyone else disagrees. To some it means getting what you need, to others it means leaving out the frills.

So, time for some clarification. Or perhaps we should say diversification. In 'Simplicity, the Ultimate Sophistication' Joshua Porter brings a number of authors (gurus, blog-heads and indeed some actual designers) to the stage to speak their minds on simplicity, such as Don Norman, Mark Hurst, Scott Berkum and John Maeda. Porter himself adds some flavor to the subject by bringing out Barry Schwartz' paradox of choice and applying it to product design:

Users face a trade-off when they must make a choice between a simple product or a complex product with more features. If they choose the product with fewer features and eventually need some functionality that is missing, they've made a bad choice. However, when users choose the complex product with more features, they don't have to make this trade-off. The complex product is more likely to have the feature users may need in the future.

I usually call that the 'I-don't-know-what-that-feature-is-exactly-but-I-might-need-it-someday'-syndrome. Another worthwhile observation about simplicity can be found at GUUI.com, where Henrik Olsen points out the difference between avoiding visual complexity and providing true simplicity:

Usability is based on principles such as "Less is more" and "Keep it simple, stupid". But there is more to simplicity than meets the eye. By reducing visual complexity at the cost of structural simplicity, you will give your users a hard time understanding and navigating the content of a web site.

In other words: reducing the amount of buttons and adding a deep menu structure does not necessarily make a product easier to use. See also earlier uselog posts on expected usability. Meanwhile PresentationZen reviews John Maeda's book 'The Laws of Simplicity', and illustrates it (how appropriate) with some appealing visuals." (Continued via the product usability weblog) [Usability Resources]

Apple vs. Dell

User Interface Implementations of Faceted Browsing

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Mon, 05 May 2008 07:46:09 -0500

Applying filters with enhanced asynchronous interactions of Ajax and Flash ...

"Just as it is important to choose the proper knife when slicing-n-dicing vegetables, it is critical to prescribe a suitable user interface to support faceted filtering. Faceted filtering allows you to narrow down a large list of objects to a manageable size by applying flexible combinations of attribute filters in any order. Rather than forcing you down fixed paths within a website’s information architecture, faceted filtering allows you to multi-dimensionally slice-n-dice the information in a manner that best accommodates your specific needs. A user interface that optimally supports faceted filtering must expose its robust functionality in a way that expresses affordances, controls complexity, and follows existing standards that have been pre-established across the web.

You Know What You Want

Traditional static information architecture (IA) makes up most of the fundamental structure of the web. Information architects responsible for individual websites supposedly reconciled user tasks with their respective information space (document and object relationships) to define how web pages should link to one another. This process presumes that users can be accurately represented as a single group and that the acting information architect optimally mapped the collective group’s needs to the information space to best prescribe the static information architecture. As anyone who has chosen to use a website’s search rather than browsing across its information architecture can tell you, this process is not always successful.

Along came faceted filtering to the rescue. If we define groups of adjectives (facets) that describe objects and allow users to filter with them, we could empower users to manipulate the information space themselves rather than oppressively imposing a fixed structure upon them. Users could flexibly select values across all facets, in any order, to view only those objects that could be described as such.

A few facet fundamentals to get us grounded. First, there are facets and facet values. A group of facet values make up a facet. For example, a facet could be color with facet values of red, white, and blue. When filtering, there are usually multiple facets each with multiple values. Balancing the user needs with the potential complexity of inter-facet and intra-facet selection is important in controlling the user interface complexity
Filtering Sequence

There are two primary methods for applying faceted filters:

* En masse—traditional form submission where multiple criteria are submitted at once
* On selection—Ajax-like technique where filtering criteria are submitted individually, sequentially upon each selection

Traditional object filtering has been done with full form submission—choose your criteria by filling out a form and submit. Yahoo’s stock screener is an example. The main drawback is you often end up with “No results found” and you are unsure which criteria or combination of criteria resulted in the null set.

More recently, with the advent of enhanced asynchronous interactions of Ajax and Flash, you can apply filter criteria individually and see how the resulting list updates. By doing so, you can progressively see the cause and effect of applying individual filters. This is more usable because it abets your browsing behavior by allowing you to actively whittle down your information space and process information along the way. It also opens up the possibility to use links instead of traditional form elements for filter selection. The functionality that progressive filtering affords is best exposed with a well planned UI." (Continued via Digital Web Magazine) [Usability Resources]

Bella Reporting Standards

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Sun, 04 May 2008 07:28:20 -0500

More on graphic representation of data ...

"The day before yesterday Rolf and I raged again. We took apart annual reports of large corporate
groups. We made fun of tachometers. We showed how charts lie. We established rules. We defined standards. Some of the rules are in the example. Time runs from left to right. Only structure is shown top-down. We don’t use funny patterns. We label directly. We never label twice. We avoid legends and scales.

Charts show profits (Gewinne) of TUI AG, a major German company for tourism (Touristik, red), shipping (Schifffahrt, blue), and logistics." (Continued via Bella consults) [Usability Resources]

Reporting Standards

Checkboxes, Radio Buttons, and Drop Downs

info@usernomics.com (Usernomics) — Sun, 04 May 2008 07:18:54 -0500

Reviewing when to use checkboxes, radio buttons, and drop downs ...

"Incorrect usage of checkboxes, radio buttons, and drop downs is one of the most common mistakes I come across. They each have their advantages and disadvantages, and their usage should generally be governed by a few simple guidelines.

Checkboxes

Anytime you have 2 options where one selection implies that the other is not selected, a checkbox should be your first choice in order to consolidate and simplify. For instance, radio buttons with "Yes" and "No" as options are generally redundant and a waste of space when it can be replaced by a simple statement accompanied by a checkbox." (Continued via YourTotalSite) [Usability Resources]

Checkboxes