More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Facilitating redesign with design cards: experiences with novice designers

Authors:

Jan StageAuthors Info & Claims

OzCHI '16: Proceedings of the 28th Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction

Pages 452 - 461

https://doi.org/10.1145/3010915.3010921

Published: 29 November 2016 Publication History

Abstract

While effort has been put into developing and evaluating usability evaluation methods less attention has been paid to shifting usability feedback into improved designs. We report from a study with 44 novice designers creating redesign suggestions. Some were provided with domain specific design cards to facilitate the redesign process. Design cards are physical cards used to structure a collaborative process, and providing design cues such as keywords and questions. Afterward, three developers assessed the quality of the suggestions. We found that the cards diversified the range of system aspects that novices considered, supported ideation, and kept the discussion going. However, the cards did not compensate the limited design experience, and the participants had challenges understanding the value of the cards, and implement them in the process. Having developers assessing the subjective quality of the suggestions turned out to be challenging due to low inter-rater reliability.

References

[1]

Bekker, T. and Antle, A. N. Developmentally Situated Design (DSD): Making Theoretical Knowledge Accessible to Designers of Children's Technology. Proc. CHI '11. ACM (2011), 2531--2540.

Digital Library

[2]

Bornoe, N., Billestrup, J., Andersen, J. L., Stage, J., and Bruun, A. Redesign Workshop: Involving Software Developers Actively in Usability Engineering. Proc. NordiCHI '14. ACM (2014), 1113--1118.

Digital Library

[3]

Bruun, A., Jensen J. J., Skov, M., and Stage, J. Active Collaborative Learning: Supporting Software Developers in Creating Redesign Proposals. In S. Sauer et al., eds. HCSE 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Heidelberg, (2014), 1--18.

Digital Library

[4]

Buur, J. and Soendergaard, A. Video Card Game: An Augmented Environment for User Centred Design Discussions. Proc. DARE '00. ACM (2000), 63--69.

Digital Library

[5]

Chilana, P. K., Wobbrock, J. O., and Ko, A. J. Understanding Usability Practices in Complex Domains. Proc. CHI '10. ACM (2010), 2337--2346.

Digital Library

[6]

Chung, D. and Liang, R.-H. Understanding the Usefulness of Ideation Tools with the Grounding Lenses. Proc. Chinese CHI '15. ACM (2015), 13--22.

Digital Library

[7]

Dean, D. L. Hender, J. M., Rodgers, T. L., and Santanen, E. L. Identifying quality, novel, and creative Ideas: Constructs and scales for idea evaluation. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7, 1 (2006), Article 30.

[8]

Deng, Y., Antle, A. N., and Neustaedter, C. Tango Cards: A Card-based Design Tool for Informing the Design of Tangible Learning Games. Proc. DIS '14. ACM (2014), 695--704.

Digital Library

[9]

Garnik, I., Sikorski, M., and Cockton, G. Creative Sprints: An Unplanned Broad Agile Evaluation and Redesign Process. Proc. NordiCHI '14. ACM (2014), 1125--1130.

Digital Library

[10]

Halskov, K. and Dalsgård, P. Inspiration Card Workshops. Proc. DIS '06. ACM (2006), 2--11.

Digital Library

[11]

Hertzum, M. and Jacobsen, N.E. The Evaluator Effect: A Chilling Fact About Usability Evaluation Methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 15, 1 (2003), 183--204.

[12]

Høegh, R. T., Nielsen, C. M., Overgaard, M., Pedersen, M. B., and Stage, J. The Impact of Usability Reports and User Test Observations on Developers' Understanding of Usability Data: An Exploratory Study. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 21, 2 (2006), 173--196.

[13]

Hornbæk, K. Dogmas in the assessment of usability evaluation methods. Behaviour & Information Technology, 29, 1 (2010), 97--111.

Digital Library

[14]

Hornbæk, K. Usability Evaluation as Idea Generation. In E.-C. Law, E. Hvannberg, and G. Cockton, eds. Maturing Usability: Quality in Software, Interaction and Value. Human-Computer Interaction Series. Springer London (2008), 267--286.

[15]

Hornbæk, K. and Frøkjær, E. Comparing usability problems and redesign proposals as input to practical systems development. Proc. CHI '05. ACM (2005), 391--400.

Digital Library

[16]

Hornbæk, K. and Frøkjær, E. Making use of business goals in usability evaluation: an experiment with novice evaluators. Proc. CHI '08. ACM (2008), 903--912.

Digital Library

[17]

Hornecker, E. Creative Idea Exploration Within the Structure of a Guiding Framework: The Card Brainstorming Game. Proc. TEI '10. ACM (2010), 101--108.

Digital Library

[18]

Howarth, J., Andre, T. S., and Hartson, R. A structured process for transforming usability data into usability information. Journal of usability studies, 3, 1 (2007), 7--23.

[19]

Howarth, J., Smith-Jackson, T., and Hartson, R. Supporting novice usability practitioners with usability engineering tools. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 67, 6 (2009), 533--549.

Digital Library

[20]

Kwiatkowska, J., Szóstek, A., and Lamas, D. (Un)Structured Sources of Inspiration: Comparing the Effects of Game-like Cards and Design Cards on Creativity in Co-design Process. Proc. PDC '14. ACM (2014), 31--39.

Digital Library

[21]

Law, E. L.-C. Evaluating the downstream utility of user tests and examining the developer effect: A case study. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 21, 2 (2006), 147--172.

[22]

Lewis, J. R. Usability: Lessons Learned ... and Yet to Be Learned. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 30, 9 (2014), 663--684.

[23]

Lottridge, D. and Mackay, W. E. Generative Walkthroughs: To Support Creative Redesign. Proc. C&C '09. ACM (2009), 175--184.

Digital Library

[24]

Lucero, A. and Arrasvuori, J. PLEX Cards: A Source of Inspiration when Designing for Playfulness. Proc. Fun and Games '10. ACM (2010), 28--37.

Digital Library

[25]

Molich, R., Jeffries, R., and Dumas, J. S. Making usability recommendations useful and usable. Journal of Usability Studies, 2, 4 (2007), 162--179.

[26]

Mueller, F., Gibbs, M. R., Vetere, F., and Edge, D. Supporting the Creative Game Design Process with Exertion Cards. Proc. CHI '14. ACM (2014), 2211--2220.

Digital Library

[27]

Nielsen, L. and Madsen, S. The Usability Expert's Fear of Agility: An Empirical Study of Global Trends and Emerging Practices. Proc. NordiCHI '12. ACM (2012), 261--264.

Digital Library

[28]

Nørgaard, M. and Hornbæk, K. Exploring the Value of Usability Feedback Formats. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 25, 1 (2009), 49--74.

[29]

Sawyer, P., Flanders, A., and Wixon, D. Making a Difference - the Impact of Inspections. Proc. CHI '96. ACM (1996), 376--382.

Digital Library

[30]

Skov, M. B. and Stage, J. Training software developers and designers to conduct usability evaluations. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31, 4 (2012), 425--435.

Digital Library

[31]

Smith, A. and Dunckley, L. Prototype evaluation and redesign: structuring the design space through contextual techniques. Interacting with Computers, 14, 6 (2002), 821--843.

[32]

Tohidi, M., Buxton, W., Baecker, R., and Sellen, A. Getting the Right Design and the Design Right. Proc. CHI '06. ACM (2006), 1243--1252.

Digital Library

[33]

Tudor, L. G., Muller, M. J., Dayton, T., and Root R. W. A Participatory Design Technique for High-Level Task Analysis, Critique, and Redesign: The CARD Method. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 37, 4 (1993), 295--299.

[34]

Uldall-Espersen, T., Frøkjær, E., and Hornbæk, K. Tracing impact in a usability improvement process. Interacting with Computers, 20, 1 (2008), 48--63.

Digital Library

[35]

Warr, A. and O'Neill, E. The effect of group composition on divergent thinking in an interaction design activity. Proc. DIS '06. ACM (2006), 122.

Digital Library

[36]

Wixon, D. Evaluating Usability Methods: Why the Current Literature Fails the Practitioner. interactions, 10, 4 (2003), 28--34.

[37]

Wölfel, C. and Merritt, T. Method Card Design Dimensions: A Survey of Card-Based Design Tools. In P. Kotzé et al., eds. Human-Computer Interaction - INTERACT 2013 SE - 34. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2013), 479--486.

[38]

Yin, R.K. Qualitative research from start to finish, Guilford Press (2010).

Cited By

Hsieh GHalperin BSchmitz EChew YTseng Y(2023)What is in the Cards: Exploring Uses, Patterns, and Trends in Design CardsProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3544548.3580712(1-18)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3544548.3580712
Nadal CMcCully SDoherty KSas CDoherty G(2022)The TAC Toolkit: Supporting Design for User Acceptance of Health Technologies from a Macro-Temporal PerspectiveProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3502039(1-18)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3502039
Jewitt CMitchell VWilson GGolmohammadi LAtkinson DMackley KPrice S(2022)Supporting novice designers design of digital touchInternational Journal of Technology and Design Education10.1007/s10798-021-09722-133:1(191-216)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09722-1
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Facilitating redesign with design cards: experiences with novice designers
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Designing software
      1. Software implementation planning
        Software design techniques
    2. Software development process management

Recommendations

What is in the Cards: Exploring Uses, Patterns, and Trends in Design Cards
CHI '23: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Card-based design tools–design cards–increasingly present opportunities to support practitioners. However, the breadth and depth of the design card landscape remain underexplored. In this work, we surveyed 103 design practitioners to assess current ...
Design Card Sets: Systematic Literature Survey and Card Sorting Study
DIS '20: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference

Design cards are a popular way for designers to encode and communicate design knowledge. Aiming to inform the designers of such design tools we set out to characterize the design space of design cards in a two-pronged approach involving a) a systematic ...
Tango cards: a card-based design tool for informing the design of tangible learning games
DIS '14: Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Designing interactive systems

For over thirty years researchers have suggested that both tangible user interfaces and digital games have potential to support learning. Each domain now has a well-developed body of literature about how to design them to enable learning benefits. What ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

OzCHI '16: Proceedings of the 28th Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction

November 2016

706 pages

ISBN:9781450346184

DOI:10.1145/3010915

Conference Chairs:
Henry Duh
University of Tasmania Christopher Lueg, University of Tasmania
,
Christopher Lueg
University of Tasmania
,
Program Chairs:
Mark Billinghust
University of South Australia
,
Weidong Huang
University of Tasmania

Copyright © 2016 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

IEEE-SMCS: Systems, Man & Cybernetics Society
Australian Comp Soc: Australian Computer Society
Data61: Data61, CSIRO
ICACHI: International Chinese Association of Computer Human Interaction
Infoxchange: Infoxchange
HITLab AU: Human Interface Technology Laboratory Australia
James Boag: James Boag
Tourism Tasmania: Tourism Tasmania
HFESA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society of Australia Inc.
IEEEVIC: IEEE Victorian Section
UTAS: University of Tasmania, Australia

In-Cooperation

ACM: Association for Computing Machinery

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 29 November 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

OzCHI '16

Sponsor:

IEEE-SMCS
Australian Comp Soc
Data61
ICACHI
Infoxchange
HITLab AU
James Boag
Tourism Tasmania
HFESA
IEEEVIC
UTAS

OzCHI '16: The 28th Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction

November 29 - December 2, 2016

Tasmania, Launceston, Australia

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 362 of 729 submissions, 50%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

7
Total Citations
View Citations
311
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)34
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 03 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Hsieh GHalperin BSchmitz EChew YTseng Y(2023)What is in the Cards: Exploring Uses, Patterns, and Trends in Design CardsProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3544548.3580712(1-18)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3544548.3580712
Nadal CMcCully SDoherty KSas CDoherty G(2022)The TAC Toolkit: Supporting Design for User Acceptance of Health Technologies from a Macro-Temporal PerspectiveProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3502039(1-18)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3502039
Jewitt CMitchell VWilson GGolmohammadi LAtkinson DMackley KPrice S(2022)Supporting novice designers design of digital touchInternational Journal of Technology and Design Education10.1007/s10798-021-09722-133:1(191-216)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09722-1
Brianza GCornelio PMaggioni EObrist M(2021)Sniff Before You Act: Exploration of Scent-Feature Associations for Designing Future InteractionsHuman-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 202110.1007/978-3-030-85616-8_17(281-301)Online publication date: 26-Aug-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85616-8_17
Aarts TGabrielaitis Lde Jong LNoortman Rvan Zoelen EKotea SCazacu SLock LMarkopoulos PWakkary RAndersen KOdom WDesjardins APetersen M(2020)Design Card SetsProceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3357236.3395516(419-428)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3357236.3395516
Darzentas DVelt RWetzel RCraigon PWagner HUrquhart LBenford SBrewster SFitzpatrick GCox AKostakos V(2019)Card MapperProceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3290605.3300801(1-15)Online publication date: 2-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3290605.3300801
Harre MFeuerstack SWortelen B(2018)A Method for Optimizing Complex Graphical Interfaces for Fast and Correct Perception of System StatesHuman-Centered Software Engineering10.1007/978-3-030-05909-5_5(65-87)Online publication date: 31-Dec-2018
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05909-5_5

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents