Oldy but a Goodie(s)- Usability Principles- Heuristics

posted in blog, design thinking, usability

Jakob Nielsen’s heuristics are probably the most used usability heuristics for user interface design. Nielsen developed the heuristics based on work together with Rolf Molich in 1990. The final set of heuristics that are still used today were released by Nielsen in 1994. The heuristics as published in Nielsen’s book Usability Engineering are as follows:

Visibility of system status:
The system should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within reasonable time.

Match between system and the real world:
The system should speak the user’s language, with words, phrases and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-oriented terms. Follow real-world conventions, making information appear in a natural and logical order.

User control and freedom:
Users often choose system functions by mistake and will need a clearly marked “emergency exit” to leave the unwanted state without having to go through an extended dialogue. Support undo and redo.

Consistency and standards:
Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing. Follow platform conventions.

Error prevention:
Even better than good error messages is a careful design which prevents a problem from occurring in the first place. Either eliminate error-prone conditions or check for them and present users with a confirmation option before they commit to the action.

Recognition rather than recall:
Minimize the user’s memory load by making objects, actions, and options visible. The user should not have to remember information from one part of the dialogue to another. Instructions for use of the system should be visible or easily retrievable whenever appropriate.

Flexibility and efficiency of use:
Accelerators — unseen by the novice user — may often speed up the interaction for the expert user such that the system can cater to both inexperienced and experienced users. Allow users to tailor frequent actions.

Aesthetic and minimalist design:
Dialogues should not contain information which is irrelevant or rarely needed. Every extra unit of information in a dialogue competes with the relevant units of information and diminishes their relative visibility.

Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors:
Error messages should be expressed in plain language (no codes), precisely indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution.

Help and documentation:
Even though it is better if the system can be used without documentation, it may be necessary to provide help and documentation. Any such information should be easy to search, focused on the user’s task, list concrete steps to be carried out, and not be too large.

Although Nielsen is considered the expert and field leader in heuristics, Jill Gerhardt-Powals also developed a set of cognitive principles for enhancing computer performance. These heuristics, or principles, are similar to Nielsen’s heuristics but take a more holistic approach to evaluation.

Automate unwanted workload:

• free cognitive resources for high-level tasks.
• eliminate mental calculations, estimations, comparisons, and unnecessary thinking.

Reduce uncertainty:
o display data in a manner that is clear and obvious.

* Fuse data:
o reduce cognitive load by bringing together lower level data into a higher-level summation.

* Present new information with meaningful aids to interpretation:
o use a familiar framework, making it easier to absorb.
o use everyday terms, metaphors, etc.

* Use names that are conceptually related to function:
o Context-dependent.
o Attempt to improve recall and recognition.
o Group data in consistently meaningful ways to decrease search time.

* Limit data-driven tasks:
o Reduce the time spent assimilating raw data.
o Make appropriate use of color and graphics.

* Include in the displays only that information needed by the user at a given time.
* Provide multiple coding of data when appropriate.
* Practice judicious redundancy.[5]

Design vs. Art

posted in blog, design thinking

In preparation for a User-Centered design seminar that I was leading for a local non-profit, I got to thinking about the difference between art and design. Of course, I Googled “design vs. art”. Surprised, as always, by the amount of results- I started sifting through…

Design vs. Art: is an interaction, experience and product design blog of a design agency based in Munich, Germany. An entry on this blog went into great detail about the high-tech train doors in Europe and their contrary design to instruction feature. Big door handle, little yellow button- large sign that says- “don’t use the handle, push the button.”

I was asked how I would define the difference during the User-Centered Design seminar from one of the more cheeky participants. I answered: Art is about individual freedom expression (push) and design is about creating an accessibility of ideas (pull).

If you have to give the user instructions on how to use your design, whether it is a door-opener or a website, you have missed the mark. In the design world, we call it “bad usability”.

Impact, metric of success, inspiration… when creating an art piece, my goal is to impact a person emotionally and to question parts of their reality. In design, I am trying to offer a solution to a problem. A successful art piece would make a person laugh, cry be filled with hope, want to make a change or contribute. A successful design creates a more effective, efficient and satisfactory user experience that would lead to higher degree of use with a more comfortable thought process.

So, with art, do we create cognitive dissonance on purpose? In design, we try to reduce the stress of the interaction. What about the synthesis of the two disciplines- usable art?