The article is mainly about how user research (scientific or non-scientific) affect design process and that the wrong approach of interpreting use research results may have reverse effects on the resulting design
Design Vs Science
Using scientific tools to measure or evaluate design effectiveness may not be accurate most of the times. Some tools may produce redundant results that we would have known by common sense while some results may have been misinterpreted. I would have to agree with that because there are some aspect of design that can't be measured. As pointed out in the article, one such aspect is the subjectivity of the design. Different users have different preferences and usage behaviour. Therefore, the aesthetics of a design is subjective in this case and therefore could not be measured.
Research as a Design Tool
User interface test tool such as eyetracking may provide insights for researchers to know which part of the screen/interface the users focuses most. However, the technique only reveal what they are looking at (location of the screen) and not what they're seeing (the content of that location or why they're looking there). Some of the results are rather obvious because the improved design simply added graphic improvements to attract attention. In conclusion, using research to determine whether a design need to be improved or scraped, depends on how the results are being interpreted and how the research tool is being used.
Research as a Political Tool
Research could be used as a tool to explain and justify to non-experts. While a designer may act on his own instincts while designing, his superior or clients who are non-designers may not agree with his design without any proof or justifications. Therefore, research could be used as a tool to justify (at least politically) to them.
Research as Bullshit
The author noted that research is conducted as an interestingly absurd environment (persona room). The room is modeled to resemble actual user's environment. However, it may not be feasible to build a room (in terms of budget) just to build user's personas. The cost of building one may not be worth. Some research represents subjective opinions in terms of numbers. These numbers may be used for objective interpretation. However, it is still subjective because there are missing some of the "reasons" or answers to the "objectives" of the survey. In conclusion, research results may be used by people (probably designers) to justify or prove their design works but it is purely unnecessary because good designers base on experience to design. Research should be done only when necessary.
Research isn't a Bad Thing
Research, when used and results interpreted correctly, is useful for the design team which can provide valuable insights. Research is important for designers to build on stronger ideas.
Conclusion
I feel that the author makes sense in the ideas presented in the article. It is true that designers require experience to justify their design. They usually act on instincts/experience to design and seldom require research-based justifications. Therefore, research results some times may not be accurate to prove a design (or rather research cannot prove a design). This is because design is a very subjective matter. You cant use objective methods to measure or quantify it.
No comments:
Post a Comment