Laura Moody & Joan Burtner Mercer University
16
Work In Progress - Using User Work In Progress - Using User Experience Research to Experience Research to Develop Needs Assessment Develop Needs Assessment Skills of Undergraduates Skills of Undergraduates Laura Moody & Joan Laura Moody & Joan Burtner Burtner Mercer University Mercer University
-
Upload
felicia-armstrong -
Category
Documents
-
view
40 -
download
1
description
Work In Progress - Using User Experience Research to Develop Needs Assessment Skills of Undergraduates. Laura Moody & Joan Burtner Mercer University. Goals. Develop potential research opportunities in the area of cell phone design and use. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of Laura Moody & Joan Burtner Mercer University
Work In Progress - Using User Work In Progress - Using User Experience Research to Develop Experience Research to Develop
Needs Assessment Skills of Needs Assessment Skills of UndergraduatesUndergraduates
Laura Moody & Joan BurtnerLaura Moody & Joan Burtner
Mercer UniversityMercer University
GoalsGoals• Develop potential research opportunities Develop potential research opportunities
in the area of cell phone design and use.in the area of cell phone design and use.
• Provide hands on opportunities for Provide hands on opportunities for engineering students toengineering students to– understand the needs of customers, clients, understand the needs of customers, clients,
and end users and end users – develop specific skills to research and develop specific skills to research and
assess needs of customers assess needs of customers – analyze and evaluate real world data in a analyze and evaluate real world data in a
variety of formsvariety of forms
The studyThe study
• PurposePurpose– Explore methodologies for developing an Explore methodologies for developing an
integrated understanding of the user experience.integrated understanding of the user experience.– Identify principal components that describe two Identify principal components that describe two
of the three foci of the user experience.of the three foci of the user experience.
• MethodMethod– 19 undergraduate students in 2 courses19 undergraduate students in 2 courses– 3 cell phones3 cell phones– Interview Interview – Simple taskSimple task– IRB approvalIRB approval
The cell phonesThe cell phones
DataData
• Phase 1 - Personal experiencePhase 1 - Personal experience– ““Story-telling”Story-telling”– 3 descriptors – current and ideal cell phone3 descriptors – current and ideal cell phone
• Phase 2 – Test phonesPhase 2 – Test phones– First impressions – semantic differentialFirst impressions – semantic differential– ““Practice” and individual impressionsPractice” and individual impressions– Simple task performanceSimple task performance– 3 descriptors – test phones3 descriptors – test phones– RankingRanking
Student participationStudent participation• In the studyIn the study
– 2 courses2 courses– participants and observersparticipants and observers
• Data analysisData analysis– partial data setspartial data sets– in-depth analysisin-depth analysis
• ImplicationsImplications– customer service & voice of the customer service & voice of the
customercustomer– human factors designhuman factors design
Course ActivitiesCourse Activities• IDM 355 -Quality Mgt. (Spring ’04)IDM 355 -Quality Mgt. (Spring ’04)
– Cell phone studyCell phone study
–participationparticipation
–observationobservation– Link to course contentLink to course content
–the “voice of the customer”the “voice of the customer”
–survey designsurvey design
–understanding data typesunderstanding data types
Course ActivitiesCourse Activities
• IDM 404 - IDM Case Studies (Spring IDM 404 - IDM Case Studies (Spring ’04)’04)– Use of quality tools Use of quality tools – Reporting quality resultsReporting quality results
• ISE 428 - Quality Egr. (Fall ’04)ISE 428 - Quality Egr. (Fall ’04)– Collecting and evaluating customer Collecting and evaluating customer
service data service data – Review of data analysis techniques Review of data analysis techniques – Use of quality tools and reporting resultsUse of quality tools and reporting results
Course ActivitiesCourse Activities
• ISE 311 – Ergonomics & Work Mst. ISE 311 – Ergonomics & Work Mst. (Spring ’04)(Spring ’04)– Participation in studyParticipation in study– Performance data analysisPerformance data analysis– Implications Implications
–““handtool” designhandtool” design
–design of human factors studiesdesign of human factors studies
Course ActivitiesCourse Activities
• ISE 412 – Human Factors Egr. (Fall ISE 412 – Human Factors Egr. (Fall ’04)’04)– Research methodsResearch methods– Study design & data collectionStudy design & data collection– Modeling human-technology interactionModeling human-technology interaction– Design of human-machine systemsDesign of human-machine systems
Independent studyIndependent study• Undergraduate studentUndergraduate student
• Collecting and organizing dataCollecting and organizing data
• Evaluating qualitative dataEvaluating qualitative data– e.g., semantic differential resultse.g., semantic differential results
Cell Phone ATotal Response Scores
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
Ligh
t/H
eavy
Com
pact
/Exp
ansi
ve
Sty
lish/
Pla
in
Fra
gile
/Stu
rdy
Per
sona
lizab
le/I
mpe
rson
al
Con
fort
able
/Unc
omfo
rtab
le
Ver
satil
e/R
igid
Cus
tom
/Sto
ck
Coo
l/War
m
Aff
orda
ble/
Exp
ensi
ve
Eas
y to
use
/Diff
icul
t
Sim
ple/
Com
plex
Pow
erfu
l/Wea
k
Cris
p/S
lack
Sle
ek/R
ough
Upb
eat/
Res
trai
ned
Ele
gant
/Rug
ged
Sec
ure/
Vul
nera
ble
Inte
llige
nt/D
umb
Inno
vativ
e/tr
aditi
onal
Cla
ssic
/Tre
ndy
Response
Sco
re
Cell Phone CTotal Response Scores
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
Ligh
t/H
eavy
Com
pact
/Exp
ansi
ve
Sty
lish/
Pla
in
Fra
gile
/Stu
rdy
Per
sona
lizab
le/I
mpe
rson
al
Con
fort
able
/Unc
omfo
rtab
le
Ver
satil
e/R
igid
Cus
tom
/Sto
ck
Coo
l/War
m
Aff
orda
ble/
Exp
ensi
ve
Eas
y to
use
/Diff
icul
t
Sim
ple/
Com
plex
Pow
erfu
l/Wea
k
Cris
p/S
lack
Sle
ek/R
ough
Upb
eat/
Res
trai
ned
Ele
gant
/Rug
ged
Sec
ure/
Vul
nera
ble
Inte
llige
nt/D
umb
Inno
vativ
e/tr
aditi
onal
Cla
ssic
/Tre
ndy
Response
Sco
re
Independent studyIndependent study• Evaluating quantitative dataEvaluating quantitative data
– e.g., dialing errorse.g., dialing errors
Phone B: NOT LookingTotoal Number of Errors by Location
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20N
NNE
NE
E
SE
SSE
S
SSW
SW
W
NW
NNW
Independent studyIndependent study• New techniquesNew techniques
– e.g., card sortinge.g., card sorting
Independent studyIndependent study
• Next stepsNext steps– Statistical analysis of quantitative dataStatistical analysis of quantitative data– Classify descriptorsClassify descriptors– Link between descriptors and preferencesLink between descriptors and preferences– Evaluate story-telling resultsEvaluate story-telling results– Develop ideas for future project Develop ideas for future project – ReportReport
Independent studyIndependent study
• Student’s perspectiveStudent’s perspective– Her view of the projectHer view of the project– Benefit of working with faculty as a Benefit of working with faculty as a
team: “I feel like I’m on an engineering team: “I feel like I’m on an engineering project team.”project team.”
– Deliverables and time requirementsDeliverables and time requirements– Relevance of the experienceRelevance of the experience
Ongoing student Ongoing student involvementinvolvement• Use of data in the classroomUse of data in the classroom
– understanding data types and data understanding data types and data gatheringgathering
– qualitative vs quantitative dataqualitative vs quantitative data– data analysis and modelingdata analysis and modeling
• Continued exploration of research Continued exploration of research methodsmethods– human factors research and designhuman factors research and design– understanding customer needs and the understanding customer needs and the
voice of the customervoice of the customer
