Pro Yearly is on sale from $80 to $50! »

Master Evaluation

Master Evaluation

Presentation of the observations and findings from the evaluation of the functional prototype.

708f993eda474c9b86face222f2fe90e?s=128

Benjamin Wiederkehr

May 03, 2013
Tweet

Transcript

  1. EVALUATION Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Benjamin Wiederkehr Zürcher Hochschule der Künste

    Master of Arts in Design Interaction Design 1
  2. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Practice- and application-oriented (Type A) Supervised by

    Prof. Dr. Gerhard Buurman and Dr. Karmen Franinović 2 EXPLORATORY TOOLS
  3. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 01 SETTING 3

  4. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Prototypes 4

  5. None
  6. None
  7. None
  8. None
  9. None
  10. None
  11. None
  12. None
  13. None
  14. None
  15. None
  16. None
  17. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Participants Participant A Female, 28, married, one

    child Participant B Male, 34, not married, no children Participant C Female, 63, married, four adult children 6
  18. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 02 RESULTS 7

  19. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 In gereral, the key observations and the

    user feedback was less focused on the way of interaction but more on the overall though process of trying to understand the numbers. 8
  20. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Observations Gesture preferences People expect to be

    able to interact with objects on a screen. That said, gestures should be easy to conduct and learn. Need for introduction Comfronted with a new topic data feels hard to read even if visualized and labelled properly. Need for explanations Some questions posed significant problems because of lack of knowledge about the topic matter. 9
  21. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Findings Introduction and background A directed approach

    for communicating information helps the user to approach a topic. Complex concepts from the domain require theoretical explanations to be able to reason about. Short cuts and presets Provide short cuts and presets that allow the user to be more efficient and precise. Experimentation, playing around, seeing own data Being able to freely «handle» the data changes the mental mode from reading to playing. Evaluation, confirmation of others Comparison with other is one of the most important criteria to feel comfortable with a decision. 10
  22. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 03 PRINCIPLES 11

  23. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Design principles for exploratory tools 1. Immediate

    orientation (introduction and direction) 2. Optimize for preattentive variables (visualization) 3. Optimize for fluid / kinetic manipulation (interaction) 4. Provide automated interpretation (machine learning) 5. Validate hypotheses (modeling) 6. Provide explanatory information on demand (theoretical background) 7. Allow for social comparison (evaluation) 12
  24. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 How I address them in the prototype?

    1. Immediate orientation (introduction and direction) 2. Optimize for preattentive variables (visualization) 3. Optimize for fluid / kinetic manipulation (interaction) 4. Provide automated interpretation (machine learning) 5. Validate hypotheses (modeling) 6. Provide explanatory information on demand (theoretical background) 7. Allow for social comparison (evaluation) 13 1. Information architecture 2. Visualization model 3. Interaction model 4. Automated interpretation 5. Experimentation and projection 6. Theoretical background on key topics 7. Comparison to myself, peers, and friends
  25. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 How I address them in the prototype?

    1. Immediate orientation (introduction and direction) 2. Optimize for preattentive variables (visualization) 3. Optimize for fluid / kinetic manipulation (interaction) 4. Provide automated interpretation (machine learning) 5. Validate hypotheses (modeling) 6. Provide explanatory information on demand (theoretical background) 7. Allow for social comparison (evaluation) 14 1. Information architecture 2. Visualization model 3. Interaction model 4. Automated interpretation 5. Experimentation and projection 6. Theoretical background on key topics 7. Comparison to myself, peers, and friends
  26. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 15

  27. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 16

  28. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 17

  29. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 18 Data iPad 8:35 PM iPad 8:35

    PM iPad 8:35 PM Detail 1 Advanced Peers Overview Basics Friends Detail 2 Applied Advisors Theory People
  30. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 19

  31. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 20

  32. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 21

  33. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 How I address them in the prototype?

    1. Immediate orientation (introduction and direction) 2. Optimize for preattentive variables (visualization) 3. Optimize for fluid / kinetic manipulation (interaction) 4. Provide automated interpretation (machine learning) 5. Validate hypotheses (modeling) 6. Provide explanatory information on demand (theoretical background) 7. Allow for social comparison (evaluation) 22 1. Information architecture 2. Visualization model 3. Interaction model 4. Automated interpretation 5. Experimentation and projection 6. Theoretical background on key topics 7. Comparison to myself, peers, and friends
  34. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 23

  35. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 24

  36. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 How I address them in the prototype?

    1. Immediate orientation (introduction and direction) 2. Optimize for preattentive variables (visualization) 3. Optimize for fluid / kinetic manipulation (interaction) 4. Provide automated interpretation (machine learning) 5. Validate hypotheses (modeling) 6. Provide explanatory information on demand (theoretical background) 7. Allow for social comparison (evaluation) 25 1. Information architecture 2. Visualization model 3. Interaction model 4. Automated interpretation 5. Experimentation and projection 6. Theoretical background on key topics 7. Comparison to myself, peers, and friends
  37. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Fluid Interaction 1. Use smooth animated transitions

    between states. 2. Provide immediate visual feedback on interaction. 3. Minimize indirection in the interface. 4. Integrate user interface components in the visual representation. 5. Reward interaction. 6. Ensure that interaction never “ends.” 7. Reinforce a clear conceptual model. 8. Avoid explicit mode changes. 26 N. Elmqvist, et al., “Fluid Interaction for Information Visualization”
  38. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Kinetic Manipulation 1. Support Kinetic Manipulation 2.

    Create Integrated Interactions 3. Avoid Complex Gestures 4. Consider the Viability of the Interaction Set 27 D. Baur, B. Lee, and S. Carpendale, “TouchWave: kinetic multi-touch manipulation for hierarchical stacked graphs”
  39. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 28 Gesture Interactions Definition One Finger Two

    Finger Three Finger Tab Long Press Tab Long Press Tab Long Press Swipe Horizontal Swipe Vertical Swipe Horizontal Swipe Vertical Swipe Horizontal Swipe Vertical Drag Horizontal Drag Vertical Drag Horizontal Drag Vertical Drag Horizontal Drag Vertical Pinch In Pinch Out
  40. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 29 APPL: 100 IBM: 500 AMZN: 200

    MSFT: 100 APPL: 200 IBM: 600 AMZN: 200 MSFT: 100 Tab and Drag Gestures
  41. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 30 Swipe Gestures

  42. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 31 Pinch Gestures

  43. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 32 Long Press Gestures

  44. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 How I address them in the prototype?

    1. Immediate orientation (introduction and direction) 2. Optimize for preattentive variables (visualization) 3. Optimize for fluid / kinetic manipulation (interaction) 4. Provide automated interpretation (machine learning) 5. Validate hypotheses (modeling) 6. Provide explanatory information on demand (theoretical background) 7. Allow for social comparison (evaluation) 33 1. Information architecture 2. Visualization model 3. Interaction model 4. Automated interpretation 5. Experimentation and projection 6. Theoretical background on key topics 7. Comparison to myself, peers, and friends
  45. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 34

  46. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 35

  47. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 How I address them in the prototype?

    1. Immediate orientation (introduction and direction) 2. Optimize for preattentive variables (visualization) 3. Optimize for fluid / kinetic manipulation (interaction) 4. Provide automated interpretation (machine learning) 5. Validate hypotheses (modeling) 6. Provide explanatory information on demand (theoretical background) 7. Allow for social comparison (evaluation) 36 1. Information architecture 2. Visualization model 3. Interaction model 4. Automated interpretation 5. Experimentation and projection 6. Theoretical background on key topics 7. Comparison to myself, peers, and friends
  48. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 37

  49. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 How I address them in the prototype?

    1. Immediate orientation (introduction and direction) 2. Optimize for preattentive variables (visualization) 3. Optimize for fluid / kinetic manipulation (interaction) 4. Provide automated interpretation (machine learning) 5. Validate hypotheses (modeling) 6. Provide explanatory information on demand (theoretical background) 7. Allow for social comparison (evaluation) 38 1. Information architecture 2. Visualization model 3. Interaction model 4. Automated interpretation 5. Experimentation and projection 6. Theoretical background on key topics 7. Comparison to myself, peers, and friends
  50. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 39

  51. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 40

  52. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 41

  53. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 How I address them in the prototype?

    1. Immediate orientation (introduction and direction) 2. Optimize for preattentive variables (visualization) 3. Optimize for fluid / kinetic manipulation (interaction) 4. Provide automated interpretation (machine learning) 5. Validate hypotheses (modeling) 6. Provide explanatory information on demand (theoretical background) 7. Allow for social comparison (evaluation) 42 1. Information architecture 2. Visualization model 3. Interaction model 4. Automated interpretation 5. Experimentation and projection 6. Theoretical background on key topics 7. Comparison to myself, peers, and friends
  54. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 43

  55. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 04 DISCUSSION 44

  56. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Self-assessment Theoretical work The thesis is still

    raw in some parts and needs further refinement. Technical work The prototype is not (quite) done, but I need to focus on the most important parts and privde reasonable simulation of less important areas. 45
  57. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 05 SCHEDULE 46

  58. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 1. Coordination 2. Definition 3. Preparation 4.

    Investigation 5. Conception 6. Development 7. Evaluation 8. Presentation 47 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
  59. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Next steps Thesis Finish the documentation of

    the evaluation. Prepare the printed document. Exhibition Finalize the prototype. Prepare the prototype documentation. 48
  60. Benjamin Wiederkehr, 03.05.2013 Thanks! 49