Warning:
JavaScript is turned OFF. None of the links on this page will work until it is reactivated.
If you need help turning JavaScript On, click here.
Den här kartan innehåller information om: Tentamen, Övningstenta 6) för en diskussion kring begreppet "affordance" Wikipedia "Affordances as perceived action possibilities In 1988, Donald Norman appropriated the term affordances in the context of Human–Machine Interaction to refer to just those action possibilities which are readily perceivable by an actor. Through his book The Design of Everyday Things, this interpretation was popularized within the fields of HCI and interaction design. It makes the concept dependent not only on the physical capabilities of the actor, but also their goals, plans, values, beliefs and past experience. If an actor steps into a room with an armchair and a softball, Gibson's original definition of affordances allows that the actor may toss the recliner and sit on the softball, because that is objectively possible. Norman's definition of (perceived) affordances captures the likelihood that the actor will sit on the recliner and toss the softball. Effectively, Norman's affordances "suggest" how an object may be interacted with. For example, the size and shape of softball obviously fits nicely in the average human hand, and its density and texture make it perfect for throwing. The user may also bring past experience with similar objects (baseballs, perhaps) to bear when evaluating a new affordance. Norman's 1988 definition makes the concept of affordance relational, rather than subjective or objective. This he deemed an "ecological approach," which is related to systems-theoretic approaches in the natural and social sciences. The focus on perceived affordances is much more pertinent to practical design problems from a human-factors approach, which may explain its widespread adoption. Norman later explained that this adaptation of the term had been unintended. However, the definition from his book has become established enough in HCI that both uses have to be accepted as convention in this field." An affordance is the quality of an object, or an environment, that allows an individual to perform action, for example, a button affords to be pressed as your average user "knows" that buttons can be pressed, Övningstenta 4) Vad är en mental modell s 32 "People have different experiences and so will have different conceptual "models" of things. The understanding and knowledge that we posses of something is often referred to as a "mental Model" (Norman, 1998)" se även s 126-130, samt 290-292, Övningstenta 3) 12 designprinciper (Norman, Nielsen, et alles) Helping people acces, learn and remember the system... 1 Visibility - Ensure that things are visible so that people can see what functions are available and what the system is currently doing. 2 Consistency - Be consistent in the use of design features and be consistent with similar systems and standard ways of working. 3 Familiarity - Use language and symbols that the intended audience will be familiar with. 4 Affordance - Design things so it is clear what they are for. Giving them the sense of being in control, knowing what to do and when to do it... 5 Navigation - Provide support to enable people to move around the parts of the system. 6 Control - Make it clear who or what is in control and allow people to take control. 7 Feedback - Rapidly feed back information from the system to people so that they know what effect their actions have had. Safely and securely... 8 Recovery - Enable recovery from actions, particularly mistakes and errors, quickly and effectively. 9 Constraints - Provide constraints so that people do not try to do things that are inappropriate. In a way the suits them... 10 Flexibility - Allow multiple ways of doing things so as to accomodate users with different levels of experience and interest in the system. 11 Style - Designs should be stylish and attractive. 12 Conviviality - Interactive systems should be polite, friendly and generally pleasant., People centred view Machines are Dumb Rigid Insensitive to change Unimaginative Constrained to make consistent decisions, Machine centred view People are Vague Disorganized Distractible Emotional Illogical, Övningstenta 2) Vad står PACT för People Activities Contexts Technologies (Concerning design being human centred), Övningstenta 5) ge exempel på "input devices" Mouse, keyboard, digitazing board, webcam, scanner etc., CSCW Wikipedia The term computer supported cooperative work (CSCW) was first coined by Irene Greif and Paul M. Cashman in 1984, at a workshop attended by individuals interested in using technology to support people in their work[1]. At about this same time, in 1987 Dr. Charles Findley presented the concept of collaborative learning-work. According to[2], CSCW addresses "how collaborative activities and their coordination can be supported by means of computer systems." On the one hand, many authors consider that CSCW and groupware are synonyms. On the other hand, different authors claim that while groupware refers to real computer-based systems, CSCW focuses on the study of tools and techniques of groupware as well as their psychological, social, and organizational effects. The definition of [3] expresses the difference between these two concepts: CSCW [is] a generic term, which combines the understanding of the way people work in groups with the enabling technologies of computer networking, and associated hardware, software, services and techniques., Övningstenta 19) Vad står förkortningen CSCW för CSCW, People centred view Being human centred * Thinking about what people want to do rather than what the technology can do * Designing new ways to connect with people * Involving people in the design process * Designing for diversity, Övningstenta 1) Skillnad mellan användarcentrerad syn och maskin/teknikcentrerad (Norman, 1993), People centred view People are Creative Compliant Attentive to change Resourceful Able to make flexible decisions based on context, Machine centred view Machines are Precise Orderly Undistractible Unemotional Logical