Leonard Verhoef.
Contact
future systems
etcs mmi
|
Human Efficiency Leonard Verhoef. Contact | for |
interface & web
public transport
future systems
etcs mmi
| with |
|
|
Why designers can't understand their users, book, reviews developing a systematic approach using cognitive psychology
This books explains why computers are user-unfriendly and how to design user-friendly computers.
The conclusions are based on experiments with train ticket vending machines and trains indicators. |
Summary
Contents
Introduction
Part IV
Testing the Solution:
is the solution really better? Pictures and quiz Design practice Reviews Pers
Persbericht
Samenvatting
|
| Review: Maas-Maarten Zeeman |
Read a really nice usability book. It uses cognitive psychology as an elementary approach to design user-friendly apps. To top. |
|
Review: Peter Simlinger Information Design Journal, Vol. 17, no 2, pag. 159-160  International Institute for Information Design (IIID), Wien/Vienna, Austria | Despite the fact that Leonard Verhoef confuses design with technology and vice versa, his book opens a window on what cognitive psychology could mean to information designers. The provocative title of the book remains unclear until the last paragraph on page 170: “One can blame management as Cooper does (1999). So far this smoke screen of ‘science’ has been effective in not blaming psychology for the interface problem. When time has blown away this smoke screen, I’m afraid our grandchildren may well blame today’s psychology for designers not understanding their users.”
To top. | To demonstrate the alternative indicated in the subtitle of the book “Developing a systematic approach using cognitive psychology” Leonard Verhoef shows how to find fundamental (psychological) concepts for interface design and then how to arrange these concepts in a way that allows both an elementary and a holistic approach. On page 157 he says: “The fundamental concepts should be generalizable i.e. time, domain and interface technology independent. At the same time, the fundamental concepts should allow reliable prediction on human performance of any time, any interface technology and any domain … including applied cognitive psychology itself” This sounds pretty sympathetic to me. |
| Referring to research done in the field, Leonard Verhoef blames his discipline for not having provided basic and generalizable knowledge ergonomists can use in the practice of everyday design (p. 8). Turning the tables on his discipline and supporting this with concepts based on his own research, Leonard Verhoef presents himself as a designer with a psychological background, rather then as a psychologist. Considering that all his research on the interface(s) of ticket machines and timetables is easily transferable to interfaces of all sorts of other machines, e.g. such for making coffee, his insights lead up to concrete design solutions, Leonard Verhoef should be whole-heartedly welcomed as a member of the design community.
To top. | What has Leonard Verhoef offered to designers and those in his ancestroral trade? He clearly distinguishes between an elementary and a holistic approach which, according to his deliberations, need to be brought together in a synthetic approach. In Part II “The Solution (a synthesis of psychological and design concepts) Verhoef argues that the “Man” and system components need to complement a “Task” component which is to include “goal or the aim of human activities.” This very much reminds me of the “persona” that Alan Cooper proposes, that can be used to replace “target groups” with exemplary users. |
| As Verhoef says (page 49 of his book), when evaluating components (human, system, task), a property approach to interface design (in which technology is adapted to humans and not vice versa) is preferable. Doing it the other way round would mean swapping master and slave.
To top. |
Subsequently, Verhoef introduces the properties of visual size, visual distance, cognitive number (quantity) and cognitive structure. The explanation of visual distance and the need to keep is as short as possible impressed me most. It requires presenting information “at point zero for the user” as distinct from a fixed position, e.g. in a menu at the top of the screen. |
| Verhoef also gives examples of “other functions” in which distance plays an important role. He refers to near and far away buttons, which require finger movements and wrist or arm movements, information within and beyond a fixation area, short and long term memory and the fact that greater conceptual distance requires more effort to strive after meaning. Interesting parallels to Hermann Knoflacher’s theory that the degree of physical effort involved in traveling a given distance determines the choice of transport modes (see the article “Infoconnectivity – The value of certainty and uncertainty for interconnected transport networks”).
To top. | To keep this review short, I should not engage in elaborating other properties nor refer to the many experiments which underpins Verhoef’s concepts of a systematic approach using cognitive psychology to attain design solutions. Those of the readers with an interest in theory and method, as well as those with an immediate concern in interfaces of vending machines, timetables and train departure indicators are strongly advised to engage in a critical appraisal of Leonard Verhoef’s book. |
Contact |
Leonard Verhoef. +31 (30) - 231 44 97 Parkstraat 19 3581 PB Utrecht Nederland humanefficiency.nl verhoef@humanefficiency.nl Chamber of commerce, trade register, subscription number: 39057871. |