Here is a dump of my live tweets during Jared’s presentation at UX London. I’m writing a more coherent version of this for
- warming up my twitter fingers in a vain attempt to keep up with
@jmspool, who is up next at
- ‘ …and they thought that was just a senseless waste of asterisks’
@jmspoolis on form
- designs can’t intuit anything, people intuit things, calling design ‘intuitive’ is a shortcut.
- people become frustrated because they are no longer focussing on what they are doing, they are focussing on the design itself
- novelty isn’t always responsible for unintuitive design, sometimes it is simplicity
- intuitive design is a personal thing – it is based on what you currently know (your previous experiences)
- intuitive design is evolutionary – as the technology matures, our expectation for intuitive design increases.
- Current Knowledge (what the user brings with them to the design) & Target Knowledge (what they need to have to complete their task)
- In between ‘Current’ and ‘Target’ knowledge = ‘The Gap’. Design happens in The Gap.
- is anyone at #uxlondon heading over to tonight’s UX London bookclub? (via
@Wandster) > I am! :)
- Lots of excellent (but not so tweetable) comparisons of IM setup pages and their relative ‘intuitiveness’
- wizards reduce Target Knowledge, which is great… as long as they work. If they don’t work, the user is screwed.
- a design is intuitive if target and current knowledge are the same, or the knowledge gap imperceptibly small.
- ethnography/field research: users in the mist
- Techniques for creating intuitive designs: Field Studies (Current Knowledge), Usability Studies (Target Knowledge)
- use robust personas to store and communicate what you learn from your user studies
- can’t believe
@jmspoolhasn’t cracked a ‘mind the gap’ joke yet