Interaction Design II

Saffer, D. (2007) Designing for Interaction. Berkeley: New Riders. [chapters 4, 5]

Design Research - investigation of product or service's potential or existing users or environments.
Hunt statement: research objectives to focus research efforts.

Interview: directed storytelling, unfocus group, role playing etc.
unfocus group-> unlike focus group which gather typical users with scripted questions, unfocus group approach gather experts from different persepctives to get diverse opinion on the product or service.

Design implications: draw out the requirements from design research

brainstorming

Research models: communicate findings from design research
Use cases and task analysis: outline what the product needs to accomplish
mood boards (emotional landscape), scenarios, storyboards, task lfows, sketches, wireframes, prototypes: piece together waht the product or service will be in visual form
Personas: document to describe archetypal people involved with products or services, listing only those characteristics relevant to the product (user profiles) - componenets include experience goals, end goals, life goals to describe what the product means to the user
Scenarios: outline design concepts in use



*******


Wittrock, M.C. (1992). Generative learning processes of the brain. Educational Psychologist, 27(4), 531-541.

Model of Generative learning and teaching
is based on the understanding of our brain processes involved in cognition and learning from neuropsychology (i.e. Luria's functional systems of brain consisting of arousal and attention, integration of sensory information, and generative processor)
Learning is seen as the effects of generation of meaningful relations, implying the active engagement by the learners.
The model consists of 4 processes
1. attention
2. motivation
3. knowledge and preconcpetion
4. generation

Studies support the model that more generative methods of learning/instruction is more effective in learning comprehension, math, science and more.


*******

Betrancourt, M. (2005). The animation and interactivity principles in multimedia learning. In Mayer (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, pp.287 -296. New York: Cambridge.

Schnotz and Lowe (2003)
Animation can be characterized over 3 levels:
technical - technology used for delivery
semiotic - signs and dynamics represented
psychological - perceptual and cognitive processes involved when viewing animation

types of Interactivity
- control: capacity of users to pace and direct succession of frames
- interactivity: capability to act on what will appear in the next succession

The advantage of animation over static representation is not clear due to either cognitive limitations in processing dynamic information or that each discrete screen in the animation might be perceived as static steps despite being displayed in continuous manner. Providing learner control might help overcome such limitations for better learning with animation (well, learner control throws in whole another slew of problems and limitations) as well as segmenting the animation into smaller chunks (similar to control solution)

'illusion of understanding' since animation visualizes the dynamic processes of the system being represented, this might lead to shallow cognitive processing by the learners in forming the visual representation of the phenomenon.

5 design priniciples for animation
1. apprehension principle: to reduce visual complexity, representations should be readily comprehensible and non-redundant
2. congruence principle: dynamic changes should represent conceptual change rather than behavior of the phenomenon
3. Interactivity principle: learners should have control over the pace of animation, higher level of control should only be provided in learners can handle it
4. Attention-guiding principle: signaling etc. to guide learner's attention to reduce overwhelming cognitive capacity
5. Flexibility Principle: provide option of static or animation version of the material, without redundant presentation