User-Designer HCI Research Model for Online Communities Groupz-ware Niki Lambropoulos Interaction Design Consultant Intelligenesis Consultancy nikilambropoulos.org

User-Designer HCI Research Model for Online

Communities Groupz-ware

Niki LambropoulosInteraction Design Consultant

Intelligenesis Consultancy

nikilambropoulos.org

nikilambropoulos.org HCII-2005 Las Vegas - Tuesday 26 July 2005 10:30-12:30

Design Approaches in HCI

Participatory design (Bjerknes et al, 1987)Plastic Interface for Collaborative

Technology Initiatives through Video Exploration (PICTIVE, Muller, 1991)

Collaborative Analysis of Requirements & Design (CARD; Muller et al, 1998)

Why do we need another design?


Need of a New Model in HCI

absence of specific methodology for online communities; the great number of online communities on the net and

their unique character absence of standards for online communities’

categorization and indexation absence of software categorization and description of

characteristics absence of a flexible guide to deal with the constrains

that appear in Interaction Design the nature of research and evaluation as such, as based

on users’ individualistic and subjective views.


Model for Innovation Technology

make work effective, efficient and saferimprove and enhance learning and trainingprovide enjoyable and exciting

entertainmentenhance communication and

understandingsupport new forms of creativity and

expression


User-Designer Plus (U-D+): I-D Process for Groupz-ware Production

Stage I: Establishing Requirements and I-D Evaluation Criteria Catalogue

Stage II: Focus GroupsStage III: Software Description - EvaluationStage VI: Users’ Profiles and

RecommendationsStage V: Pre-ProductionStage VI: Final ProductionStage VII: User-Designer Plus (U-D+)


ID+ Stage I & II

1. Stage I: Establishing Requirements and Evaluation Criteria Catalogue

2. Stage II: Focus Groups Target population & sampling

High level of their expertise The nature and culture of online communities Relativity to the main study target group (from 0% to

100%) Participants’ familiarity with different software used in

online communities Accessibility to focus groups

Content analysis and reports.


U-D+ Stage I: Evaluation Criteria Catalogue (ECC)

A. Sociability: People, Purposes, Practices - Management of the Community (code S)

A1. Sociological aspects (Identity S-ID, Relations S-REL , Language S-LAN )

A2. Management aspects (Practice S-PRA , Community Knowledge S-CK, Evaluation and Assessment S-EVA, Evaluation for Research S-RE)

B. Usability: HCI and Interaction design (code U) Common tools (U-TOOLS) based on the previous

sociability indicators. As such the tools are suggested to support identity (code U-ID), relations (code U-REL), language (code U-LAN), practices (code U-PRA), community knowledge (code U-CK) and evaluation (code U-EVA).

Research Tools: usability evaluation (code U-RE) Additional features (code U-ETC)


U-D+I: Evaluation Criteria Catalogue


ID+ Stage III to V

1. Stage III: Software Description - Evaluation

2. Stage VI: Users’ Profiles and Recommendations

3. Stage V: Pre-Production Prototype construction could be represented with

the use of scenarios and prototypes Sociability and Usability tests Prototype Refinements


ID+ Stage VI: Final Production

Production of the final application. International Use on the Internet. Final Survey, Analysis and Report based on the

evaluation criteria catalogue. Data Analysis: Descriptive Analysis Inferential Statistics

Generalisations by standard inferential statistical methods

Measures of association between usability and sociability

Test of significance


Stage VII: User-Designer Plus (U-D+), Why Plus (+)?

‘what credible research design can be used to effectively evaluate an intervention which might help the community?’ (Sanson-Fisher, 2004)

Online Groupz need time-based direction and design

Interrupted Short-Time-Series Design


Interrupted Short-Time-Series Design:Recording & Evaluating a Process


Example: Focus Groups Criteria Selection

High level of their expertise The number of online communities’ members they were

moderating Relativity to the main study target group (from 0 relativity

as in Habbo Hotel to 100% relativity as in tagteachernet); Participants’ familiarity with different software used in

online communities. The ratio of applications complexity and sophistication varied from simple open source software (e.g. yahoo.groups) to software from production companies (e.g. commkit, specifically designed software for massive online communities);

Accessibility to the focus groups (the author is an e-mint member).


E-mint: Evaluation Criteria Catalogue


Synthesis of Findings


Result: Sociability - Usability

Eyeball of Participation (from the Lurkers’ Project; McDonald et. al, 2003)


Conclusions: U-D+ provides

simplicity and functionality process-based framework that creates close

examination of both social networks and interventions as well as causal inference for sociability and usability

Individual and social networks new theories created in each stage clear research design and data analysis Consistency to decision making processes adjustability to future trends


Thank you…

For your attention!

niki lambropoulos

Intelligenesis Consultancy

nikilambropoulos.org

[email protected]

Photo by Jennifer Risley

Documents

User-Designer HCI Research Model for Online Communities Groupz-ware Niki Lambropoulos Interaction Design Consultant Intelligenesis Consultancy nikilambropoulos.org