Max Fern – Human-Computer Interaction, Dix (09/07)

In Human-Computer Interaction, Dix, Finlay, Abowd, and Beale argue that, to maximize interactivity, software designers should create interfaces that are as intuitive as possible and also minimize opportunities for careless mistakes.

The introduction serves to encourage a multi-disciplinary view of HCI that rewards the most successful products for their interactive qualities: usefulness, usability, and use. By defining interactivity in these terms, the authors are able to look at HCI theory through the methods and principles of contributing disciplines, painting a fuller picture of familiar technological design systems and how humans and computers interact through them.

Building on some of the foundational conceptual definitions of interactivity that have already been covered, this chapter relays its central conceit in terms that are easily understood. Regarding software specifically, it is easy to discern the relative interactivity of an interface based on how useful, usable, and used it is in the online environment. I wonder, however, how these qualities are measured and what sort of behavioral adjustments users might make if they were aware of the specific advantages, in terms of interactivity, of the digital platforms available to them?

 

 

4 thoughts on “Max Fern – Human-Computer Interaction, Dix (09/07)

  1. You pose an interesting question in terms of behavioral adjustments users might make if they are aware of the interactive advantages of a platform, and I think that we are already aware of them, at least subconsciously. If a site is slow, outdated, or not visually appealing, we are more likely to use something else: something new, fresh and easy to use. Even if our immediate thought isn’t directly about interactivity, we do make choices about the softwares we use based on our interactive needs, and we are familiar enough with technology to know when something is more or less interactive.

  2. I read a different article (do Women and Extroverts view interactivity differently) and I ended my response asking a question that seems to be relevant to this article. I was wondering if something like the perception of interactivity is more important for users than usability and website trust. However, based on your response, it seems as though interactivity and these other categories (trust and usability) are interconnected. I agree with this as I imagine that we are more likely to perceive a website as interactive if we have trust with it and find it usable.

    1. I like this point you made and I completely agree; trust is central to whether or not users will interact with a site. I think a good example of this is Google.com, there isn’t much to do on that site (reducing opportunities for careless mistakes), yet it is the number one searching browser in the world because everyone trusts it to work as it should.

  3. This point is really interesting and I think it is unique that this approach was from the perspective of the software design rather than the user. Your question raises a good point and I am also curious to see how one will alter their behavioral response based on the interactivity. In the article I read, different characteristics are looked at when regarding HCI other than usefulness, usability, and use. It is intriguing to see how one’s approach can determine which characteristics of HCI are most important and focused on to understand the field.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *