Dustin Stevens-Baier

COMP 449

Assignment #10

1. Reconsider the HutchWorld design and evaluation case study and note what was evaluated, why and when, and what was learned at each stage?

The patient experience was first evaluated, they wanted to know how the typical treatment process was for each patient and the caregivers.  They learned that HutchWorld should be available to patients any time of day or night, regardless of their geographic location.  They also decided based off of a user-centered development methodology that HutchWorld should be design after outpatient clinic lobby of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.  

The early observations were of six computers set up with HutchWorld were they watched people use them for several months.  What they learned was they needed more people to test it out better as there never was enough people for a successful communication. They also learned that people preferred the asynchronous communication like email and journals.  Therefore, they came to the conclusion that a strong asynchronous base was essential for communication.  They also learned that users used the computers to play games and search fro approved cancer websites. 

After redesigning HutchWorld they tested it again this time for usability and seven participants were tested and they were given five minutes to explore and then asked a series of questions.  They learned that they made small errors in the consistency of labeling their product.  They also learned that people weren't paying attention to the navigation buttons.  They also were able to see that people were clicking on objects expecting them to do things.  There was also a problem with people understanding what the world was capable of.    

After the usability testing there was another round of testing that followed the same format but tested for multiple users.  The tests results were positive but there were still usability problems to be fixed.  Afterwards they decided to show it to cancer patients and caregivers.

2. How was the design advanced after each round of evaluation?

After the first round of they learned that they needed to make sure that the design incorporated access all the time into the mold.  This lead them to the virtual world design.  After the second round of testing and questions they learned that they needed to make sure that it was able to support a bunch of asynchronous tasks like email and journals.  They also learned that it needed to be able to access websites on cancer and play games.  After the third design.  

3. What were the main constraints that influenced the evaluation?

There were a few constraints that played a major role in the development of the program.   One was the time it needed to be available another was the ability to have people be in constant support of one another so that when they were feeling down they could have people to talk to to and support them.  Another constraint was in testing with the patients and the caregivers as they had to be careful because of the sensitive nature of the illness.   

4. How did the stages and choice of techniques build on and complement each other?

It worked well because they started off by looking into the patients' and caregivers' needs and days.  This enabled them to make a some reasonable assumptions and get started.  Then with a little bit done they were able to test things and see that they needed to improve certain areas.  After testing it the first time and seeing what needed to be added and what was easy and what wasn't they got a little bit more specific.  Then by testing specific people they were able to see what didn't work well and what people thought of each thing.  This also enabled them to decide what was high priority and what wasn't.  After this test they then tested for multiple users which was the next logical step since it worked for single users.

5. Which parts of the evaluation were directed at usability goals and which at user experience goals?

The first two tests were directed at experience goals by looking at people using the product and talking to patients and caregivers.  The second two tests actually talking to individual people and asking specific questions were more geared towards usability goals.

Which additional goals not mentioned in the study could the evaluations have focused on/

They could have talked about consistency and affordance a little bit more.  Whether or not the design was similar to those that people had used before and if that made them comfortable or if they didn't like that design.  They could also see if the logistics of the design made since with little or no instruction.  They did briefly discuss this but it didn't seem to be that big of a deal and in a situation like a hospital people won't be able to explain what to do because they will be very busy helping people in other ways.