Reactions to readings due Nov 15th

Qualitative Data

• Everything you ever wanted to know about qualitative analysis and didn't want to ask.
• If he could restrain himself to just one paragraph per heading, it would be a much better guide. i.e. it might be short enough to be useful.
• There is a zeal in documenting and listing everything here: listing some of the possible memos you could write yourself while performing a case study; guidelines, memos, for the writing of; tactics, conclusions, for the drawing of; ad nauseam.
• If the chapter was reorganized, the amount of detail would make sense: start with high level overview, then describe each method in one paragraph. Finally let the reader refer to the back of the chapter for the gory details on, say, causal networks.
• It's interesting that the suggested file structure for qualitative analysis is hyper-textual. "All files are cross-referenced." Any reason for this is not given however.
• The qualitative methods described would be very useful in any process of understanding.
• The editor still hasn't discovered page breaks.
• I liked: the first paragraph of each section.
• I liked: the discussion of displaying qualitative data.
• I liked: the credibility/dependability/confirmability/transferability distinction in the conclusion.
• I liked: the brief discussion of computer based tools. I wished there were more discussion of general types of tools. Knowledge management software like Lotus Notes or the early Lotus Organizer would be dynamite here, since they generate links on the fly based on keyword weightings.

Storyboard Prototyping

• A basic paper. Not much quantitative data there. Not even much qualitative summary of tests. On first reading it seemed neat enough, but on rereading I felt it was shallow. Ok - it is a preliminary report, but it is frustrating not to see any sort of data or analysis.
• Their definition of Storyboarding (they quote themselves) is at odds with my own: storyboarding is a rough pictorial outline of a story or interaction. Then again, my definition is coloured by the Filmmaking and HCI course I took last year. What they call a storyboard I would call an interface prototype or mock-up. You can buy special tools to help you build these things. (HyperCard, Visual Basic, DemoII, TK are all examples)
• Their HyperCard extensions are limited to "limited interaction modes": pushing buttons. They take a $1000 Mac and turn it into a $15 VCR control panel. Now that's progress! This would be admirable had the point been to model and analyse the existing VCR interface. Unfortunately the point was to model the user-computer interface, where there is no point in limiting oneself to the limited modes of teeny buttons.
• A better approach (HyperCard is only good for prototyping this tool, as they note) is to model types of control, and allow them to be rendered in different ways: slider, up/down arrows, scroll bar, etc. This is what is known as a UIMS (User Interface Management System). What you want to be able to do is say: "these buttons should be a slider", not just "these buttons should go there".
• When they talk of creating families of systems, it is clear they haven't thought through their examples: Space stations, country-wide real estate systems. They are describing large-scale UIMS with embedded semantic knowledge (ie: this requirement means display these controls), something that has little to do with user-interface mock-up ("storyboards") editing tools.
• I liked: the idea of using interaction playback to help debrief a user. This apparently led to richer commentary - of course, one must be cautious of post-facto rationalizations for actions.
• I liked: idea of letting users play with a UIMS-like system.
• Note: their On/Off buttons would give Don Norman heart attack. A blob in a circle means ON? Or does it mean off?