[HN Gopher] My HCI toolbox: Methods for designing and evaluating...
___________________________________________________________________
My HCI toolbox: Methods for designing and evaluating UIs
Author : azhenley
Score : 24 points
Date : 2022-07-31 16:32 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (austinhenley.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (austinhenley.com)
| cryo wrote:
| Would be nice if the article tells what the HCI acronym means.
| intrepidhero wrote:
| HCI = Human Computer Interaction[1] for the curious. This is
| the name for the older research discipline that UX (user
| experience) grew out of. I'm familiar with the term from
| reading "An Introduction to Human Factors Engineering" (2004)
| by Wickens, et al. But wikipedia dates it's first use to a
| paper by James Carlisle in 1976.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human-computer_interaction
|
| Edit: to add further context.
| cryo wrote:
| Thank you, that's a very interesting topic. I watched lots of
| videos and material about computer interfaces of the early
| days to present.
|
| It feels a bit like the magic and larger innovations stopped
| at some point in the 80/90's. It's rare to find new UI
| experiments.
|
| The following keeps me hoping:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGVCVqlXg0Y unfortunately
| it's just an animated concept.
| 8note wrote:
| Did you miss the iphone and gesture based capacitive touch
| interfaces?
|
| Pen plus touch on the surface devices is also crazy better
| than keyboard/mouse for plenty of things
| binbashthefash wrote:
| Came for the hyperconverged infrastructure, left confused
| flurie wrote:
| One thing I've noticed about a lot of inward-facing HCI topics is
| that they are very focused on "the code", but that's just a
| portion of what's involved in common working loops. I spend a lot
| of time thinking about stuff that surrounds the code, and it's
| clear that large orgs are starting to as well, if they haven't
| already, though there is little convergence on the topic. Am I
| wrong about these topics not being in the literature? Am I not
| looking for the right topics or terms, or is this not happening
| at all in academic research? And if it's not happening, how do we
| draw researchers' attention to it?
| angrais wrote:
| It's difficult for me to follow what you said.
|
| What specifically do you want to draw researchers attention to?
| Can you give an example?
|
| Your example above of "common working loops" and essentially
| think time around coding has been studied extensively
| previously. Before making recommendations, I want to first
| ensure we're on the same page.
|
| Potential keywords (and conferences) are CSCW and CHI.
| flurie wrote:
| Sorry, I should have given some examples.
|
| I'm talking about the secondary work that goes into software,
| things like environment setup, building artifacts, producing
| ancillary tooling, and deployment.
|
| I know these might be considered disparate, and I'm
| intentionally omitting topics that I know are studied, such
| as formal verification and fuzzing.
|
| I was joking with my spouse, who is a methodologist in
| medicine, about making a group of researchers set up
| environments for working on various large open source
| projects as an example.
|
| Perhaps all of this crosses into operations research?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-08-02 23:02 UTC)