I moved about a year ago into a new house and I'm still trying to organize my life by removing clutter and unwanted items (as many of you may be able to relate). As I was going through my old papers and magazines, I came across a stack of Ergonomics in Design magazines from the turn of the 21st century (that's the year 2000) and, as usual, my curiosity piqued as I was perusing the hot topics of the field at that point in time, reflecting on how they have changed today, and wondering if we have resolved any of these issues. As I was paging through one of them, I came across an article in the Provocations sections written by the Engineering Psychology pioneer John W. Senders (2001).
What Senders is arguing is that "there needs to be a systematic science of unsystematic use (2001)." User experience should fall on a continuum: Far left describing novices and the far right describing experts. By now we may have well versed methodological approaches to evaluating interactions of those anchor users, but what about all of those users in the middle? What about those that know how to use it, but choose not to use it correctly or find more beneficial ways of using it? Or worse, what if they uncover flaws in a design that have catastrophic results? Are the same methodological approaches used for the typical users the same as the ones we should use for these "creative mischief makers?"
What do you think? In the comments below share some examples of how you've used or seen others use devices in unique ways (positive or negative), because I know deep down we are all "creative mischief makers."
Expand your creative minds and learn more about the brilliance of Prof. John W. Senders: http://www.johnwsenders.net/
Cohen, E. (2016) Google cardboard saves a baby's life. CNN. Retrieved on March 12, 2018 from https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/07/health/google-cardboard-baby-saved/index.html.
Google. (2018). VR Carboard. Retrieved on March 12, 2018 from https://vr.google.com/cardboard/.
Senders, J.W. (2001). Deliberate misuse of medical devices. Ergonomics in Design, 9(4), 26.
These posts are written or shared by QIC team members. We find this stuff interesting, exciting, and totally awesome! We hope you do too!