Creative Mischief makers

Julian Abich, IV, Sr. Human Factors Engineer

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). ​​

---

​This really caught my attention because of my interest in usability research.  Senders was addressing a general design problem: most devices are designed by people who know how to use them, so it's difficult for them to imagine other ways of using the device. This is where usability testing comes into play.  He goes on to explain that there are three types of users that could be tested: 1) Technically competent, 2) Technically ignorant, & 3) Technically Mischievous. The first describes a user that is very knowledgeable, understands the use of a product, and adheres to its proper intended use. The second describes a user that has little to no technical knowledge about a product and may misuse a product because he or she may not know its proper use.  The third (my favorite) are users who have the technical knowledge to use the product correctly, but they choose to use the product in unimaginable ways (Figures 1 & 2). My rebellious nature tended to think, "okay, am I one of those people? And if so, how many others are out there like us? Or are we all creative mischief makers?" 

Figure 1. Skateboarding started when some surfers connected roller skates to a piece of wood. It gave them a way to "surf" when there weren't any waves.

Figure 2. Street luge is believed to have started when a guy ran out of gas in California and sat on his skateboard to ride down mountains on his way to a gas station.

These "creative mischief makers" are clearly among us. They are the innovators that have taken devices or processes and have applied them in new ways beyond their original intended purpose. They are the ones that break past conventional wisdom. They see beyond the social and cultural norms and breach the metaphorical "thinking box." In my opinion, without these types of users and thinkers, our designs would become stagnant and our technological progression would plateau.

Think of the child that can take a simple cardboard box, and with some scissors, glue, and markers, turn it into a castle or a rocket ship. It's this type of thinking that can turn this cardboard box into a virtual reality headset, quite literally (Google, 2018 ). And it's also this type of thinking that can take this virtual reality cardboard box and use it to save a baby's life (Cohen, 2016).

Figure 3. Google's Cardboard VR headset.

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/

Reference:
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.