==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

UNDERSTANDING USERS & THE EMPATHIC DESIGNER ITPDP’26, L4

==> picture [152 x 296] intentionally omitted <==

Minna Pakanen

Department of Digital Design and Information Studies mpakanen @cc.au.dk

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

TODAY

• Designers role

• Empathic Designer

• Understanding users

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

DESIGNERS ROLE

Harold G. Nelson & Erik Stolterman (2003) The design way. Intentional Change in an Unpredictable World. Foundations and fundamentals of design competence

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

5

DESIGN AS SERVICE RELATIONSHIP

• A dynamic service relationship between service provider (designer) – those being served (clients, surrogate clients, customers and end users)

• Design is about service on behalf of the other

• The clear difference between traditions of design vs. art-science

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

Own curiosity/ Own need for passion for knowing self-expression Self-serving

==> picture [72 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

‘Serves’ the client? Other-serving

MINNA PAKANEN

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

DESIGNER AS SERVICE PROVIDER

• Being in service does not mean

• being a servant, or subservient

• acting as a mere facilitator on behalf of someone else’s needs

• service to exclude self-expression, but it is not as dominant as in art-science

• Service is not about helping people to create what they already know they want

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

Desiderata? & Designer’s role in it?

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [171 x 171] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [157 x 157] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [171 x 171] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [137 x 137] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [171 x 159] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [202 x 203] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [160 x 159] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [188 x 189] intentionally omitted <==

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

DESIDERATA

==> picture [39 x 39] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [93 x 86] intentionally omitted <==

• The success of the design process can best be determined when those being served experience the surprise of self-recognition

==> picture [106 x 109] intentionally omitted <==

• → when the outcome of the design process meets and exceeds the client’s original expression of what is desired (usually only dimly perceived) is known as the client’s desiderata

==> picture [75 x 75] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [85 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

• The designer’s role is to midwife that desiderata!

• Not fully imagined from the beginning, by either client or designer

• to provide end results in the form of an expected unexpected outcome

==> picture [64 x 64] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [52 x 52] intentionally omitted <==

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SERVICE IS NOT SERVITUDE

• Other party is seen as equal, but not as similar

• Service is not about helping

“Helping is based on inequality; it is not a relationship between equals. . . Service is a relationship between equals. . . Helping incurs debt. When you help someone, they owe you one. But serving, like healing, is mutual. There is no debt.”

Remen (1996)

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

DESIGN EDUCATION

==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

Own curiosity/ Own need for passion for knowing self-expression Self-serving

==> picture [72 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

Objective and subjective understanding on behalf another’s interest Other-serving

reflective thought + practical action –> knowledge of ‘why’ + knowledge of ‘how’

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [64 x 63] intentionally omitted <==

designer client

EMPATHIC DESIGNER

Harold G. Nelson & Erik Stolterman (2003) The design way. Intentional Change in an Unpredictable World. Foundations and fundamentals of design competence Peter Wright & John McCarthy (2010) Experience-Centered Design. Designers, Users, and Communities in Dialogue

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

16

LISTENING

• Design communication is about listening

• Helping people to express what they believe will help them live fuller lives.

  • design communication may at times include the use of rhetoric and persuasion, as is true of science and art

• A good designer does not convince clients of needs or desires they have not authored –no ‘selling’!

• It is the client’s own intentionality—in the form of their desiderata—that triggers the process.

• Design is democracy

   - –> Heightened ability to ‘listen', utilize notitia (Hillman, 1992)
  
   - Notitia is an act of attention that is complete and uncompromising: ‘focus’
  

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

DESIGN COMMUNICATION

==> picture [291 x 312] intentionally omitted <==

• A complex multi-dimensional and multi-phased process:

• → initial phase of building trust (through conversation)

• → finding common ground through dialogue (using logic) and developing a shared or common understanding

• = creation of an uncommon understanding through diathenic graphologue (Greek: diatheno= to show through or let a thing be seen through; and grapho= image or representation).

• → produces breakthrough insights in the form of rich, complex images that are difficult, if not impossible, to apprehend from a single perspective or cannot be represented in the linear format of text

• → break the established common ground and bring the process back to a need for more dialogue, in order to find new common ground.

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

DESIGNER/CLIENT RELATIONSHIPS?

==> picture [563 x 303] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
designer designer
designer technician
designer facilitator
client client
designer artist
designer designer
designer expert
client client
----- End of picture text -----

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

designer

designer

designer technician

==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

designer facilitator

client

designer client

client

designer client

designer artist

designer expert

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

designer

designer

==> picture [210 x 184] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [209 x 184] intentionally omitted <==

client client designer artist designer facilitator

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

designer designer client client designer expert designer technician

MINNA PAKANEN

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

IDEAL SERVICE RELATIONSHIP

==> picture [296 x 297] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
designer
client
----- End of picture text -----

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

DESIGNERS CHOISES OF RELATIONSHIPS

But any given process have more stakeholders…

• People who influence …

• People who are affected …

• People who are using …

Key exercise is to identify them and decide which ones to satisfy, this needs to be designed!

==> picture [328 x 343] intentionally omitted <==

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

DESIGN RELATIONSHIPS

• Interaction “protocols” describing a relationship

• Can change along the way

• I (designer) -> you

• We (designer + specific stakeholder) -> them • I (designer) -> It / other

• Everyday relations / partnership / alliances etc.

==> picture [373 x 349] intentionally omitted <==

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EMPATHIC DESIGNER

• ‘Makes meaning’ for a client by empathetically drawing out his or her pre-formed desires

• Does not ask the client what fully-formed outcome is to be designed, but instead, through open communication, tries to discern the underlying intentions of that client’s vague ideas of desiderata

• This symbiotic relationship is possible only if there is an exchange of empathy

• Empathy in design means: ability to ‘be’ as the other, while remaining a whole self

• Must be willing to let empathy lead the way!

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

UNDERSTANDING USERS

Peter Wright & John McCarthy (2010) Experience-Centered Design. Designers, Users, and Communities in Dialogue

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

29

BEYOND USABILITY

• Computer systems started to spread from workplaces into home and leisure use context

• Design for usability is only one of the many values that user-centered design could focus on (Blythe et al., 2003)

• It no longer seemed enough for user-centered design to focus solely on usability, ease of learning, efficiency, and effectiveness, and for a transparent interface to be the ultimate criteria of success

• “

• • beautiful things work better” (Norman, 2004)

  • significant impetus toward experience-centered design

  • slogan opened up an interdisciplinary debate around beauty and pleasure as a design value and the relationship between aesthetics and usability (Sutcliffe, 2009) and (Hassenzhal, 2010)

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXPERIENCE

• Developed from pragmatist philosopher John Dewey’s focus on human experiences (Art as Experience, 1938)

• Thoughts and ideas do not exist separate from our bodies and separate from each other

• There is no knowledge (or experience) without a knower, language without context or emotion without thought and action

• We must engage with felt life — the full range of our embodied experiences

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

Felt life?

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [247 x 477] intentionally omitted <==

“FELT LIFE”

• Life is felt in as much as the continuous sensory and sensual connection we have with it is integral.

• This is a connection that is situated in and built up over .

• time and space

• It reminds us that the world of experience is a world that has a kickable reality both in the physical sense and also in terms of the way in which actions we take have consequences for us intellectually and .

• emotionally

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXPERIENCE

• Experience as sensation, emotion, intellect and action situated in a particular place and time

• Most experiences consist of a subtle interplay and overlaying of unconscious and conscious action

• Highly subjective, solitary and introspective process vs. social experience

• Anticipation and expectation connect past experience to present and future experience

• “Levels” of experience:

• Aesthetic experience (flow — body directly connected to the world)

• Pre-reflective experience (successful habitual interactions)

• Reflective experience (engage in process of sense making)

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

WHAT AFFECTS ON THE EXPERIENCE OF DRIVING A CAR?

==> picture [556 x 371] intentionally omitted <==

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXPERIENCE-CENTERED DESIGN

Valuing the whole person behind ‘the user’

• Focusing on how people make sense of their experiences

• Seeing the designer and user as co-producers of experience

• Seeing the person as part of a network of social (self-other) relationships through which experience is co-constructed

• Seeing the person as a concerned agent, imagining possibilities, making creative choices, and acting.

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

STORIES IN EXPERIENCE-CENTERED DESIGN

• Focus on stories over use-cases, requirements, etc.

• Collecting and analysing stories (understanding the users)

• Conceptualise and interpret for design

• Scenarios (agents, goals, plot, action, events)

• Personas (personal histories, goals, and feelings)

• Drama and role-play (to connect and evoke)

• Sharing stories as a way to involve participants

==> picture [140 x 387] intentionally omitted <==

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXPERIENCE-CENTERED DESIGN

Requires empathic understanding of the users –> Dialogical methods for:

• Dialogue with the person for whom the object is designed, before and after the object is made

• Dialogue with materials when the object is being made

==> picture [444 x 335] intentionally omitted <==

Cultural probes (Gaver et al., 1999)

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

BLOSSOM FOR ANA BY JAYNE WALLACE

==> picture [688 x 318] intentionally omitted <==

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXdUNVBOtb0

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [960 x 543] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
16 [TH ] FEBRUARY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN
----- End of picture text -----

DIALOGUE IN BLOSSOM

• Wallace uses the […] conversations to try to get a glimpse of the other person’s life, perspectives, and values, their own sense of who they are

• She immerses herself in the materials produced by the participant and in the conversation they have had together

• Wallace finds some threads that are familiar to her from her own experiences or with which she can empathize .

==> picture [426 x 308] intentionally omitted <==

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EMOTIONAL RESPONSE TO BLOSSOM

• Blossom piece provoked a strong emotional response and important insight.

"…when it blossomed, it kind of upset me that it was only the once, and I thought ‘oh my god!’ (laughs) but …if it wasn’t only once then that would defeat the object … for me anyway… I mean that was a kind of crucial point for me, when I started blubbing (laughs) when it said it ‘only blossoms once’ and I was just like ‘oh!’, ‘yeah!’ and it, I sort of got it, that it was sort of, represented life really and that, erm, you only live it once…”

(Ana interview transcript lines 155 – 161)

==> picture [390 x 297] intentionally omitted <==

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

DESIGN AS DIALOGUE

Separate knowing versus connected knowing

• “Dialogue puts the focus clearly on processes between people. It sees communication, knowledge, and identity as constructed in relationships between people, not within individuals.”

• “New understanding is created in the respectful, responsive engagement with dissimilarity. Trying to understand other people, including users, by foregoing one’s own perspective may reproduce existing knowledge but will not produce new understandings.”

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

Listening?

MINNA PAKANEN

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

Listening by thinking about the situation in terms of problems and needs?

We already impose our frame of reference rather than listening to what the other person has to say.

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

In active listening we have minimum ~~of~~ preconceptions about what we will hear in the situation and the understanding that it may be necessary to change how we already think about the people, practices, and events we find there.

MINNA PAKANEN

Active listening is the way forward when aim is to do experience centered-design.

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

LISTENING

“By thinking about the situation in terms of problems and needs, we already impose our frame of reference rather than listening to what the other person has to say.”

VERSUS

“Active listening involves going into a situation with the minimum of preconceptions about what we will hear and the understanding that it may be necessary to change how we already think about the people, practices, and events we find there.”

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

Why you should not design to students who are studying in IT Product Development Program?

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

REFERENCES

• Harold G. Nelson & Erik Stolterman (2003) The design way. Intentional Change in an .

• Unpredictable World. Foundations and fundamentals of design competence. MIT Press

• Wright, P., & McCarthy, J. (2010). Experience-centered design: designers, users, and communities in dialogue. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 3 (1), 1- 123. (chapters: 2-5)

16[TH ] FEBRUARY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

DESIGN RATIONALES AND MODELS

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

WHERE ARE WE NOW?

==> picture [451 x 254] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [142 x 21] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
AARHUS UNIVERSITY
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [184 x 15] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN
25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

WHAT TO DO NOW (THIS WEEK)?

You should now do:

• Read literature for week 5 - and earlier weeks ;-)

• Your own inspirational work – edging closer to final Problem Area decision.

• Start planning empirical work. Requires narrowing down user group.

• Tooling exercises.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

STATUS AND MESSAGES

Monday trip!

How is it going?

Context, theme, subtheme, user group?

Any observations done? Places visited?

Choosing your topic? Done? Close?

Any questions?

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

SUB-ASSIGNMENT 1

1. Motivation for choice of subtheme, context and user group.

2. Initial positioning in relation to the theme (read some inspirational literature, introduce the field/theme and draw parallels + point out differences in approach)

3. Tentative problem formulation (what will you actually do in this project, what are your tentative hypothesis around practice and use, and what could help/fix/better/enhance this?)

4. Preliminary plan for your user research (who, when, what, how? Plans, contacts, emails, methods to try - this can be added as appendix if needed, but make sure to keep it concise).

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

DESIGN RATIONALES AND MODELS

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

IN TODAY’S LECTURE

What is a design rationale?

Design Spaces

Contextual Design

Personas – representing users and roles

Working models

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

WHAT ARE IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF A GOOD DESIGN PROCESS? (2 MINUTES)

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

Result? The users liked it? The designer is proud of it? Sticking to the budget? Listening to the users? Getting paid? Getting promoted? Getting recognition? Teamwork? Fun? Cake every Friday? Societal impact? Many daily users?

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

A happy customer? Spearheaded by a hotshot? Spoken about in the media? Using the newest technologies? Being completely unique? Involving the user every step? Sales after launch? Scalability? Handover? Celebrating when it’s done? Instagram Influencers loving it? Trustpilot score? Certifications?

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

WHAT IS THE MOST CRUCIAL ASPECT OF A GOOD DESIGN PROCESS?

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026 AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

DOCUMENTATION!

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

WHY?

Design processes are long and complex, and involves many variables and parties

You often do not nail it the first time

Iterations and Fluidity

Learning and revisitability

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

DESIGN RATIONALE

A survey paper of representation methods for Design Rationale For this lecture we focus on understanding the concept (sect 1-3)

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

DESIGN RATIONALE (LEE AND LAI)

To document genealogy (tracing of lineage) of a design’s final appearance and the decisions that lead to it

To link issues to formal design decisions (example: global menu to reduce screen clutter)

Document selection and de-selection arguments

• Supporting and counter arguments on issues for the design

May lead to generalizable patterns and reusable design-decision relations (Fischer 1991)

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

WHAT IS DESIGN RATIONALE?

Design rationale is write-down of arguments and decisions made during a design process, and the reasons for why those arguments were brought up, and the decisions were made. Primary goal is to support designers by providing a means to record, describe, justify and communicate the argumentation and reasoning behind the design process (MacLean 1991), including but not limited to:

• The reasons behind a design decision

• The justification for a design decision

• The other alternatives considered

• The trade-offs evaluated

• The argumentation that led to the decision (what if the argument was BS?)

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

WHAT IS DESIGN RATIONALE?

“Design rationale in the most general sense is an explanation of why an artifact is designed the way it is”

• LEE AND LAI, 1992

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [294 x 376] intentionally omitted <==

DESIGN SPACE

Design Space is a representation of alternative design options + analysis of pros/cons and relations.

From MacLean 1989:

“The design space consists of a decision space (alternative options which might be appropriate}, and an evaluation space(explicit reasons such as consistency and criteria for choosing from among the possible options).”

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [314 x 369] intentionally omitted <==

DESIGN SPACE

Evaluation Space

Mapped differently in a lot of HCI literature… Issue (and Design Rationale) being the most impactful difference from Lee and Lai, adding potential issue handling to your argument space.

Design Rationale vs Design Space

Design Rationale describes the Design Space (MacLean).

Using for example the QOC model to represent Design Space options, generates Design Rationale.

Interesting possible exercise: Part of group specs decision space, another the beginning of evaluation space

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [314 x 369] intentionally omitted <==

DESIGN SPACE

Long story short:

The map metaphor is a bit funky…

Think of products as clusters (buildings) on the map. The Design Space is the entire map, linking (making roads) and including/excluding certain alternatives (neighbourhoods).

QOC model used extensively in this process, and sticking to just this might be simpler.

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

THE QOC MODEL

Developed by McLean at Xerox PARC A brilliant comparative tool Helps map Design Space Part of your Design Rationale

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [525 x 326] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

PARKING GATE: SAME CORE FUNCTIONALITY, SAME QUESTION – DIFFERENT DESIGNS

==> picture [329 x 247] intentionally omitted <==

Pay-by-plate is a radical change within/of design space

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

21

DESIGN SPACE

==> picture [401 x 349] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
evaluation space
“How does the user
pay for parking?”
Pay-by-plate Privacy
Ease
Machine
Culture
with card
decision space
What happens if
user has lost ticket?
ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN
25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [142 x 21] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
AARHUS UNIVERSITY
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

DESIGN SPACE

Is useful for emplacing your design and the alternatives/related design (for analysis, juxtaposition and distinctions)

Is useful for expanding horizons and taking different/novel interactions/systems into account.

It is a concrete way of making constraints visible and impactful in design

• For example through questions or criteria in QOC

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

THE ROLE OF A DESIGN RATIONALE

Support and capture the design argumentation during a design process

When iterations occur, designers can go back and avoid mistakes or decisions already tested and rejected

Argument for why the final design appear as it does and support for designing the next version of the product

• A formerly too expensive or too clunky solution has become feasible in the mean time, and the process can be started from better position

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

24

REPRESENTATIVE QUESTIONS

Made by Lee and Lai to provide a framework for assessing different representations Since it’s used to assess representations/models way of making Design Rationale; Also a brilliant set of questions to help your design rationale and status meets Can be used as a part of sit-down meetings to organize your team’s thoughts Not all representations and models answers all questions

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

REPRESENTATIVE QUESTION SET EXAMPLE

Italic: Maybe for status meets? Orange: Maybe for Ideation and Concept Dev.?

What are our user’s biggest issues? What are our biggest issues? What is the status of the current design?

What did we discuss last week and what do we need to do today/this week? What are alternative designs and what are their pros and cons?

What if we do not consider power/portability/user interface/GPU muscle/CPU muscle? Which issues are inherently linked?

What would the consequence of removing this aspect/part be? Which unresolved issues do we still have?

How do past designs or other fields deal with a similar issue?

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

WHY IN ITPDP?

Tools, representations, models to help keep track of design documentation Help structure solved problems and the user-centric elements of your design Graphical representations to use for the report, that shows field knowledge if used correctly. Future work for your report Preparation for your exam

Avoid having to say “… I don’t know we why did that, actually…” J DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

SUMMARY

Make sure to document your design issues, positions, arguments with decision. Use it for your internal discussions. And for feedback. And for the report. And for the demo.

When a reviewer ask ”why didn’t you put that button on the top instead of here?” Your design rationale will help you provide the answer.

• the answer may be feasibility of construction, or the occurrence of accidental push during an evaluation or.

• If you don’t have an answer, then the design may appear coincindental and not well argued…

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

CONTEXTUAL DESIGN AND CONTEXTUAL INQUIRY

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

CONTEXTUAL DESIGN

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

CONTEXTUAL DESIGN (BEYER & HOLTZBLATT)

User-centered design process

Focus on collecting and interpreting data of users in the field Focus on creation of prototypes and systems as end goal

“…Understand users in order to find out their fundamental intents, desires, and drivers. But these are invisible to the users - so the only way to glean this is to go out in the field and talk with people.”

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

CONTEXTUAL DESIGN (BEYER & HOLTZBLATT)

Step-wise method and principle-based

• Especially helpful for people who will not specialize in field study

• Fits into a software development cycle; products of field study work made visible

Guides analyst on how to understand & document what he/she sees

Not really users as co-designers

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

CONTEXTUAL DESIGN (BEYER & HOLTZBLATT)

Principle: System design must support and extend users’ work practice

Behavior, attitudes, goals, and intents of users; all part of work practice.

Work practice is part of the larger context – so is technology. Any and all system/tech change will impact work practice.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

CONTEXTUAL DESIGN (BEYER & HOLTZBLATT)

Principle: People are experts at what they do – but are unable to articulate their own work practice

Field work = crucial to pick up on these practices/tendencies/events. Tacit knowledge. Multiple methods can help with this – participate in natural context.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

CONTEXTUAL DESIGN (BEYER & HOLTZBLATT)

Principle: Good design requires partnership and participation with the users

Designers = experts in design. Users = experts in work practice. Partnership = proper design focused on context and practice. Step in and do your part – ask questions, offer interpretations!

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

CONTEXTUAL DESIGN (BEYER & HOLTZBLATT)

Principle: Good design is systemic

Good design considers the system as a whole, and it’s impact on it. Methods can support generating overview of possible outcomes and implications. Treat issues and problems to be solved as a part of the whole.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

CONTEXTUAL DESIGN (BEYER & HOLTZBLATT)

Principle: Design depends on explicit representations

Use drawings, sketches, prototypes, mock-ups, models, videos, animations etc. Visual representation is key and makes design thoughts sharable.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

CONTEXTUAL DESIGN PROCESS

==> picture [574 x 320] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

CONTEXTUAL INQUIRY - FIELD STUDIES

Often two elements: Direct Observation and Interviews (+ Contextual Interviews (TBA))

Field studies are useful to understand:

• The use context

• Challenges and potential value added by a new design

• People and their roles (end-user, indirect user, manager)

• Features of the place/space

• Understand the activity that you want to support

• Communications and patterns of interactions

• Local culture

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

WHAT ARE FIELD STUDIES?

It is not simply “hanging out” with users Field studies are (and requires the analysists to be):

• Systematic and careful

• Without assumptions (as much as possible!)

• Thoughtful

• Respectful

• Productive!!

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

WHY FIELD STUDIES?

“Ground” designs in real activity, not assumptions

Do NOT falsify empirical data…

Helps understand “situated activity” not “rationalized accounts”

• See exceptions, exception handling, mechanics

• User behavior needs to be understood at a low-enough level to design for it

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

AN EXAMPLE FROM DEVELOPMENT OF “FINDING NEMO”

==> picture [402 x 296] intentionally omitted <==

“Finding Nemo”-movie animators had to ”ground them selves” by practicing scuba diving to become familiar with under water phenomena in order to be able to draw and animate them.

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

BASIC RULES & PRINCIPLES

Be an apprentice:

Carefully frame questions

• Be polite –> the user is the expert in their domain

• Be humble –> assume you don’t understand something

Be open-minded

• Expect to see a lot of things you didn’t think you would

Check interpretations;

• Do not ask leading questions

• Do not ask Yes and No questions

• Focus on getting concrete data

Don’t be too narrow… Don’t be too wide

• Begin by observing more WIDELY than defined problem(!)

• REDEFINE boundaries of problem

• Work within that new “unit of analysis”

• Reflect back to user; debriefing

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

INTERVIEW TECHNIQUES

In interviews – be concrete and relate to daily work examples

• Ask about examples from yesterday or last week

• Critical Incident Technique , Wendy Mackay (expanded upon next slide)

• Page 7: https://www.lri.fr/~mackay/VideoForDesign/print/print.pdf

Exceptions are as important as the routine situation

• Listen to user anecdotes and workarounds

• Exceptions may reveal important requirements and conditions – or just common practice

Be aware of potential intention conflicts (culture/hierarchy)

• Different user groups (or levels) do not necessarily share the same experience/intention

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

EXAMPLES FOR CRITICAL INCIDENT TECHNIQUE

Ask for a concrete, critical incident

• Positive: Can you remember the last time when you were really happy with the UI?

• Negative: What happened the last time when you very disappointed by the system?

Let the user go through the entire scenario

• Positive: Identify useful features and design rationales

• Negative: Identify break down scenarios

Ask for as many details as possible

Ask why this situation was in particular memorable

Do not ask suggestive or general questions

• Why is this UI so good?

• E.g., Do you like the UI?

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

RECORDING YOUR DATA

Notes Pictures (get consent, adhere to GDPR regulations) Video (get consent, adhere to GDPR regulations) Sound (get consent, adhere to GDPR regulations) Sketches and drawings Scenarios (post hoc description) Notes on roles/personas

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

46

FIELD STUDIES - PREPARATION

You have already done some observations (right?) – but mainly inspirational!

For future field work:

Secure permission to be at the site

Plan ahead, don’t expect to get into calendars quickly – it’s good to have a foot in the door someway You want to observe the natural workflow of your users:

• Ask that users not “clean up” their desks or desktops, calendars, and so on because you will be there. Politely explain that you want to see things as they normally occur

• Prepare and test all data recording equipment

On arrival, be professional, courteous and patient. Remember that you are a guest. Some might see it as additional workload.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

CONTEXTUAL INTERVIEWS

Not your typical Q&A interview

• A mix of observation & questions

Who to interview: those doing the work, not just management

• 2-3 hours of observing a user work, including “shadowing” them around the workplace

• Observe the natural flow of activity and occasionally interrupt to explain and clarify what they are doing.

• You can ask users to “think aloud” to understand their thought process.

• Your questions are guided by what you see.

Recording: Notetaking, audio record, and perhaps video-record

Save the last 15 minutes with the user to review what you learned

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

HINTS AND ADVICE

Good idea to combine techniques

• Observation and Interviewing have different strengths and weaknesses

• Combination ensure quality of investigation

From pure analysis to design oriented activities

• Scenario and mock-up design may reveal useful knowledge about current state of affairs

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

PERSONAS

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

50

PERSONA

Persona is personified but generalistic. Not the same as an archetype (abstract) or a person (individual). A persona description gives details about the user group(s) you are designing your interactive system for It highlights the group specific requirements and context associated with persona.

More on that in lecture: Sketching User Experiences (Minna) https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/four-different-perspectives-on-user-personas DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

51

PERSONA

Sub-assignment 2

==> picture [404 x 200] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

52

– PERSONAS EXAMPLES A TRAVEL APP

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026 AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

53

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR AARHUS UNIVERSITY

54

55

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

56

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

USE OF PERSONAS

Analyze and reveal requirements for system/app design from different perspectives (use scenarios, drivers, intent) Integrate in scenario descriptions (later assignments) Use persona description for your new design (or styling) Utilize for prototyping and evaluation planning

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

57

REMEMBER THE NOT-AVERAGE

”Extreme characters” (also used for ‘Ideation’ later in the course) Extremes in travel app

• The passionate business person and car-driver that almost never use public transportation

• • Elderly who do not have knowledge of smartphones

==> picture [320 x 253] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

CONTEXTUAL INQUIRY – PROCESSING RESULTS

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

GOT DATA? NOW WHAT?

Create “models” that capture the data (order different from literature)

1. Physical Model:

a map of the site with details about equipment location

2. Flow Model:

Depicts work-flow between users/personas

3. Sequence Model:

Depicts work tasks

4. Artifact Model:

Describes the tools that people use to complete tasks

5. Cultural Model:

Captures bigger context of cultural factors that influence how things are done

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

PHYSICAL MODEL – HOTEL CASE

==> picture [383 x 232] intentionally omitted <==

Map of site with important features

Include digital photographs to elaborate Include traffic and potential “incident” areas or bottle-necks.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

FLOW MODEL

Represents how work is divided & coordinated Flow models for different types of workers

• 1. Diagram who is involved in the work
• 2. Show communication flows between people, and how those communications are achieved (through invoices, face-to-face, messages)
• 3. Mark breakdowns in communication & coordination

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

FLOW MODEL – HOTEL CASE – STEP 1: ROLES

• Define Personas (+tasks) in circles

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [500 x 346] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

• FLOW MODEL – STEP 2: FLOW - Define Personas in circles

• Define Artifacts in squares

• Define Relational Actions with arrows

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [184 x 15] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN
25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR
----- End of picture text -----

SEQUENCE MODEL

Represents work tasks by point of view (POV), shown as a sequence of steps of actions

Diagram:

1. Intent/Purpose of the action sequence

2. Trigger that causes the action to start

3. The steps that achieve the intent

4. Breakdowns/problems in getting the task done

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

SEQUENCE MODEL EXAMPLE – HOTEL BOOKING

Diagram:

1. Intent/Purpose of the action sequence

2. Trigger that causes the action to start

3. The steps that achieve the intent

4. Breakdowns/problems in getting the task done

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

ARTIFACT MODEL

Artifacts are the things people use in to complete a tasks (documents, maps, notes, the web, spatial layout of items when planning something)

• 1. Collect artifacts, pictures of artifacts
• 2. Check with customers that you understand what they are for
• 3. Annotate these to identify in detail their functions

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

ARTIFACT EXAMPLE – HOTEL DIARY

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [184 x 15] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN
25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR
----- End of picture text -----

ARTIFACT EXAMPLE

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

CULTURAL MODEL

Understand the local culture and the cultural assumptions. This is the broader context.

For each point of view

1. Start with each “influencer”—different groups of people, organizations, institutions—that affect how that person understands and does their work 2. Arrange these as bubbles or balloons that have different scope reflecting how much influence they have on the worker

2. Identify breakdowns

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [471 x 420] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN
25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR
----- End of picture text -----

CULTURAL MODEL - EXAMPLE

Goals and relationships between user groups and organizational values Constraint focused

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

MODEL EXAMPLE EXERCISE!

Group 1, 2: Physical Model example of FORMLab or PROTOLab Group 4, 5, 6: Flow Model example from (one of) your jobs Group 7, 8, 3: Sequence Model example from a recent novel interaction/experience Group 12, 13, 16: Cultural Model example from a community Group 20, 11: Artifact Model 3 x examples of tools for work activities from your life (can be pictures) or Google J

15 minutes, then quick presentations.

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY

SUMMARY:

The 5 models capture:

1. How the physical environment supports the work [Physical model]

2. The people, their relationships, and their communications [Flow models]

3. How tasks are carried out [Sequence models]

4. How artefacts support the work or are processed as part of the work [Artifact models]

5. How work is constrained by organizational values [Cultural models]

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 25. FEBRUARY 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

SUMMARY

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026 AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

74

SUMMARY

Document your design and design rationale!

Design needs to take the user, the context, and constraints of the problem domain into account Thus, user involvement in design is important.

Prepare for design through contextual inquiries

• Capture your understanding in the five models, personas and scenarios

• Triangulation

Later envisionment through prototyping become essential

• Based on contextual inquiry models, personas, and scenarios

Plan your field study methods carefully - get help from TAs

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - RATIONALE AND MODELS 25. FEBRUARY 2026

SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [36 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [783 x 440] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

EVALUATION ITPDP’26, L13, W15/19

Assoc Prof. Minna Pakanen Department of Digital Design and Information Studies mpakanen @cc.au.dk

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [97 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

TODAY

› Ways of evaluating

• › Usability testing

• › Early development phase UX evaluations

• › Prototypes in early development phase evaluations

• › Data gathering and recording methods

• › Evaluation planning and roles in the evaluation

• › TA session: Planning of the evaluation of your own ITPDP product!

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

WAYS TO EVALUATE

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

4

WHY DO WE EVALUATE?

› We are not designing for ourselves › Feedback on the design process

› Iterative development › ”Fail early, fail often"

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

“Iterative design, with its repeating cycle of design and testing, is the only validated methodology in existence that will consistently produce successful results. If you don’t have user-testing as an integral part of your design process, you are going to throw buckets of money down the drain .”

(Bruce Tognazzini)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

THREE WAYS TO EVALUATE

Usability testing/ UX evaluation

• Test and evaluation setting controlled by the evaluator

• With users

Field evaluation

• Evaluation in a natural environment with real users and their actions

• The user’s surroundings and tasks set the evaluation frame

Analytical evaluation

• No users are involved!

• Heuristic evaluation

You will learn this in the coming HCI course!

• Walkthroughs

Combination of these!

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

USABILITY TESTING PLEASE DO NOT USE THIS IN YOUR EVALUATION!

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

11

AIMS OF USABILITY TESTING

• › Interested of how easy it is for the user to use the system

• :

• › Usability is defined by 5 quality components

• Learnability : How easy is it for users to accomplish basic tasks the first time they encounter the design?

• Efficiency : Once users have learned the design, how quickly can they perform tasks?

• Memorability : When users return to the design after a period of not using it, how easily can they re-establish proficiency?

• Errors errors : How many do users make, how severe are these errors, and how easily can

• they recover from the errors?

• Satisfaction : How pleasant is it to use the design?

• (https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

USABILITY TESTING

› Three ways of conducting:

• Laboratory-based user observations

• Controlled user testing

• › facilitator can help the user if the user does not know how to proceed, but this needs to be marked down in the observation notes!

• Expert inspection techniques

• › Analytical evaluation methods you will be learning more in the HCI course

(Greenberg & Buxton, 2008)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

USABILITY TESTING

› Controlled laboratory-based user (covert) observations & studies

==> picture [405 x 194] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [284 x 194] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [257 x 194] intentionally omitted <==

https://www.brighton.ac.uk/business-services/consultancy/user-centre-design-lab/index.aspx https://www.volkside.com/2009/12/tip-print-out-your-usability-testing-tasks/ https://www.testingtime.com/en/blog/in-house-usability-tests/ https://ux247.com/usability-lab-dead/

==> picture [224 x 49] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

What are the challenges of usability evaluations conducted in an early design phase according to Greenberg & Buxton (2008)?

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EARLY DESIGN IDEAS AND PROTOTYPES

• › Early designs are “sketches”

• Illustrate the essence of an idea, but have

• many underdeveloped aspects to it

• Can be represented in many forms

• Work as externalization of the idea and help the designer to iterate the design

• › Early prototypes

• Have many holes and undeveloped attributes

(Greenberg & Buxton, 2008)

==> picture [348 x 311] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

CHALLENGES OF USABILITY STUDIES IN EARLY DESIGN PHASE

› Usability study is not the best approach to evaluate early designs or prototypes because

• It focuses on negative aspects:

• Errors & bugs

• Task completion time: faster the better

• –> Abandoning a promising idea too early –> Focus on developing aspects that can be measured, usually something we are already familiar with

• –> Limit the number of alternative ideas

==> picture [392 x 273] intentionally omitted <==

(Greenberg & Buxton, 2008)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EARLY PHASE USER EXPERIENCE EVALUATIONS

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

19

USER EXPERIENCE EVALUATION

• › UX studies focus on lived experiences

• A holistic view of the user’s interaction with a product

  • Emotions, enjoyment & aesthetics

• Focuses on positive aspects of the use

  • Hedonic and non-instrumental aspects of use (non-task related)

• Dynamic and situational aspects

  • Different time spans (before, during, after the use)and momentary experiences (changes over time spans)

  • Context impacts the experience

(Bargas-Avila & Hornbæk, 2011)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

AIMS OF UX EVALUATIONS

• › To find out how the user feels about the system and interaction

• with it

• Qualitative or mixed-methods approach in research

  • Interviews, focus groups, observations

  • Questionnaires

  • Constructive and creative techniques (drawing & collages)

• UX studies can be conducted at any phase of the design process (concept ideas – – – –>final products)

(Bargas-Avila & Hornbæk, 2011)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EARLY DEVELOPMENT PHASE UX EVALUATIONS

• › Early phase user experience evaluations are done to

• › help to choose the best design for the development

• › Evaluating that the development is on the right track

• › Examining if the final product can meet the set UX targets

(Stone et al. 2005)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

ANTICIPATED USER EXPERIENCE (AUX)

can ”Anticipated UX happens before the first use, or it happen also within the other time spans of UX, e.g. during and after the use and over time, as a person may imagine also during those time spans. A person can have indirect experience prior the first use through formed expectations brand of existing experience with related technologies, , advertisements , presentations, and other peoples’ opinions.”

(Roto et al., 2011)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

ANTICIPATED EXPERIENCE

”Anticipated user experience means the experiences and feelings that are expected to occur when the user is imagining using an interactive product.”

(Yogasara et al., 2011)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PROBLEMS WITH THIS DEFINITION?

==> picture [467 x 380] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
?
6 [TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN
----- End of picture text -----

ANTICIPATED USER EXPERIENCE (AUX)

Users should not be put in a situation where they have to imagine their future needs without giving . concrete options for them

(Von Hippel, 1986)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

ANTICIPATED USER EXPERIENCE (AUX)

” needs wishes that result from Experiences, , and anticipated interaction with a concept of the product before the actual product exists.”

(Pakanen, 2015)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PROTOTYPES IN EARLY DEVELOPMENT PHASE UX EVALUATIONS

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

29

PROTOTYPES IN AUX EVALUATIONS

• › Prototypes should

• › evoke people’s dreams for the future (van den Hende 2010)

• › give a sense of experience before the actual artefact exists (Roto et al. 2011)

• › allow envisioning the concept and prevent unwanted confusion

  • (Kuutti et al. 2001, Gegner & Runonen 2012)

• › focus subject’s attention on studied things (Lim & Stolterman 2008)

• › allow utilizing concepts key characteristics directly to the design (Law 2011).

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

MIXED FIDELITY PROTOTYPES

5 filter dimensions of prototypes

• Appearance

• size; color; shape; margin; form; weight; texture; proportion; hardness; transparency; gradation; haptic; sound

• The functionality

• system function; users’ functionality need

• The interactivity

• input behavior; output behavior; feedback behavior; information behavior

• The data

• data size; data type (e.g., number; string; media); data use; privacy type; hierarchy; organization

• The spatial structure

• arrangement of interface or information elements; relationship among interface or information elements— which can be either two- or three-dimensional, intangible or tangible, or mixed

(Lim & Stolterman, 2008)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

MANIFESTATION DIMENSIONS

==> picture [484 x 311] intentionally omitted <==

(Lim & Stolterman, 2008)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

FILTER-FIDELITY-PROFILES IN EVALUATION

5 filter-dimensions of prototypes

• Appearance

• Size, color, shape, weight, hardness, haptic, sound, & arrangement

• The functionality

• Breadth (functions realized) & depth (completeness)

==> picture [163 x 125] intentionally omitted <==

• The interactivity

• Action, reaction, input modality, & output modality

• The data

• Closeness to the reality, information architecture, data model, & amount and type of data

• The physicality

• Spatial position, coherence of tangibles, & tangible embodiment

(Kohler & Hochreuter, 2014)

==> picture [163 x 124] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PROTOTYPES IN EARLY UX EVALUATIONS

==> picture [450 x 345] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [503 x 346] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

COMPARABLE VISUAL MATERIALS IN AUX EVALUATIONS

Extending the existing prototype and comparing alternative visualization styles for GUIs When preparing comparable visual materials, make sure the comparable examples and items under evaluation are same in: 1) Relative size

• 2) Color scheme, unless you compare different color options

3) Level of detail and visualization style (sketch, line drawing, shaded, …)

Note that your alternative visualizations should all be presented in same application context (contextualization).

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE: VIRTUAL AVATARS FOR AR & VR IN COLLABORATIVE SETTING

==> picture [832 x 352] intentionally omitted <==

(Pakanen et al. 2022)

6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE: RESEARCH/ BENCHMARKING

(Pakanen et al. 2022)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE: EXAMPLES

• 1) Relative size

• 2) Color scheme

• 3) Level of detail & visualization style

==> picture [455 x 466] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

(Pakanen et al. 2022)

EXAMPLE: CONTEXT

Examples are shown both in AR & VR context

(Pakanen et al. 2022)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

COMPARABLE VISUAL MATERIALS

==> picture [722 x 370] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
6 [TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN
----- End of picture text -----

(Pakanen 2015)

PROTOTYPES IN EARLY UX EVALUATIONS

==> picture [642 x 321] intentionally omitted <==

(Pakanen et al. 2014)

6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

VISUAL MATERIALS TO HELP EVALUATING PROTOTYPES

==> picture [422 x 299] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [531 x 301] intentionally omitted <==

(Pakanen et al. 2014)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

Reporting of the study in your report:

› How the visual materials were used?

› When they were used in the evaluation?

6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

VISUAL MATERIALS IN AUX EVALUATIONS

Example from paper 1

Paula and her husband p lanned in the morning that she will buy groceries, and her husband will collect her from the shop. Hence, now prior leaving from the office, she pre-writes a message on her phone “At the checkout desk!” (1) and assigns it to a t urquoise color that she can remember.

When she arrives at t he checkout, she uses the bracelet device on her wrist to browse the messages that she has created with the phone (2). She finds the turquoise message (with inner ball) that she created at her office.

Then she selects the receiver, Matt, her husband (with outer ball) and sends it to him (3).

Matt is arriving to the parking lot, when Paula’s message arrives to his phone, he knows that it will only take a few minutes for Paula to come out of the shop, so rather than parking, he drives to waits at the front of the store (4).

==> picture [434 x 309] intentionally omitted <==

(Pakanen et al. 2014)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

VISUAL MATERIALS IN AUX EVALUATIONS

• Help user to see over limitations of the prototype by creating a model to show the appearance

• A nice rending/ visualization of the concept idea in use context held by a human (print/screen)

• A physical unfunctional mock-up (can be hold in hand by the user)

• A set of images + use case story (prints/ Powerpoint slides/video)

• Make sure you show this use case story before evaluating the partial and unfinished appearance (in this case size, weight, shape, materials), functionality (only two types of interactions were compared [interactivity]) or the prototype.

• Think of what aspects you need to realize as close to the final prototype (physicality as in this case tangible embodiment was almost realistically realized)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

VISUAL MATERIALS IN AUX EVALUATIONS

Example from paper 2

Collect feedback for the further development

• 2 Altered visualizations of possible solutions presented on screenshots taken from the model

• Make sure you show the alternative vualizations after evaluating the partial and unfinished prototype

• appearance (no visualizations)

• functionality (only moving was realized in the prototype).

• Think of what aspects you need to realize as close to the final prototype (Appearance and the animations)

==> picture [199 x 393] intentionally omitted <==

(Kukka et al. 2017)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

VISUAL MATERIALS IN AUX EVALUATIONS

Example from paper 4 Collect feedback for the further development

• One virtual environment with alternative interior and functionalities

• Make sure you let the participants see the alternative visualization after evaluating the partial and unfinished prototype

• appearance (no visualizations)

• functionality (only moving was realized in the prototype).

• Think of what aspects you need to realize as close to the final prototype (Appearance, functionalities, and the interactions)

==> picture [539 x 302] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

(Pakanen et al. 2020)

WIZARD OF OZ

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

48

WIZARD OF OZ TECHNIQUE ALLEN MUNRO AND DON NORMAN, 1975

› The Wizard of Oz method is a moderated research method in which a user interacts with an interface that is not really working, but the system responses are initiated by a human operator

==> picture [817 x 236] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
Video
camera User
Operator
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/wizard-of-oz/#:~:text=Definition%3A%20The%20Wizard%20of%20Oz,Norman%20at%20UC%20San%20Diego.
----- End of picture text -----

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

WIZARD OF OZ TECHNIQUE AN EXAMPLE IN LAB SETTING

==> picture [385 x 267] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [565 x 205] intentionally omitted <==

(Colley et al. 2016)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

WIZARD OF OZ TECHNIQUE

AN EXAMPLE IN FIELD WITH A MOBILE OPERATOR

==> picture [697 x 352] intentionally omitted <==

Pakanen et al. 2022

==> picture [44 x 6] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
6 [TH] MAY 2026
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [56 x 7] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
MINNA PAKANEN
----- End of picture text -----

Reporting of the study in your report:

› What kind of Wizard of OZ evaluation was conducted?

› How was the Wizard of OZ method described in the paper? Paper: 3

MINNA PAKANEN

6[TH] MAY 2026

==> picture [377 x 326] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
User
< 2m
----- End of picture text -----

WIZARD OF OZ TECHNIQUE MOBILE

==> picture [87 x 87] intentionally omitted <==

Operator

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PLANNING OF WIZARD OF OZ STUDY

Remember

› Assign group members to be:

• 1) Facilitator, introduces the tasks and interviews the participants

• 2) Operator/”observer” who operates the protype based on participants input/ other type of input. Make sure there is either direct or indirect (through live video feed) visibility to participants interaction with the

prototype with, so that you can operate the prototype well. If the operator is to be in the same space, then say to participants that this person is an observer

› Do not break the illusion!

• › Plan the tasks carefully and think all the possibilities what the user could do?

• If participant does unexpected things, facilitator should say: unfortunately the prototype does not function in that way, can you think any other way how it could work? (and at the end show how to use it).

• › Make sure the operator have a direct view to the participant and their interaction with the prototype

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

USER STUDY DATA GATHERING METHODS

Blandford, Ann, Dominic Furniss, and Stephann Makri. ”Qualitative HCI research: going behind the scenes." Synthesis lectures on human-centered informatics 9, no. 1 (2016): 1-115.

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

55

OBSERVATION

Observer observes

• › ”Fly on the wall” (Blandford et al. 2016)

• › What do people do and how do they do it?

==> picture [156 x 155] intentionally omitted <==

• › Difficulties or errors with the interaction?

• › What do they get enthusiastic about?

• › How do they operate the system?

• › Are their actions supporting what they say?

• › e.g., if they seem to have problems and they claim it is easy to use

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PLANNING OBSERVATION

Pay attention to

• › Select setting(s)

› It is not possible to observe everything, so decide what is to be documented in each observation.

› Plan an observation form for collecting observations for each task › When a participant does something very interesting, you can mark down the time, which helps finding that incident from the video or audio recording.

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

THINK ALOUD

› Technique can be used in usability testing, user experience evaluation, and even in field studies › Start by explaining to the participant how to think aloud › It is not about what they do, but what they think while doing it › The tasks: chosen by participants (naturalistic) or defined by you › Thinking aloud does not come naturally to all

› You can prompt silent participant by asking: “What are you thinking” › You should politely steer too chatty participant back to the tasks › UX and usability studies have different rules

› Intervention in minimum (usability) | UX interventions for seeking clarifications

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

INTERVIEW

› allows understanding people's perceptions and experiences

==> picture [401 x 314] intentionally omitted <==

› Different types

› Unstructured

• › not directed by a script (ethnographic)

• › Structured

• › tightly scripted, almost like a questionnaire

• › Semi-structured (most used)

• › guided by a script, interesting issues explored in more depth by asking for further details

MINNA PAKANEN

6[TH] MAY 2026

INTERVIEWING

The interviewer interviews the participant/s › Form the topics and questions: open, broad & narrow

• › Next slide what to avoid when forming questions

• › Opening the conversation

• › assure your interest in participants’ replies as an expert in the topic

› Ask the question and wait that the person gives a reply › Ask for clarifications if a person’s reply is not complete or if it is just yes or no/ good/bad

› You said that it is good, in what way/s it is good/ what features make it good?

You wished the information on the screen was clearer, in which way?

6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

When creating questions avoid:

› Long questions

• › Compound sentences - split them into two

• › Jargon and language that the interviewee may not understand › What did you think of this AR feature? –> ….the feature where you can see items appearing on this real space we are in?

• › Leading questions that make assumptions

› Isn’t this feature good in…

• › Unconscious biases e.g., gender/age… stereotypes

• › As a/n elderly/woman/child you probably found this as complicated…

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

DATA RECORDING

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

62

VIDEO RECORDING

Pros and cons

› A rich way to capture interaction in the context + user comments are automatically in sync with user interaction

› Video recording can make participant anxious

› Placing the video camera in a more discrete location usually helps users to forget it

==> picture [86 x 86] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [405 x 348] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

AUDIO RECORDING

==> picture [74 x 73] intentionally omitted <==

When and why

• › In some of the interviews it is fine to record audio only

• If you do not have any prototypes or visual materials, an audio recording is more discrete than a video.

› It is good to also record audio when you use video recording as sometimes it is hard to hear from the video what the user is saying especially if the camera is located far away from the user

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PHOTOGRAPHS

Records the moment › Capture moments as they happened. They help in reporting results and important moments in the interaction for example in project reports and publications

==> picture [73 x 73] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [423 x 375] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

OBSERVATION NOTES

==> picture [80 x 81] intentionally omitted <==

Fast in situ note taking

› Observation notes are a good way of getting the most important things marked down, you can even mark the time when a user did or said something that was unexpected or interesting in some other way

› Notes can be used also as the basis of analysis (i.e., themes)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

LOG DATA

==> picture [74 x 73] intentionally omitted <==

Recording user interaction on the device › records user actions in the device log

› You can find errors and quantify your results easily with log data, but remember that you need the before-mentioned methods to understand why people made mistakes or did things in certain ways

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

UX EVALUATION AND DATA CAPTURING METHODS

==> picture [709 x 475] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
https://experienceresearchsociety.org/ux/evaluation-methods/
6 [TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN
----- End of picture text -----

~~R~~ eporting of the study in your report: › What kind of data collection and recording methods were used?

› Were there some methods that were not described here?

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EVALUATION PLANNING TASKS, PROCEDURE, & INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

78

PLANNING

1. Prepare procedure – steps, tasks…”script of the evaluation” 2. Prepare interview (+questionnaires) questions – background, task related, end

2. Pilot study – try out your procedure, tasks, forms, questions & how long the evaluation will be

3. Iterate your procedure – if something needs to be changed 5. 2[nd] Pilot – test if changes work better

4. Recruit participants – amount depends of the study, from 6-14-30-…, set also times for the studies and let them know the estimated duration

5. Prepare for the evaluation – cameras, video cameras, tripods, audio recording, print forms, get gifts for the participants, book rooms…

6. Conduct your study- follow your procedure, record the data and store it for analysis, remember to thank your participants after the evaluation! 6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

PROCEDURE Applied from Leena Arhippainen, UX researcher and Minna’s Phd supervisor

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

80

PROCEDURE

1. Consent from filling- participant agrees on the study (See L3: GDPR)

2. Intro to the study- who, why and what

3. Background info of the users- questionnaire or interview

4. Ice breaking task – easy task to get user familiar with the prototype 5. Actual task(s) with the prototype – design the task so that you are able to get feedback on right things

5. Post questionnaires- preferences and quantitative data

6. Semi-structured interview – get more detailed understanding how user felt using your prototype and what s/he thought about the design idea in general 6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

PROCEDURE

Example of procedure:

• Everything is explained so it is easy to follow in the actual evaluation

1. Consent & background questionnaire form filling 2. Who are we and explanation of the purpose of the study (even if explained in the consent form in detail)

2. Actual tasks are written down so that each participant is instructed in a similar way

3. Questionnaire fillings are marked in the procedure 5. Interview questions for post-interview (can also be on different paper)

4. Thank and reward the participants

==> picture [348 x 492] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

PROCEDURE

2. Introduction to the study

• Who are we

• Short description of the study aim

• Tell the user once more that they can withdraw from the study

  • whenever they feel like it

• Ask the user to think aloud during the tasks (+how to do it)

• In Usability evaluation: explain if you will not help the participant during the tasks

• Ask if the user has any questions

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE

2. Introduction to the study

MINNA PAKANEN

6[TH] MAY 2026

Reporting of the study in your report:

› Was there differences in the example procedure that was given to your group?

MINNA PAKANEN

6[TH] MAY 2026

PROCEDURE

3. Background information

• What do you need to know about your user?

  • Age

  • Gender: male/female/nonbinary

  • Educational background/ profession

  • Prior experience with similar technology that you are evaluating

  • Prior experience with the use context (e.g., fab labs, pottery, chemical lab, etc.) of your system

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE

3. Background questionnaire

Note that you do not necessarily need this, especially if you have only a few things to ask. The questions can also interviewed in the beginning or at the end of the evaluation!

==> picture [353 x 457] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

Reporting of the study in your report:

› How the participants were described in the paper, and what kind of information was given about them? › What way the description was written?

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PROCEDURE

4. Icebreaking task

• Idea is to familiarize your user with the thing under evaluation

• Easy and short task

• Reduces nervousness of the participant

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE

4. Icebreaking task

• Explore the prototype freely for a while

1. Familiarization with the current 3D City model

1. Familiarize yourselves with the 3D City model simply by looking at it and giving your initial thoughts before interacting with it.

2. Now you can start interacting with the model by controlling an avatar (WASD and arrows) and explore the model freely. While exploring the 3D model, please think aloud and comment on anything that caught your attention.

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PROCEDURE

5. Actual task(s)

• The idea is to plan tasks that the user can do and by doing the tasks you will learn if your product is understandable for the user or how they do experience the prototype

  • Try to keep them short and not too complicated to conduct

  • Test how your core use case activities are working

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE

5. Tasks

1st task:

1. First you want your handbag to match with these red shoes over here, what would you do?

2. Next you can try to make the bag imitate the fabric and color of this of this scarf here.

3. And then this shirt here.

Questions after the tasks are completed What did you think of this idea? Would it be useful for you?

Is the idea fun?

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PROCEDURE

6. post questionnaire

• Sometimes you might need user feedback on different designs so you can use certain questionnaires to help assess different things.

• The attractiveness of the product: Attrakdiff https://www.attrakdiff.de/index-en.html (online service was discontinued from January 2025 L)

• Can be used for

• Single evaluation

• Comparison

• Before-after

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE

6. Post questionnaire With Attrakdiff questionnaire

==> picture [547 x 189] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [351 x 496] intentionally omitted <==

(Colley et al. 2016)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE

• › Visual presentation of Attrakdiff findings in the report

(Pakanen et al. 2014)

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PROCEDURE

7. Semi-structured interview

• The last part of the evaluation is for asking questions from the user to find out their thoughts about the prototype and the interaction with it

  • What is good/bad in the design idea and the prototype?

  • What was difficult?

  • What would make it easier to use?

  • What would you like to change in it to make it more interesting to you?

  • Try to avoid questions that can be replied to just with yes or no!

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE

7. Post-interview questions

• Describe your experiences with the system.

• What do you think of using this kind of technology for remote collaboration?

• What was easy/natural and what was difficult/unnatural in the interaction?

• Were there any critical moments in the interaction? If yes, describe it/them.

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

HOW DO YOU DESCRIBE YOUR STUDY IN THE REPORT?

How procedure is reported in the paper?

› How is the procedure description in the paper differentiating from the study procedure, or is it doing that at all?

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

Reporting of the study in your report:

› How the procedure is reported in the paper?

› Is the procedure description in the paper differentiating from the study procedure, if so, how?

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

ROLES IN THE EVALUATION

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

102

ROLES IN THE EVALUATION

1. Facilitator/interviewer

• Facilitates the study, gives tasks, interviews, handles questionnaires

2. Observer

• Stays behind and observers what user does

• Takes notes on each task-can also write down user comments

3. Documenter (can be also facilitator)

• Videos/photos/audio recording

Pick a role that fits best for you!

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

ROLES IN THE EVALUATION

An example

==> picture [369 x 283] intentionally omitted <==

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS Thematic Analysis

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-004

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

105

PLEASE REVISIT MY SLIDES FROM L5

› https://brightspace.au.dk/d2l/le/lessons/202542/topics/256 9495 › There is detailed explanation how to conduct thematic analysis!

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

Reporting of the data analysis in your report:

› How the qualitative data analysis was reported in the papers?

6[TH] MAY 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

Reporting of the findings in your report:

› Check the example papers for tips how to report qualitative findings in your report ›How participants were identified? ›How participants quotes were written? › Pay attention to the story!

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PLANNING YOUR OWN EVALUATION TA SESSION FROM 13:15-> TODAY!

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

132

TASK FOR TA

Start planning your evaluation

• Who are your participants? You need 5 participants

• Think of your research question

• Think what kind of tasks and questions would help you to answer to your research question

• Make an early draft of your procedure

• Think about the roles: facilitator, observer, video recorder…

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

WHEN THE PROTOTYPE IS “READY”

Conduct a pilot evaluation

• Get participant/s from the other group/s

• Follow your procedure rigorously

• Act like you do not know your participant beforehand

• After the pilot you have an understanding whether your tasks are easy to understand or too complicated to pass and if your questions can reveal knowledge you were hoping for -> Iterate your procedure, tasks and questions, do another

• pilot study before you go to the actual evaluations!

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

COURSE LITERATURE REFERENCES

• Blandford, Ann, Dominic Furniss, and Stephann Makri. "Qualitative HCI research: Going behind the scenes." Synthesis lectures on human-centered informatics 9, no. 1 (2016): 1-115.

• Greenberg, Saul, and Bill Buxton. 2008. Usability evaluation considered harmful (some of the time). In Proc. CHI '08. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 111–120.

• Arnold P. O. S. Vermeeren, Effie Lai-Chong Law, Virpi Roto, Marianna Obrist, Jettie Hoonhout, and Kaisa Vaananen-Vainio-Mattila. 2010. User experience evaluation methods: current state and development needs. In Proc. NordiCHI '10. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 521–530. https://doi.org/10.1145/1868914.1868973

• Lim N-K & Stolterman E (2008) The anatomy of prototypes: Prototypes as filters, prototypes as manifestations of design ideas. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 15(2): A7.

• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-004

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

OTHER REFERENCES

• Javier A. Bargas-Avila and Kasper Hornbæk. 2011. Old wine in new bottles or novel challenges: a critical analysis of empirical studies of user experience. In Proc. CHI '11. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2689–2698. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979336

• Ashley Colley, Minna Pakanen, Saara Koskinen, Kirsi Mikkonen, and Jonna Häkkilä. 2016. Smart Handbag as a Wearable Public Display - Exploring Concepts and User Perceptions. In Proceedings of the 7th Augmented Human International Conference 2016 (AH '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 7, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/2875194.2875212

• Gegner L & Runonen M (2012) For what it is worth: Anticipated experience evaluation. In: Brassett J, Hekkert P, Ludden G, Malpass M & McDonnell J (eds) Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Design and Emotion. URI: https://reseda.taik. fi/Taik/jsp/taik/Publication_Types.jsp?id=23583813. Cited 2015/08/15.

• Hende, EA van den (2010) Really new stories the effect of early concept narratives on consumer understanding and attitudes. Doctoral dissertation. Delft University of Technology.

• Hippel E von (1986) Lead Users: A source of novel product concepts. Management Science 32(7): 791–805.

• Kuutti K, Battarbee K, Sade S, Mattelmaki T, Keinonen T, Teirikko T, & Tornberg A-M (2001) Virtual prototypes in usability testing. Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE: 1–7.

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

OTHER REFERENCES

• Law ELC (2011) The measurability and predictability of user experience. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems. New York NY, ACM: 1–10.

• Pakanen M (2015) Visual design examples in the evaluation of anticipated user experience at the early phases of research and development. Doctoral dissertation. University of Oulu.

• Pakanen, M., Alavesa, P., Van Berkel, N., Koskela, T., & Ojala, T. (2022). “Nice to see you virtually”: Thoughtful design and evaluation of virtual avatar of the other user in ar and vr based telexistence systems. Entertainment Computing, 40, 100457.

• Roto V, Law E, Vermeeren A, & Hoonhout J (eds) (2011) UX white paper. https//allaboutux.org/uxwhitepaper. Cited 2015/03/08.

• Stone D, Jarrett C, Woodroffe M, & and Minocha S (2005) User interface design and evaluation. Morgan Kaufmann Series in Interactive Technologies. San Francisco CA, Morgan Kaufman.

• Tognazzini, B. 1990. User Testing on the cheap. In Tog on Interface, Addison Wesley publ.

• Yogasara T, Popovic V, Kraal B, & Camorro-Koc M (2011) General characteristics of anticipated user experience (AUX) with interactive products. Proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Design Research: Diversity and Unity. Delft, Delft University of Technology: 1-11. URI: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/47035/. Cited 2015/06/15.

6[TH] MAY 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

AARHUS UNIVERSITY ITPDP: ACADEMIC WRITING

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose Department of Computer Science Collaboration & Computer-Human Interaction Group clemens@cs.au.dk

==> picture [135 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

PROFESSIONALLY: WHY DO WE WRITE?

• › Communication: 25K+ emails in your work life › Design: Analyse and report › Technology: Strategic assessments, analysis and feasibility studies

› Projects: Process and final reports › Code: Documentation and architectural descriptions › Strategy: Financing, business plans, development plans, etc.

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [303 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose APRIL 2023
2
----- End of picture text -----

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

STUDENTS: WHY DO WE WRITE?

• › Learning tool

• › Taking notes, working with theory, etc.

› Assignments in courses, bachelor report, master’s thesis, Ph.d. dissertation.

› Communication

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

==> picture [135 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
APRIL 2023
3
----- End of picture text -----

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

IMPORTANT POINTS

• › To write is a craft

• › It must be trained and maintained › Learning demands time and effort

• › You must be open to feedback

› Writing something is as much about your own understanding of the topic as it is about understanding the reader

› Take pride in writing well, don’t be sloppy.

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [135 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
APRIL 2023
4
----- End of picture text -----

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ACADEMIC WRITING STYLE

› Academic language › Precise, unambiguous, clear › Understandable by peers on same level › Critical argumentation without opinions that are not backed up › Is objective › Uses terminology of the field › Use references!

› Characteristics (The ABC)

• › A ccuracy

• › B revity › C larity

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

==> picture [135 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
APRIL 2023
5
----- End of picture text -----

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ACCURACY

• › Many apps developed for the public sector suffer from accessibility issues. Imprecise

• › One of four apps developed for the public sector suffer from accessibility issues (Doe, 2022). More precise.

› Twenty three percent of mobile applications (iOS & Android) are not compliant with the WCAG 2 guidelines (Doe, 2022). Too detailed?

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

APRIL 2023 6

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

BREVITY

› Avoid overly long sentences.

› Avoid redundancy (except when signposting).

› Never write just to write something.

“I apologize for such a long letter - I didn't have time to write a short one.” Mark Twain

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

==> picture [57 x 23] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
APRIL 2023
7
----- End of picture text -----

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

CLARITY

› Write to express not to impress.

› Don’t assume that your reader has the same background knowledge as you.

› Use active voice when possible

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [135 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
APRIL 2023
8
----- End of picture text -----

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

COMMUNICATE WITH THE READER

› Transparency

• › Meta communication

• › Be honest

› Describe choices, assumptions, and limitations

› Help the reader assess the work

• › Write to express not to impress

• › Summaries after sections

› Tell the reader why they have to read what they are about to read (signposting) › Use references to previous and future sections

https://studypedia.au.dk/en/academic-standards/academic-norms

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

APRIL 2023

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

9

ACTIVE / PASSIVE VOICE

› Active voice

• › Direct

• › Clear sender › “We have analysed data…”

• › Passive voice

› Indirect › Weak and complex › “Data shows… “

• › (fake objectivity)

›Newer academic tradition

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

› Older academic tradition

==> picture [135 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
APRIL 2023
10
----- End of picture text -----

• › Try to avoid it!

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

• › Use spellchecker!

› Be consistent with punctuation, numbers (three/300), lists, etc. › Avoid unnecessary use of “quotation marks”. › Don’t use instant messaging writing style such as “…” or not ending sentences with a period.

› Use a reference manager

› EndNote if you use Word (accessible for students)

› https://library.au.dk/en/students/reference-management › Bibtex if you use Latex (you should.)

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [135 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
APRIL 2023
11
----- End of picture text -----

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

REFERENCES

› To anchor our argumentation in the field › To support our argumentation with evidence › Note: the weight of the evidence depends on the source! › To avoid plagiarism › If we use text, concepts, results from others we need to cite it › Cite with:

› “…” 1 with literal reproduction of text (e.g., quotes) › When it is just a reference use 1 › https://library.au.dk/studerende/plagiering/

› Better to cite one time too many than one time too few!

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

APRIL 2023 12

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

TIPS FOR REFERENCES

• › Pick a system (APA, Harvard, Vancouver) › For reports, APA/Harvard style (Author, year, [page]) is more readable than Vancouver [1]

• › Use a reference the first time you mention author: Bardram (2009) says …

• › End quotes with reference and page: “Activity-Based Computing … “ (Bardram 2009, pp.50)

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

APRIL 2023 13

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

TIPS FOR REFERENCES

› Google Scholar! https://scholar.google.com

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [135 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
APRIL 2023
14
----- End of picture text -----

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose APRIL 2023 15

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

LATEX AND REFERENCES

› Choose a package: \usepackage{natbib} › Chose a style: \bibliographystyle{apalike} › Put in bibliography: \bibliography{refs} › Refs refers to the file refs.bib

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [135 x 102] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
APRIL 2023
16
----- End of picture text -----

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

LATEX AND REFERENCES

• › → \cite{weiser1999} (Weiser, 1999)

• › → \citet{weiser1999} Weiser (1999)

• › \cite[see][pp. 10]{weiser1999} → (see Weiser, 1999, pp. 10)

• › \citeauthor{weiser1999} → Weiser

• › \citeyear{weiser1999} → 1999

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

APRIL 2023 17

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose APRIL 2023 18

WRITING PROCESS

› Write to think › Iterate on text › Don’t be afraid to throw away text › Use structure

› Outline the headings of the document to begin with › Add notes/bullets to the different sections › Ask for feedback!

› … but not on notes written for yourself › (In Latex use % notes: %This is a note to myself)

==> picture [64 x 40] intentionally omitted <==

APRIL 2023 19

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

AARHUS UNIVERSITY