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

SKETCHING USER EXPERIENCE ITPDP’26, L9

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

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

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

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

TODAY

• Interaction and UX design

• Externalisation and design

• Break

• A bit more about scenarios

• Storyboards

• Sketching UX in storyboards

• Concept selection

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

INTERACTION DESIGN (IXD)

Design of the user interaction and experiences that occur during using a product

4. User experience evaluation

• 1.User research • Interview

• • Observation

• • Shadowing

• • Remote studies

• 1.1. Creating personas & scenarios + sketching storyboards 2. UI sketching • wireframing

3. UI graphics & interaction design • Aesthetics

• Interactive content design

• User experience design

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

USER EXPERIENCE (UX) DESIGN

A good user experience is one that meets a particular user’s needs in the specific context where a person uses the product

==> picture [634 x 131] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
Why? How?
What?
Motivations for Functionality:
Functionality:
adopting the Accessibility &
Features
product Aesthetics
----- End of picture text -----

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

INTERACTION DESIGN (IXD)

Design of the user interaction and experiences that a occur during using a product

==> picture [704 x 314] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
4. User experience evaluation
Why?
1.User research How?
•
Interview
• 3. UI graphics & interaction design
Observation
•
Aesthetics
•
Shadowing
•
• Interactive content design
Remote studies
•
User experience design
1.1. Creating personas
& scenarios + sketching
storyboards
2. UI sketching
•
wireframing
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [73 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
What?
----- End of picture text -----

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [211 x 140] intentionally omitted <==

EXTERNALISATION AND DESIGN

Alan Dix & Layda Gongora (2011)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

9

EXTERNALISATION?

• Is an active shaping of the world as an intellectual resource

• a uniquely human ability & foundation of culture and civilisation

• Involves the embodiment, representation and exploration of our own thoughts, feelings and interior life

• The term externalisation itself reflects a philosophical and practical tension:

• embodied interactions with external artefacts

• process of making internal representations external

• In art and design this reflects dual views of creativity as internal muse or embodied .

• engagement

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

KINDS OF KNOWING

Tacit knowledge

• Unconscious or prenoetic

• Slowly building up through trial and error

• Relational

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

KINDS OF KNOWING

Explicit knowledge • Conscious • Rational/logical • Learning through abduction or reasoning • a uniquely or at least largely human attribute

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

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

Tacit or Explicit? or Tacit and Explicit?

MINNA PAKANEN

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

3-LEVELS OF EXPERT KNOWING

1) in action knowing

2) reflection in action

• 3) reflection on action

(Donald Schön,1984)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

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

"knowing is in our action"

(Schön, 1984)

MINNA PAKANEN

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

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

”reflection in action”

(Schön, 1984)

MINNA PAKANEN

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

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

”reflection on action"

(Schön, 1984)

MINNA PAKANEN

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

EXTERNALISATION IN CRAFTS/PRODUCT DESIGN

• Sketches

• Mood boards

• Full-scale mock-ups in blue foam, cardboard, or 3D printing

• Production-line mold

• CAD and other forms of simulation or virtual walkthroughs

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXTERNALISATION IN IXD

• Storyboards

• • Personas

This lecture

• Scenarios

• • Paper prototypes

==> picture [218 x 271] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [314 x 271] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXTERNALISATION IN PRODUCT DESIGN

Products

==> picture [248 x 176] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [287 x 177] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [184 x 177] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [226 x 176] intentionally omitted <==

Sketches

Models

Prototypes

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXTERNALISATION IN DESIGN PROCESS

Product Design

• Problem space

• Design space

• Process

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXTERNALISATION IN PROBLEM SPACE

• Mood boards = values and ethos of the setting/ organisation

==> picture [471 x 326] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXTERNALISATION IN DESIGN SPACE

• Series of alternative designs = sample of possible designs

• Focus on context with constraints

• Materials

• Paper and pencil–>abstract list of properties

• Plasticine or cardboard and glue –> exploring the design space by way of example

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXTERNALISATION IN DESIGN PROCESS

• Schedule

• Stages

==> picture [391 x 381] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PROPERTIES AND DIMENSIONS

Representation

• Physical

• the foam model

• Schematic

• sketch or floor plan

• Symbolic

• E.g., Mind map, equations on the blackboard

==> picture [232 x 175] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [232 x 146] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [222 x 146] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

PROPERTIES AND DIMENSIONS

Modality

• Written (also mathematical, and musical)

• Speech

• Drawn (sketches, diagrams, plans)

• Aural, olfactory, or tactile

• Body

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

PROPERTIES AND DIMENSIONS

Persistence

• Persistent

• the words written on a page, the clay model, or the sketch on the back of an envelope

• Ephemeral

• the words in a conversation, the notes played on a keyboard, or the movements made during an improvisation session

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

FUNCTIONS OF EXTERNALISATION

1) Informational 2) Formational 3) Transformational 4) Transcendental

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

Informational

Formational Transformational

Transcendental

==> picture [277 x 101] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [258 x 93] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [233 x 87] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [219 x 87] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

INFORMATIONAL

– passing on to others already formed ideas

==> picture [428 x 154] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [344 x 212] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

FORMATIONAL

– vague ideas becoming clearer by the process of externalisation

==> picture [217 x 300] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [419 x 156] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

TRANSFORMATIONAL

– thinking using materials

==> picture [403 x 159] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [296 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [296 x 90] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [432 x 104] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [432 x 115] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

TRANSCENDENTAL

– our thoughts and ideas become the object of thought

==> picture [421 x 154] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [383 x 250] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

TAPPING INTO TACIT

Rich personas and scenarios

• Appeal directly to our tacit understanding

• Deliberately far more detailed than crude user profiles

• Include 'unnecessary' details that make the people, and the physical

• situation seem real to us

• By appealing to our imagination , they spark our natural social and physical understandings in a way that an abstracted 'user group' cannot.

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE PERSONA

Susa

Age: 30 Location: Rovaniemi, Finland Job: director of furniture shop Status: engaged

Susa loves snow and sports and that is why she lives in Northern Finland in Rovaniemi just a few kilometers from the nearest slopes and ski tracks. She has a full-time job, so as an opposite to that, she wants to spend most of the weekends and evenings on skies or on a snowboard. She often goes there with her boyfriend, Jyri. They both love snowboarding on fresh snow on untouched slopes.

==> picture [194 x 235] intentionally omitted <==

Needs and goals:

She wants to be able to get to the untouched slopes immediately after the right type of snow has fell.

Activities:

• Snowboarding outside of slopes

• Uses many weather apps with radar for the temperature and spotting the fresh snow

• • Uses a navigation app in parallel to find the snowy hills.

Challenges:

• There is no application that can tell her the consistency of the snow, so she needs to go out to test the snow

• The day is very short in Lapland during winter months so she cannot go outside of lighted slopes during the late afternoons or evenings

• Difficult to find slopes with fresh snow

• • Difficult to navigate and use the weather app radar function at the same time while driving a car on slippery roads

• • It is risky to snowboard alone outside of the slopes especially after sunset.

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

SCENARIOS

John M. Carrol (1999) Peter Wright & John McCarthy (2010)

MINNA PAKANEN

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

42

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

”a written outline of a film, novel, or stage work giving details of the plot and individual scenes”

(Oxford Dictionary of English, 2020)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SCENARIOS

• Stories about people and their activities often involving their use of technology

• Setting of the activity = the physical location in which the activities occur (e.g., an office or a sitting room)

• Agents and actors

• Agents’ goals and objectives

• The plot that moves the action and events of the scenario on

==> picture [69 x 52] intentionally omitted <==

• State of the system in use with which the person is interacting with

• Be sufficiently dynamic to accommodate goals being changed by the events that occur throughout

(Carroll, 1999)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SCENARIOS

Why?

• Evoke reflection in design

• They are concrete and flexible

• They are multifaceted and have multiple views ... they promote a workorientation

• (help envision, design, communicated, collaborate etc.)

(Carroll, 1999)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SCENARIO

Example

• Context of design =

• Agents and actors=

• Agents’ goals and objectives=

• The action and events =

• State of the system in use=

Harry is interested bridge failures; as a child, he saw a small bridge collapse when its footings were undermined after a heavy rainfall. He opens the case study of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and requests to see the film of its collapse. He is stunned to see the bridge first sway, then ripple, and ultimately lurch apart. He quickly replays the film and then opens the associated course module on harmonic motion. He browses the material (without doing the exercises), saves the film clip in his workbook with a speech annotation, and then enters a natural language query to find pointers to other physical manifestations of harmonic motion. He moves on to a case study involving flutes and piccolos.

(Carroll, 1999)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SCENARIO

Example

• Context of design =

• Agents and actors=

• Agents’ goals and objectives=

• The action and events =

• State of the system in use=

Harry is interested bridge failures; as a child, he saw a small bridge collapse when its footings were undermined after a heavy rainfall. He opens the case study of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and requests to see the film of its collapse. He is stunned to see the bridge first sway, then ripple, and ultimately lurch apart. He quickly replays the film, and then opens the associated course module on harmonic motion. He browses the material (without doing the exercises), saves the film clip in his workbook with a speech annotation, and then enters a natural language query to find pointers to other physical manifestations of harmonic motion. He moves on to a case study involving flutes and piccolos.

(Carroll, 1999)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXPERIENCE-CENTERED SCENARIOS

Focus on

• People’s activities

• • their motivation

• feelings

• • the meanings they make of the interactions
• • social interactions around the activities in question

• Good stories have the power to stimulate imagination, engage interest, and highlight specific aspects of a situation (real or imagined)

(Wright & McCarthy, 2010)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

AN EXAMPLE SCENARIO

Different elements

• Context of design =

• Agents and actors=

• Agents’ goals and objectives=

==> picture [56 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

• The action and events =

• State of the system in use=

• People’s activities

• • their motivation + feelings
• • the meanings of interactions
• • social interactions around the activity

==> picture [421 x 470] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

AN EXAMPLE SCENARIO

Different elements

• Context of design =

• Agents and actors=

• Agents’ goals and objectives=

==> picture [56 x 62] intentionally omitted <==

• The action and events =

• State of the system in use=

• People’s activities

• • their motivation
• • feelings
• • the meanings of interactions
• • social interactions around the activity

==> picture [417 x 486] intentionally omitted <==

MINNA PAKANEN

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

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

”Constructing scenarios of use inescapably evokes reflection in the context of design.”

(Carroll, 1999)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

STORYBOARDS

Corrie van der Lelie (2006) The value of storyboards in the product design process. Pers Ubiquit Comput (2006) 10: 159–162.DOI 10.1007/s00779-005-0026-

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

58

~~”~~ , a sequence of drawings typically with some directions and dialogue, representing the shots planned for a film or television production.” (Oxford Dictionary of English, 2020)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

==> picture [632 x 532] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
23 [RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [234 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

A storyboard is a graphic organizer that consists of illustrations or images displayed in sequence for the purpose of previsualizing a motion picture, animation, motion graphic or interactive media sequence. The storyboarding process, in the form it is known today, Walt Disney Productions during the early 1930s, after several years of similar processes being in use at Walt Disney and other animation studios https://pencilpusher.carbonmade.com/projects/6733548 https://pencilpusher.carbonmade.com/projects/673354823[RD ] MARCH 2026

==> picture [415 x 350] intentionally omitted <==

http://www.pixartalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/casrsstoryboards4.jpg MINNA PAKANEN

STORYBOARDS

=Visual scenarios

• Common visual language –> A tool for communication

• Product-user interaction + context + time

• Generating ideas and concepts based on the scenario

• Getting a feel of the interaction with the product

==> picture [520 x 365] intentionally omitted <==

(Kettunen, 2001)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

VISUALISATION MANNER

Early phase

Late phase

==> picture [252 x 181] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [303 x 182] intentionally omitted <==

Sketchy

Visually detailed & refined

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

ANALYSIS PHASE

Using storyboard to consider:

• Defining function and intended behavior (technical, psychological, social, economic, cultural)

• Where, when, what, why, with who, for how long?

• Situations, atmosphere, feelings ...

• Exploring through scenario

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SYNTHESIS PHASE

Explore & integrate

• Generating ideas and concepts based on the scenario

• Getting a feel of the interaction with the product

• Details are not yet important

==> picture [541 x 411] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SIMULATION PHASE

==> picture [577 x 417] intentionally omitted <==

Evolving into

• Create coherent narrative

• Focus on the story line

• Adding details

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

STORYBOARDS IN EVALUATION PHASE The storyboard used for:

• walkthrough with future users

• Evaluating ideas based on the scenario

• Allows studying product and its values and qualities

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

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

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

VISUALISATION MANNER

Affects to user feedback

==> picture [252 x 181] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [303 x 182] intentionally omitted <==

Sketchy

Visually refined

Evoke comments and suggestions

Is accepted as final ‘as is’

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

VISUALISATION MANNER

Drawing vs. tracing

==> picture [367 x 264] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [414 x 264] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

VISUALISATION MANNER

Drawing vs. tracing

==> picture [398 x 304] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [410 x 288] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EVALUATION PHASE

Example storyboard: Evaluation of the AR application

==> picture [960 x 290] intentionally omitted <==

Note that many pictures are missing in between!

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SHOWING THE CONTEXT

Photo + tracings + colors

==> picture [668 x 403] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
23 [RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN
----- End of picture text -----

SHOWING THE CONTEXT

Photo + tracing + colors

==> picture [673 x 390] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SHOWING THE CONTEXT

Photo + dimming + tracing + colors

==> picture [643 x 385] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SKETCHING STORYBOARDS

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

76

SKETCHING STORYBOARDS

Basic humans + a bit of context + things to interact with Remember to zoom in and out!

==> picture [376 x 220] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [449 x 226] intentionally omitted <==

(Baskinger, 2008)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

BASIC SHAPES

==> picture [428 x 264] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [459 x 206] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

HUMANS

==> picture [392 x 66] intentionally omitted <==

(Baskinger, 2008)

==> picture [515 x 364] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE

Johannes Valentin Berg & Rasmus Hvilshøj

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

HANDS AND FINGERS

==> picture [311 x 306] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [265 x 232] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [426 x 294] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
23 [RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN
----- End of picture text -----

DEVICES

==> picture [220 x 147] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

HANDS + DEVICES= INTERACTION

==> picture [493 x 349] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [362 x 362] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [137 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
23 [RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN
----- End of picture text -----

HANDS + DEVICES = INTERACTION

==> picture [441 x 347] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [440 x 311] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SHOWING INTERACTION

==> picture [384 x 382] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [157 x 91] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [157 x 162] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [319 x 314] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

TRACING

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

88

TRACING

Constructing the context and people

==> picture [484 x 309] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [241 x 117] intentionally omitted <==

You can also create a suitable picture of the context with AI!

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

RESPECT COPYRIGHTS!

==> picture [269 x 311] intentionally omitted <==

Hetkiä by Maija Louekari, 2003 competition entry to Marimekko

==> picture [251 x 295] intentionally omitted <==

Markus Leppo in Helsinki ja helsinkiläiset, 1966

https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-6921730

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

THINK TWICE BEFORE GENAI!

==> picture [494 x 279] intentionally omitted <==

Vesa-Matti Väärä, 2020

GenAI illustation, 2026

Use of AI is problematic also point of view of your learning and consumption of natural resources!

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

RESPECT COPYRIGHTS!

To avoid violating other peoples copyrights when tracing and especially if you use photos in the background:

a) Take the pictures yourself

b) Use royalty-free photos (Stock Adobe, Shutterstock, Getty Images, etc.) c) Combine many sources (combine images well and use only small pieces from each) d) (Buy the right to use the photos)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

LINE TRACING An example

==> picture [374 x 371] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

LINE TRACING + COLORING

==> picture [318 x 319] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [137 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
23 [RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN
----- End of picture text -----

NO COLOR VS. GREYSCALE VS. COLORS?

Depends on the case

==> picture [311 x 198] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [311 x 198] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [312 x 198] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

LINE TRACING An example

==> picture [239 x 411] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

LINE TRACING + PICTURES OF THE PRODUCT

==> picture [238 x 410] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [449 x 357] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----
= =
23 [RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [125 x 376] intentionally omitted <==

LINKS

Illustrator tutorials on tracing and drawing any shape: https://youtu.be/j69a3-shkGE https://youtu.be/RbbQl2sU-ag https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rk-JGsriJ4o

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

CONCEPT SELECTION

Ulrich, K. T., & Eppinger, S. D. (2016). Product design and development. McGraw-hill. (Pages 146-156)

https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/productdesignanddevelopmentkarltulrichstevendeppingeredisi/266164184

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

99

CONCEPT SELECTION

==> picture [812 x 104] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

CONCEPTS

==> picture [624 x 347] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

WAYS OF SELECTING CONCEPTS

Choose what fits the best to the design phase and case

• External decision = Customer, client or other external entity

• Product champion = An influential member (head of design) of product design team chooses the concept based on personal preference

• Intuition = Concept is chosen by its perceived feel, and it's fit to the case

• Multivoting = Each member votes for (3-5) concepts with • or I , the most voted concept/s wins

• Pros & cons =The team lists strengths and weaknesses of each concept and makes a group decision

• Decision matrices =The team rates each concept against prespecified selection criteria, also possible to compare your concepts against existing product

• Prototype & test = Developed prototypes are evaluated against each other by users.

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE 1

Selection by intuition

==> picture [537 x 311] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

CONCEPT SCREENING MATRIX

6-step process

0. Conduct multivoting to select ideas for concept screening

1. Prepare the selection matrix

2. Rate the concepts

3. Rank the concepts

4. Combine and improve the concepts

5. Select one or more concepts

==> picture [332 x 128] intentionally omitted <==

6. Reflect the results and the process

Note that matrices always focus on the customer/ user needs and other decisions criteria defined based on the case!

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE 1

Multivoting

• I conducted multivoting with a few classmates to narrow down the number alternatives

• • Each could vote for max 3 concepts

==> picture [515 x 366] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE 1

4 concepts presented with images and short textual descriptions (each in own A4 )

Reference product that the concepts are evaluated against Adjustability Storage space Cleanability Aesthetics Multifunctionality Novelty Ergonomics Durability Likeness Storability Score Rating

Concept screening

Selection criteria drawn from user studies and competition requirements + = Better than reference – = Worse than reference 0 = Same as reference

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

Reference product

EXAMPLE 2

==> picture [371 x 86] intentionally omitted <==

Novo Pen Concepts

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

EXAMPLE 2: SELECTION MATRIX

==> picture [806 x 311] intentionally omitted <==

23[RD ] MARCH 2026 MINNA PAKANEN

REFERENCES

• Carroll, J. (Ed.) (1999). Five Reasons for Scenario-Based Design. IEEE Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

• Dix, A., & Gongora, L. (2011, October). Externalisation and design. In Proceedings of the second conference on creativity and innovation in design (pp. 31-42).

• Ulrich, K. T., & Eppinger, S. D. (2016). Product design and development. McGraw-hill. (Chapter 8, pp. 146-156).

https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/productdesignanddevelopmentkarltulrichstevendeppinge redisi/266164184

• Van der Lelie, C. (2006). The value of storyboards in the product design process. Personal and ubiquitous computing, 10(2-3), 159-162.

• Wright, P., & McCarthy, J. (2010). Experience-centered design: designers, users, and communities in dialogue. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 3(1), 1-123. (pages: 33-34)

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

SKETCHING HUMANS & STORYBOARDS Sketching tutorial in class. Bring your pencil/s, pens, and 3 shades of grey markers with you!

25th March 10.00-12.00

23[RD ] MARCH 2026

MINNA PAKANEN

110

IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

MESSAGES

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

COURSE PLAN

==> picture [634 x 357] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

COURSE PLAN

==> picture [634 x 357] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

TEACHING TIMES

Mondays still 12-14 Wednesdays still 10-12

Some sessions are on other days and times – double check course plan! Completely done (hopefully J ) and revised Friday supervision 10-11.30 from 17/4 – 19/6. Feedback/supervision can also be requested via email J

Remember PROTOLab practical session 23rd (14-16) and 24th (12-16) of March.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

PROTOLAB INTRODUCTION WORKSHOP

PROTOLab practical session – 3D printing and Laser cut

23rd of March from 14.15-16: Groups 1-5 (14 people) 24th of March from 12.15-14: Groups 6-8 and 11 (15 people) 24th of March from 14.15-16: Groups 12, 13, 16 and 20 (13 people)

Important to have finished tooling exercises and watch the PROTOLab videos: BS à Week 9/13 à Before class à Link to PROTOLab Tutorial …

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

PROTOLAB INTRODUCTION WORKSHOP

==> picture [251 x 357] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [251 x 357] intentionally omitted <==

SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT 16. MARCH 2026

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

SUB-ASSIGNMENT 2

Deadline: 8[th] of April 2026 at 15.00

Should include:

• Methods section : What have you done, which methods did you use, use literature, talk

• pros/cons, and argue for methodology or lack hereof.

• Empirical Presentation: What data have you collected, highlight findings, summarize,

• describe patterns, present hypotheses.

• Working models : Minimum 2 of 5, include descriptive text segment to each. Argue for

• choice (using, not using).

• Scenarios: User scenarios. Sketches. Personas. Add-ons to working models.

Remember to read assignment instructions on Brightspace properly and carefully!

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

IDEA GENERATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

QUICK LITERATURE OVERVIEW

Girotra et al. (2010): How to be successful when doing ideation.

Djajadiningrat et al. (2000): Extreme Characters and Interaction relabelling as a tool for generating ideas. Kensing & Madsen (1992): Future Workshops as a tool for generating ideas. Halskov & Dalsgård (2006): Inspiration Cards as a tool for generating ideas. Carroll (1999): How using scenarios can help formalize your ideas into concepts.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

IDEA GENERATION ~~AND~~ CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

IDEA GENERATION/IDEATION

You have maybe already started this, due to the "Research Through Design"-nature, that you were taught in FITDes.

As mentioned, this course follows the "User-centered Design"-approach.

Everything originates from your empirical work. If your ideas do not fit with tendencies, issues and aspects of your empirical work, it is (probably) not the right idea.

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

IDEA GENERATION/IDEATION

==> picture [466 x 311] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

https://www.ideou.com/pages/brainstorming

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

IDEA GENERATION/IDEATION

Only a small subset of ideas are good.

As IT-Product Developers we are only interested in the best and most motivated ideas.

To maximise our chance of a good idea, we should maximise the amount of ideas we get.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Karan Girotra, Christian Terwiesch, Karl T. Ulrich, (2010) Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea. Management Science 56(4):591-605. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1144

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

IDEA GENERATION/IDEATION

==> picture [686 x 311] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Karan Girotra, Christian Terwiesch, Karl T. Ulrich, (2010) Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea. Management Science 56(4):591-605. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1144

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

IDEOS LIST OF BRAINSTORMING PROS

Brainstorming is an effective way to: Produce a large number of ideas Generate ideas quickly Expand your portfolio of alternatives Get people unstuck Inject insights from a broader group Build enthusiasm Improve team collaboration

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

https://www.ideou.com/pages/brainstorming

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

IDEO RULES FOR BRAINSTORMING

1. Defer judgement

2. Encourage wild ideas

3. Build on the ideas of others

4. Stay focused on the topic

5. One conversation at a time

6. Be visual

7. Go for quantity

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

https://www.ideou.com/pages/brainstorming

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

TEAM VS HYBRID BRAINSTORMING

Do you believe there is a difference?

==> picture [806 x 120] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Karan Girotra, Christian Terwiesch, Karl T. Ulrich, (2010) Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea. Management Science 56(4):591-605. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1144

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

TEAM VS HYBRID BRAINSTORMING

“We find that groups organized in the hybrid structure are able to generate more ideas, to generate better ideas, and to better discern the quality of the ideas they generate.”

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Karan Girotra, Christian Terwiesch, Karl T. Ulrich, (2010) Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea. Management Science 56(4):591-605. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1144

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

TEAM VS HYBRID BRAINSTORMING

1) Hybrid structure is often able to get more and better ideas - and it gets everyone involved!

2) Hybrid structure is better at choosing which ideas are good!

==> picture [505 x 206] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Karan Girotra, Christian Terwiesch, Karl T. Ulrich, (2010) Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea. Management Science 56(4):591-605. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1144

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

TEAM VS HYBRID BRAINSTORMING

Certain group dynamics can be a hinderance for ideation.

Hybrid ideation ensures involvement from the entire team.

Choosing the right idea is more important than coming up with it – and this is truly difficult no matter what type of structure you use. Let your empirical findings guide these.

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Karan Girotra, Christian Terwiesch, Karl T. Ulrich, (2010) Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea. Management Science 56(4):591-605. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1144

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

IDEATION METHODS

Inspiration Card Workshops Future Workshops

Interaction Relabeling / Extreme Characters

(Experience Prototyping/Bodystorming from FITDes – Buchenau & Suri)

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

INSPIRATION CARD WORKSHOPS

“We present the Inspiration Card Workshop as a collaborative method for combining findings from domain studies, represented in Domain Cards, with sources of inspiration from applications of technology, represented in Technology Cards, to create new concepts for design.”

Domain card: People, settings, situations, contexts. Can be divided into multiple card types.

Technology cards: A technology or ”system” of tech. Inspiration card: Domain card + Technology card

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Halskov, K., & Dalsgård, P. (2006, June). Inspiration card workshops. In Proceedings of the 6th conference on Designing Interactive systems (pp. 2-11). ACM.

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

INSPIRATION CARD WORKSHOPS

Structure (4-6 person teams):

• Create several domain and tech cards per participant (5 min)

• Introduce cards (7 min)

• Use combinations of cards to create new concepts (10 min)

Documentation:

• Document each idea on A3 paper

• Title, users, what and why • Use sketches and cards on the A3 poster

• Annotate and refine in the presentation phase

• Present each idea in the group and refine (7 min) (requires one facilitator and one time-keeper)

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

INSPIRATION CARD PROCESS

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Finn Kensing and Kim Halskov Madsen. 1992. Generating visions: future workshops and metaphorical design. In Design at work, Joan Greenbaum and Morten Kyng (Eds.). L. Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, USA 155-168.

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

INSPIRATION CARDS

Pros:

Rapid Idea Generation

Combines domain observations with tech High throughput of ideas Might highlight ”misunderstandings” or behavioral misconceptions

Cons:

Can be too technology centric Subject to group dynamics (same as before) Can be somewhat “limited” by the cards

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

FUTURE WORKSHOPS

==> picture [435 x 143] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Finn Kensing and Kim Halskov Madsen. 1992. Generating visions: future workshops and metaphorical design. In Design at work, Joan Greenbaum and Morten Kyng (Eds.). L. Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, USA 155-168.

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

FUTURE WORKSHOPS

Structure:

Critique phase (10 min) Fantasy phase (10 min) Implementation phase (10 min) (requires one facilitator and one time-keeper)

Documentation:

Document each issue in each phase Summarise key ideas

Written descriptions, short scenarios, details, etc. Identify next steps for each idea

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

FUTURE WORKSHOPS

Pros:

Problem focused

Includes domain knowledge and observations Participatory and co-creative

Cons: Might focus on symptoms and shallow problems, but not underlying issues Implementation centric (Can be) Time consuming

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

INTERACTION RELABELLING/EXTREME CHARACTERS

“Moving beyond a narrow focus on usability […] requires new methods for understanding design possibilities. Here we describe two: interaction relabelling, in which possible interactions with a known mechanical device are mapped to the functions of an electronic device to be designed; and extreme characters, in which fictional users with exaggerated emotional attitudes are taken as the basis of design to highlight cultural issues.”

Can be used individually

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Djajadiningrat, J. P., Gaver, W. W., & Fres, J. W. (2000, August). Interaction relabelling and extreme characters: methods for exploring aesthetic interactions. In Proceedings of the 3rd conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques (pp. 66-71). ACM.

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

INTERACTION RELABELING EXERCISE

Structure:

Pick an idea and either a completely random artifact, or an artifact from within the community.

Relabel the prop to work for your idea.

Documentation:

Describe the initial idea

Summarise the interaction relabeling.

Summarise how the exercise has changed your previous idea

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

INTERACTION RELABELING/EXTREME CHARACTERS HYBRID EXERCISE

Structure:

Pick an idea and an unrelated product

Relabel the prop to work for your idea

Redesign it for an extreme character (requires one facilitator and one time-keeper)

Documentation:

Describe the initial idea

Summarise the interaction relabeling and the extreme character design Summarise how the exercise has changed your previous idea

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

INTERACTION RELABELING/EXTREME CHARACTERS

Pros:

Good for reframing your understanding of the design space Excellent for breaking fixation

Cons:

Conceptualizes, generates thoughts, and perspectives rather than new ideas Small throughput - but plenty of reflection

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

~~IDEA~~ GENERATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

So now you have an idea

How do you mold this into a concept?

What is the difference?

Concept = "Conceptus” = ”that which is conceived or formed in thought” Develop = ”Desveloper” = ”Disvolvere” = to unveil/to unwrap

You need to communicate and "sell" your idea, before it is a concept. Scenarios can help with this, and trigger multiple considerations/reflections.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

SCENARIOS

”Harry is interested bridge failures; as a child, he saw a small bridge collapse when its footings were undermined after a heavy rainfall. He opens the case study of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and requests to see the film of its collapse. He is stunned to see the bridge first sway, then ripple, and ultimately lurch apart. He quickly replays the film, and then opens the associated course module on harmonic motion. He browses the material (without doing the exercises), saves the film clip in his workbook with a speech annotation, and then enters a natural language query to find pointers to other physical manifestations of harmonic motion. He moves on to a case study involving flutes and piccolos.”

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Carrol, J. M. (1999, January). Five reasons for scenariobased design. In Systems Sciences, 1999. HICSS-32.

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

SCENARIOS

“Scenarios are stories. They are stories about people and their activities.” – Carroll (1999)

An externalisation of, e.g., the context, the design space, design ideas, an interaction, a feeling, etc.

Different representations:

Written stories, sketches, videos (Binder 1999) Pictures (Pedell et al. 2004). Personas (Chang et al. 2008). Techsonas (Bødker & Klokmose 2013). Drama and props (Brandt & Gunnet 2000).

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

SCENARIO-BASED DESIGN: PRINCIPLES… OR PROBLEMS?

Action vs. Reflection

Design Problem Fluidity

Design Moves Have Many Effects

Scientific Knowledge Lags Design Application

External Factors Constrain Design

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

ACTION VS REFLECTION

Carroll: Prototypes are amazing, but

“There is a fundamental tension between thinking and doing: thinking impedes progress in doing, and doing obstructs thinking”…

Scenarios can be used for (self-)reflection about actors, roles, communities and tasks

“[Scenarios are] vivid descriptions of end-user experiences [that] evoke reflection about design issues”

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

DESIGN PROBLEM FLUIDITY

“Design, and especially the design of new technology, undermines the stability of the world […]”

It is vital to ensure that everyone always agrees on the requirements of the project.

“Scenarios (edit: can) concretely fix an interpretation and a solution, but are open-ended and easily revised”

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

DESIGN MOVES HAVE MANY EFFECTS

“Every element of a design, every move that a designer makes, has a variety of potential consequences.”

“Scenarios can be written at multiple levels, from many perspectives, and for many purposes.”

We can, with a design, end up creating more/worse problems/issues if we are not careful.

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE LAGS DESIGN APPLICATION

How do we make sure, that we actually learn something from design activities? When does knowledge become applied practice?

“Scenarios can be abstracted and categorized to help design knowledge cumulate across problem instances”

“The design and development of technology aspires to occupy the high, hard ground […] but at the same time, technology design and development is inevitably driven to pursue novelty and innovation”

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

EXTERNAL FACTORS CONSTRAIN DESIGN

Requirements are formed from empirical data; work, tasks, culture, people, and other external factors (technological development).

==> picture [357 x 274] intentionally omitted <==

Scenarios are great at anchoring requirements in practice, or with a new design.

Scenarios can help explore interaction/technology possibilities without investing in prototype development.

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

SCENARIOS

==> picture [416 x 311] intentionally omitted <==

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

Carrol, J. M. (1999, January). Five reasons for scenariobased design. In Systems Sciences, 1999. HICSS-32.

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

SCENARIOS SUMMARY

We need ways to manifest and maintain our requirements, ideas and knowledge. IT Product Development has many challenges; knowledge, practice, fluidity, context, contraints.

We also need team-based consensus regarding above.

Scenarios are a good way to ensure (or reflect upon) this.

Scenarios can anchor and ”test” your ideas.

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

LAST BUT NOT LEAST

Definition is what makes a concept:

Planning

Speccing

Rapid prototyping Researching (and READING!) UI drafts Usability/User Experience notions

All of the above adds to a defined mental construct and shared understanding

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

ITPDP - IDEATION AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SIMON HOGGAN CHRISTENSEN 16. MARCH 2026 LAB COORDINATOR

==> picture [43 x 44] intentionally omitted <==

AARHUS UNIVERSITY

==> picture [176 x 88] 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