Theme 5 Pre Reflection

1. How can media technologies be evaluated?

In the text they use ISO recommendations provided by another paper; X. Faulkner, Usability Engineering. Hampshire, U.K.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002. This means that they define usability as how users completes specific goals in regard of effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction.


2. What role will prototypes play in research?

Perhaps the best thing with a prototype is that it enables you to try your hypothesis more easy and in a realtime situation. In the study they faced the fact that there was no product like the one they wanted to use, so they constructed a prototype in order to conduct their research better.

Prototypes can also successfully eliminate flaws that you perhaps would have missed if you only conducted text based research. Another great thing with mockup prototype is that it can be a lot cheaper sometimes to have a very simple prototype, than buying electronics or what not and create a more advanced apparatus. 

3. Why could it be necessary to develop a proof of concept prototype?

Proof of concept is a method you use to ensure if it is worth or not to create the final product. One example could be that you create a physical prototype and let a test group use the prototype for a limited time and then evaluate. With the data and input collected from the test group, they then evaluate if it is worth to construct the product. Another example comes from the tv-business in North America where it is praxis that you create a pilot-episode of a new tv-series and then evaluate how the pilot performed in numbers of viewers and other factors. After this the production company evaluates if they should make the series or if it gets axed. 

4. What are characteristics and limitations of prototypes?

A characteristic of prototypes is that it is cheap to construct in relation to a finalized product (which might not even exist) and that they aren't finished. Often they are also constructed in a way that enhances research, regarding connections etc. They also usually lack functions that they probably will include in a final product, due to cost or that those functions aren't relevant for the research. In the paper the use a PCB board that is connected to the mockup telephone. The people who use the prototype will of course notice that it isn't a real telephone and this might influence on the finalized result. Another limitation with prototypes are that the researcher can get emotionally attached to the product, and unwilling to realize that the best would be to not construct the finalized product. 

5. How can design research be communicated/presented?

When presenting a prototype it can be wise to present the first mockup (who probably looks terrible) and then show the evolution that the prototype has gone through. This way, it is very clear to the audience how the prototype has evolved and how the prototype is constructed around it's most important functions. You also, of course, need to present text, data and diagrams in order to communicate the full picture of the design resarch.

Part 2:



1. How does a collaborative setting differ from a single user setting as regards methodology used and the results obtained?
The results from a single user setting is based solely on that users thoughts and input and the results from a collaborative setting is instead based on the whole group and their thoughts. In a collaborative setting the persons might have different views on different things which makes for interesting results, but they can also think in the same ways which also can be interesting for the research.


2. How can qualitative and quantitative methods in the same study complement each other?
This is something that I used in my bachelor-thesis. It's often called mixed methods approach and the main point about working in this way is to be able to use the strengths from both methods in way so that they complement each other. By acknowledging the weaknesses in a quantitative method like a survey, you can complement it with focus groups or interviews or some other qualitative method and in this way get the different methods to complement each other.

3. How can using both subjective and objective methods give a better understanding of a phenomenon? 
This is a little bit like the question above. When using subjective methods you get a great sense of that persons approach or thought about the phenomenon, but because its subjective, it can't really be applied in a broader perspective, what's true for you doesn't necessarily have to be true for me. So the same reasoning applies, You want to use the strengths of one method and complement it with the strengths of the other method.