The usability movement is sometimes criticized for being dull and for promoting boringly invariable designs. The chief reason for this is that some people equate design conventions with creative restrictions. However, this equation doesn't add up for two reasons.

标准与设计决定

首先,虽然可以通过一致性和遵守设计指南,因此通常增强可用性,但这并不需要相同的设计。相反,这种公约的目标是创建一个建筑块的词汇表,设计师可以在许多广泛不同,通常令人愉快的方式中结合。

考虑自然语言。每个单词都具有既定含义,我们通常将单词组合使用定义的语法。遵循这些惯例的文学更容易阅读,比Avant-Garde,实验文献更大。尽管如此,这种“常规”小说绝对不一样:虽然它们使用完全标准化的语言,但它们可以在各种情绪尺度上达到任何所需的极端。

Usability = Engagement

第二个原因是可用性并不反对乐趣是greatest joy of using computers comes through user empowerment and engagement。It's very enjoyable to visit a website that works, where everything just clicks for you. In contrast, a user interface that doesn't do things the way you want feels sluggish, unpleasant, and possibly even hostile, despite the designer's no doubt sincere attempt to invoke positive emotions. A user's personal experience trumps anything the designer is trying to communicate. In talking about a design's "look and feel,"感觉wins every time.

As an example, Amazon.com uses associative links to create a fun and rewarding experience for users. Each book page offers associative links to five books frequently bought by other people who purchased the book you’re interested in. Following these links can lead toa powerful feeling of discovery。As a result, you can easily spend much more time shopping on Amazon than is dictated by the simple efficiency metric of buying the book you came for as quickly as possible.

Suchengagement requires usability。如果用户无法掌握界面,他们会感到压迫而不是授权,并且不太可能探索或使用超出绝对最低限制的任何东西。在Web上,这个“最小”通常会发现一个或两个页面浏览量,然后用户已经消失 - 永远不会返回。

There is certainly more to an enjoyable activity than the mere ability to complete it. At the same time, computers are currently difficult to use and much of the网络就像一片荒原。Given this, people can and do derive considerable pleasure in finding a well-crafted user experience that empowers and engages them.

Methods for Testing Satisfaction

Traditional user testing在调试用户界面设计中是伟大的,以查找使系统难以使用的元素。然而,在确定设计的令人愉快的方面,测试方法的进化量较小。在过去,这并不重要,因为用户界面很难使用我们所希望的一切,因为他们可以改善使用它们的水平actively unpleasant。Websites in particular were designed in such great contrast to users' needs that simply exterminating bloated and useless designs has been the usability movement's great achievement over the last ten years.

Now, as we change from the negative endeavor of removing bad design to the positive pursuit of good design, we must modify the methodology to encompass more awareness of fulfilling, engaging, and fun design elements.

大多数研究目前依赖经典,而不是完全令人满意的方式评估用户享受:

  1. 主观满意度问卷administered at the end of a study that provides a simple, overall system assessment.
  2. Observations of the user's body languagefor indications of satisfaction or displeasure (smiles or frowns), as well as for laughs, grunts, or explicit statements such as "cool" or "boring."

熟练的观察者可以从第二种方法获得很多洞察力,但它是一个弱者和可能误导的数据来源,用于少熟练的可用性专业人员,他们构成了世界上绝大多数的世界考试促进者。

至于第一种方法,主观满意问卷遭受上下文管理的标准问题:他们通常依靠用户回忆享受,而不是此刻使用的实际经验。您可以通过在整个测试会话中管理几个小问卷来缓解(虽然不是消除)这一点,而不是在最后保存一个更大的问卷的所有问题。

Beyond Ease of Use

As always, you不能依靠简单,文字解释用户的陈述。例如,在测试公司网站中,用户几乎总是说他们不希望有趣或娱乐内容:只是把答案放在答案,尽可能快。而且,在观察实际用户行为的过程中,我们当然也看到了对无聊内容的负面反应——比如迷人模特的大照片或者在屏幕上蹦蹦跳跳的毫无意义的动画。但是,与此同时,我们也看到,当用户遇到写得巧妙的内容或适度有趣的描述时,他们会微笑或表现出其他积极的肢体语言——假设他们属于用户对网站体裁中专业写作的期望范围。因此,用户似乎比他们声称喜欢的内容更欣赏和享受更高的风格。

我们需要更好的方法来测试用户界面令人愉快的方面。这种方法应该既健壮又易于应用,因为世界上绝大多数用户测试都是由专业知识相对较少的人来完成的。

That said,ease of usemust remain our first priority. Technology is just too difficult for us to abandon this goal. But hopefully it will soon be time to emphasizejoy of useas well.