IUE 2010 Panel

Information about the Internet User Experience 2010 panel on Research-Practice Interaction.

Twitter stream from the session (edited)

  • 5:05 PM Jul 27th @ksattler: About to start final session of the day. I'm at the panel on Research & Practice Interaction. Actually, pub crawl after this.
  • 5:07 PM @dgcooley: research practice gap panel beginning @keithinstone @thebrainlady @nooom http://twitpic.com/298qqm
  • 5:09 PM @dgcooley: @keithinstone gets things started. http://twitpic.com/298r33
  • 5:15 PM @dgcooley: 27 ppl at the research-practice gap session. Good show! Napkin drawing is fun!
  • 5:17 PM @internetUX: we're using napkins to doodle our reason for being at the research/practice interaction session
  • 5:18 PM @jcr: @keithinstone kicks off Research and Practice Interaction panel http://flic.kr/p/8njG9W
  • 5:31 PM @dpoppink: @crfarnum raises the question whether b school research is a good model for practice-heavy fields like UX
  • 5:34 PM @dpoppink: @thebrainlady asks whether practitioners want to read the research or get the nuggets
  • 5:43 PM @dpoppink: Re: Don Norman's article on translational developers. Who pays them to do that work
  • 5:48 PM @ksattler: research finds more questions than it solves problems @thebrainlady (#1 research answer is we need to do more research)
  • 5:52 PM @dpoppink: @nooom discusses the blurring of the term research. Academic research trying to add to world's knowledge vs applied research
  • 5:53 PM @internetUX: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasteur%27s_Quadrant - Applicability on x axis & Knowledge on y axis
  • 6:02 PM @dpoppink: What's the business model? The dream job would be to do the research all the time and have the client pay for it
  • 12:42 PM Jul 28th @jyesko: @keithinstone Here's the link I referenced Tuesday in the panel: http://whichtestwon.com/

Napkin drawings from the session

You can also see these sketches as a Flickr set.

1.Why don't the practitioners understand what I am saying?
By: Susan Weinschenk
Front: IUE2010-1.jpg
Back: IUE2010-1a.jpg

2.Two-headed body
By: Danielle Cooley

3.Researcher & Practitioner goals
By: Gordon Leacock
Description: Top section: Research --> Goals, Audience. Audience --> Other researchers, Peer review. Goals--> Prove & disprove, Client-specific but confidential. Bottom section: Practitioner --> Very specific, Many hats. Many hats --> Futurist, Paid hours, "Real work", Advocates, Org change.
Dotted line betwen top and bottom, connecting Client-specific & very specific.

4.Questions lead to Answers and Ideas
By: Barbara Hernandez

By: Unknown

6.Blinded me with science
By: Unknown

7. Research on Practice / Derek's Roles
By: Derek Poppink
Front: IUE2010-7a.jpg
Back: IUE2010-7b.jpg

Other. One head, Two bodies
By: Mark Newman
(No image)

(add other napkin drawings here.....)

Introduction (from IUE description)

Session Leader:
  • Danielle Cooley, Principal, DGCooley Consulting
  • Mark Newman, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, University of Michigan School of Information, and Co-founder, Michigan Interactive and Social Computing (MISC).
  • Susan Weinschenk, Chief of Technical Staff, Human Factors International

As a user experience practitioner, do you wish you really understood "scientific research" (like CHI papers) and were able to apply it to help you do a better job? Have you tried to read "the literature" but been bored, confused and disappointed? Do you have a list of burning questions you wish "those academics" would get answers to? Would you like to talk with HCI researchers to get to know them better so that one day you might able to collaborate with them, but you have no idea how to get started?

If you are interested in the existing research-practice gaps in user experience, and talking about possible solutions to these challenges, join Keith (and others) in an informal discussion on this important topic. He recently co-lead a workshop and follow-up discussions at CHI 2010 in Atlanta, which are leading to specific changes for CHI 2011. Interest has increased since Don Norman posted an essay on his opinion of the gap.

Links of note

From the panelists prepared comments:

Position statements for the panel

  • CHI workshop
    • There are “immovable objects” of culture: HCI/research, UX practice/corporate
    • Focus on bridges: Education, Knowledge, Communication
    • Possible to make a difference, people want to change (e.g., CHI 2011)
  • Information Architecture Summit
    • IA still in early stages (cf. HCI, usability)
  • The topic is getting some attention
    • Don Norman interactions article

  • “Back off, man. I’m a scientist.”
  • UX Practice subspecialty makes a difference
    • Tim Brown’s “T-shaped People”
  • Practice changes too quickly for academia to keep up with specifics
  • Issues with the Norman article
    • What about rigor?
    • Qualities like “intensity,” “attention to detail” and patience” not unique to one or the other.
    • How do design patterns fit in?

  • Research is critical in UX practice
  • Research papers are hard to read and interpret
  • There is a lot of misunderstanding by practitioners about research
  • It takes a special (weird?) person
  • Research is power
  • The best papers may be outside of your field
  • Research may not give you answers
  • There are some great blogs and websites that are "translators" of research

  • Types of “research”
    • “Scientific" model is NOT only type: design, engineering, qualitative, exploratory
    • Hard to digest different types, evaluate “goodness”
  • Pasteur's Quadrant
    • Useful tool for thinking about problem selection
    • Not useful: helping researchers communicate results
  • Translational developers (vs. researchers)
  • Translational skills
    • What are the translation skills, who has them, how to motivate them? Lucrative publishing/consulting career a la Nielsen?
  • Translational research (at NIH)
    • Big pots of money DO motivate researchers to shift their focus. Would it work for HCI?