Three Misconceptions About Human-Computer Interaction

Tessa, thank you for helping clarify what is a common misconception. User-centered design is a process, not a library, and not a widget.

That said, I do think it is highly satisfying that we are now seeing technology that first appeared in CHI conferences about 10 years ago, then appearing in film (e.g., Minority Report), and now appearing in products (like the iPhone).

These are great points. I remember the first HCI course I took (Rex Hartson) and I was also expecting to learn the secret formula for when to use a button, icon, menu and exactly how to lay them out for different circumstances. Very naive.

As long as technology changes, HCI research will be needed to understand and design the use of the technologies. But have we answered the big questions already? GUIs and the direct manipulation paradigm pretty much handle the common cases.

Tessa - very interesting post!

I am curious, how did you come to your understanding that good interaction design trumps smart algorithms? I believe you, but what you say runs counter to the prevailing winds of today. In the web arena, for example, the common wisdom is that smart algorithms trump interaction design. Search is designed as a black-box, smart algorithm function, with no user interactivity or insight into the process. The engine handles it all for you.

So what research or examples have led you to the opposite conclusion? I would be interested in another post from you on this topic.

(As an aside, since you work at the intersection of HCI and information, you might be interested in the upcoming HCIR [=HCI + Information Retrieval] workshop: http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/03/25/hcir-2009-a-pre-cfp/ )

> GUIs and the direct manipulation paradigm pretty much handle the common cases

On the desktop, perhaps this is true. However as computing moves off the desktop, and as we start needing to interact with larger scales of information, I believe GUIs and direct manipulation just don't scale up. Which brings us to search as an emerging paradigm for interaction, which Jeremy mentioned in his comment.

Jeremy, take a look at my recent workshop paper on "Why PBD systems fail": http://tlau.org/research/papers/pbd-fail.pdf

I agree that some smart algorithms -- search included -- are successful in part because on the intelligence of the algorithm. However I'd also argue that good interaction design is also key to success. Would Google be as successful if the results page were cluttered with extraneous information that distracted you from the search results?

I'll be writing on this more in future posts.