A User Study into Customising for Inclusive Design T Lewis, P J Clarkson, Engineering Design Centre, University of Cambridge
[email protected], +44-(0)1223 766957
Abstract Inclusive Design has progressed far on the route of ‘one product for all’ but there is a point at which the severity of impairment will make this infeasible through lack of profitability or otherwise[1].Mass Customisation has predominately appeared in high cost, low volume products where the cost saving benefits of mass production techniques are less relevant. Its occurrence at the higher volume end of the product spectrum is usually in some limited form. This may offer a next step when the one product for all approach is exhausted in allowing slightly different products to be created, honed to the users’ individual needs [2][3]. A pilot study to investigate these issues, consisting of 8 users, is used to explore attitudes and current experience of customisation. Using the video recorder as a case study, for its familiarity amongst the elderly users targeted, two forms of purchasing were studied. Firstly the users were presented with pictures, specifications and prices for a current range of video recorders from a typical electrical goods retailer. The process of choosing was studied carefully by questions and asking participants to vocalise their thought processes. The panel were then asked to consider the possibility of customising the video recorder in two key areas to suit their needs. The first is purely superficial changes based on button size and the font used to describe the function on both the remote control and the unit. The second permits more functional alterations giving the participants the option to remove non-essential functions, like pause or Videoplus. The result show a range of attitudes to customisation from those who felt it was an unnecessary waste of their time to others who perceived the extra time and potential extra costs as worthwhile if they could understand how to use their video recorder. Most interesting of all is that the customised video recorder they designed had, in most cases, fewer functions than the cheapest of the selection originally presented, however, all avoided the cheapest model instead selecting predominately on brand.
Introduction In order to have an improved understanding of how typical users targeted by inclusive design may respond to a customisation process, a pilot set of user trials was designed and conducted. The sample size was small and the results are to be used to both give an indication of the responses and also produce an iteration upon which subsequent, larger studies can be developed. For simulation of the process a sample product was required to be chosen that both the users were familiar with and would be considering buying again in the future in order for the trial to be as realistic for them as possible. Several domestic products were considered; the product also had to be something the sample available would experience a difficulty using. The sample chosen were elderly with no severe physical impairments but all were experiencing some form of sensory loss as well as highlighting cognitive difficulties with modern technology. Video recorders are now widely used within the home, within the UK market penetration was recorded at 84% of homes by 2002 [4]. This extent of popularity is echoed across all developed countries and as such means the study could be used without confusion to an international
audience. Furthermore it offers sufficient complexity to offer a variety of options altering both its usability and functionality. A Department of Trade and Industry Report of 2000 also lists the video recorder as the most difficult in both Sequence and Terminating tasks as well as scoring poorly in other task areas. The remote control is also identified as particular poor for those with impairments [5].
Trials The trial was composed of several stages to understand a user’s response to the new style of selection with reference to their experiences within the current frameworks. A pre-trial interview aimed to understand the users’ experiences and thoughts on current shopping procedures, any improvements they would make and their attitudes to a customisation route of obtaining the required product. The first phase also audited the technology the user was familiar with using around their home and outlined any problems they may have. The second phase of the trial aimed to replicate a trip to an electrical store where the user was presented with a number of video recorders and asked to choose one whilst vocalising their thought process. In order to supply them with a standard range of video recorders the complete range from a chain electrical retailer was used. A sheet of paper with a photo and a specification for each model was laid out in front of the user, in price order, as displayed in the shop. The interviewer had to play the role of the shop assistant and only provided the answers the user would receive to any of the enquiries in the store. Meanings of abbreviations and unfamiliar terms as well as any additional information were provided from the retailer’s website and a set of standard set of answers to expected questions was prepared before. This section of the trial acted as a representation of the user’s purchasing choices including the model they opted for, the price they were prepared to pay and length of time they spent on the deciding. Also it provided a valuable understanding of their psychology of when purchasing including what they look for, in what order and what information they chose to dismiss.
Figure 1: Functional Breakdown of a VCR
During the actual customisation process, the sample consumer was given a series of options targeted at offering them a choice of various features as well as the opportunity to exclude others. Firstly the consumer was asked to select, from a full-size printed selection, button sizes for both the remote control and the unit itself. An opportunity to choose the font sizes for the descriptions of the buttons again on both the remote and recorder was also given. A functional breakdown of the video recorder was necessary to be able to offer a range of options to the trial consumer. Offering individual options such as play, stop, pause would be too detailed so options, deemed from the models used in phase 2, were presented as Figure 1. Some of these clearly are essential options whereas others are more advanced, familiar to those who are more technologically equipped. An explanation of each of the groups was also given and was consistent each time so each person received the same information unless they asked a specific question. The groups are not meant to offer a breakdown on a technical footing as some electrical and software experts may offer a different breakdown; they are a cognitive breakdown of the functions that the sample would understand. The process was designed to consider the manufacturer’s requirements but with the user at the centre of its design and not the reverse. The trial is concluded with an evaluating set of questions deemed to consider the final feelings toward a customisation approach over the current familiar process. Assuming a favourable response the candidate was also asked how much more they would be prepared to pay extra for the customised version. Whilst it is appreciated that what people say will pay for something and what they actually do may differ, this is as strong an indication as is available within the limits of this trial.
Results Technology Audit The initial interview revealed the users had a wide experience of kitchen appliances, despite on the whole not identifying them as technology. Televisions, video recorders and telephones were also commonly used amongst the group. The majority of the group was female, aged between 65 and 85 and all identified difficulties in using modern technology through self-diagnosed cognitive difficulties. Some had mild visual impairments whilst several identified impaired hearing. Whilst discussing the technology the users regularly used, many of their annoyances and problems with the products were mentioned. Many qualms echoed responses given in a previous study [6] despite no overlap in the participants. Particular recurring difficulties came when the user had to use the same button for different functions dependent on the state of another variable. Mention was also made of a the lack of colour used on modern products and how designs had to fit in with modern interior design themes to be sleek making the products all black and silver. The attitudes of the panel towards current experiences of customisation were obtained by asking about various examples. Some of the participants owned cars and others had past experience in influencing a design of kitchens and bathrooms. This was also combined with answers given on how the panel buys salad items from a supermarket; whether they opt for the now common place pre-packaged salads or the “make-your-own” counters. The customisation experience of the panel was fairly limited, but this is unsurprising and similar results would be expected throughout the wider population. Users highlighted choosing colours and trims in the car customisation and negotiating the layout when designing a room. Regarding the salad options, those that didn’t use the customised packs often clarified their choice by stating it wasn’t necessarily the customisation they objected to but the cleanliness and freshness of the open containers in the store or the just a preference to prepare a salad themselves. Although these forms of customisation haven’t revealed strong opinions on customisation, they are the closest experience most users will have.
Conventional VCR Purchasing In the example of buying a video recorder the first point of interest was what the participants would be looking for from the product range. When asked this question before the process actually began, by far the most popular answer stated was that they would be looking for a product that was easy to use. When the video recorders were presented to them, they were asked to vocalise as much of what they were thinking as possible. Overwhelmingly the panel were picking and excluding on the basis of brand. Previous experience of brands tended to have significant influence on their choice. In some cases brands were simply “known as good” whereas any negative experience with a brand meant immediate elimination. Price was not a concern, several stating the video recorders were cheaper than they had anticipated from past experience. The models ranged in price between £44.99 and £119.99 and all the users regarded even the top of this range within their means. Despite this, all showed some form of animosity towards both the cheapest and most expensive models for fear that in the case of the former it would be poor quality and the latter that it was overpriced. Bending down was identified by most of the panel as not preferable and so the majority of their interaction would be through the remote yet in all cases they were more concerned with the layout of the unit than the remote. Few questions were asked regarding the meaning of the functions, several highlighted videoplus, a method of entering codes from television listings to easily record a programme, as useful and would want their chosen model to include it.
Customisation There was significant variation amongst the user’s choices. None selected the biggest button size, this was more than 3 cm in diameter and would accommodate several of the users fingers in operation. This might have been more attractive to those with more severe physical impairments. On the whole if the participant chose to vary the size between unit and remote then they did so for both buttons and fonts and did so significantly. After understanding the functional breakdown of the video recorder, the participants did give considerable thought to what choices they wanted to make. All identified the essential requirement to have both the first groups. These were not included for the users to exclude but for completeness of the breakdown. A summary of the choices made by the panel can be found in Table 1 below. Table 1 : Users'choices of VCR functional groups
Function groups General Operation Playback Additional Playback Recording Additional Recording Timed Recording Videoplus Linking
Interviewees 1 2 3 4 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
6 • • • • • •
7 • • • •
8 • • • •
The video recorders on offer to the panel all featured nearly all of the functional groups, yet clearly Table 1 shows the participants have chosen to overall exclude many of them. After establishing the need for both the basic and playback groups, the participants considered whether they would require the pause buttons in additional playback. Most decided that this was unnecessary as they never used it on their current models. Recording, as a group, was generally popular but, as expected, additional recording selected less so. Timed recording also unpopular, one interviewee didn’t think it was ideal but had had problems with videoplus for setting up to record in advance.
Those who found it advantageous to have fewer remote controls selected linking; enabling audiovisual devices to be controlled with one remote Others felt there was confusion in one remote operating more than one device drawing on the problems already mentioned with one button having two or more associated functions. The cosmetic alterations to the size of the buttons and the text were based on instant reactions to questions that they found easy and simple to understand. The functional breakdown had to be first explained to the users and then in most cases they spent far longer considering for each group whether it was something they used on their current model or could benefit from. The sample were explained before starting that if this process was to be real, it would be likely the video recorder would be more expensive regardless of the options selected. Despite this they opted in all cases to choose fewer functions than the models shown earlier, in some cases creating a video recorder that would be inferior in function than even the cheapest model. The cheapest model was not picked by any of the participants but usability was only part of this, brand and familiarity were far more important. Evaluating, 5 of the 8 participants stated they would prefer to use a customised route despite knowing it would cost more than the traditional mass production models. Of those that didn’t prefer the customisation method, participants cited lack of problems with the current situation as reasons. For those that gave positive responses to customisation, the amount they would be prepared to pay more for a product tuned to their needs was surprising, varying from 0 to 3 times more than the mass-produced product they had selected earlier.
Conclusion The results of these trials clearly show there is interest from this older group; but a larger study would be necessary to provide a compelling argument to industry. Although the panel didn’t have severe impairments, this represents a large proportion of those considered impaired and demonstrates a way that they can be better included. A more substantial study would need to consider those with more severe impairments. The video recorder did provide the familiarity desired; but a number of products would also be necessary to justify the use of customisation across wider product families. The choices offered for customisation were kept deliberately small in order not to overwhelm the user with options but with hindsight there were clearly more attributes they would have liked to have varied, eg. button colour and shape. The users felt more comfortable making the decisions in their domestic environment, without the pressures of a busy shop; many said they would prefer if companies offering this type of service would come out to them.
References [1] Keates, S, Clarkson, PJ, (2003). Countering Design Exclusion, An Introduction to Inclusive Design. Springer. [2] Huffman, C, Kahn, BE, (1998). Variety of Sale: Mass Customization of Mass Confusion? Journal of Retailing, vol 74, 491-513 [3] Lewis, T, Eckert ,C, Clarkson, PJ, (2004). Product Architecture Issues within Inclusive Design. Paper presented at the 7th Workshop on Product Structuring, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden. 24 March [4] DVD and Video Statistics (2003). Eurostat [5] A Study of the Difficulties Disabled People have when using Everday Consumer Products (2000). DTI [6] Lewis, T, (2003). Understanding the User. Masters thesis. Cambridge University Engineering Department.
