The User-Based Perspective

Establishing a user-based perspective requires questioning how people determine information needs, and how they interact with systems in connection with these needs

prior to system or tool design rather than basing design on expert’s opinions of user’s needs (B. Dervin & Nilan, 1986). A user-based perspective helps ensure that the real needs of the users are incorporated by asking users for their own perspective. Tools or systems can then be designed based upon their actual needs. Dervin’s approach applies a disciplined interview communications technique with prescribed talking and listening turn-takings, which focuses both researcher and user communication patterns on the user perspective (B. Dervin & Devakos, 2010).

Taking a user-based perspective and investigating actual user needs, issues, and problems (based on empirical patterns in how they think, feel, and talk about them) makes it more likely that designs will be effective from the user’s viewpoint. This

minimizes the necessity for trial-and-error design and post-design revision, and reduces overall costs. A user-based approach often provides more accurate, valid, and reliable data on user perspectives than methods based on user observation or user

characteristics. A user-based approach improves design and development of systems and tools, provision of user support services, and effective education and professional development (B. Dervin & Nilan, 1986; Nilan & Mundkur, 2007).

This study will investigate actual user needs and patterns of behavior based on what faculty think, feel, and talk about conceptual instructional design experiences, and is expected to provide accurate, valid and reliable data.

User-based research relies on user data obtained through conversations with actual users about their real-life information seeking experiences, in the user’s own context, where the user is the most qualified expert on his or her information needs and uses.

Asking the user about a specific type of situation, such as an online purchase, bounds the user experience and permits investigation of relevant, universal aspects of an information seeking situation.

While the details of an information seeking experience may vary, patterns can be recognized across similar situations. For example, users may purchase different products for different reasons, but each will still progress through a similar series of steps to make their purchase, such as investigating product options, choosing a specific product, and making the actual purchase.

This study applies Dervin’s timeline interview technique, which was developed

specifically to obtain user data through conversations with actual users (B. Dervin, 1983; B. Dervin & Dewdney, 1986; B. Dervin & Nilan, 1986).

This study focuses on a user-based perspective on design.

2.2.3.1 A User-Based Perspective on Design

The user-based approach provides an improved understanding of humans, not just an understanding of physical objects and systems. We cannot really understand humans unless we interact with each other. However, it is also important to remember that we do not always entirely understand the physical aspects of design, or the power of Mother Nature (Oliva & Hubbard, 2015).

The power plant operators at Chernobyl did not understand their plant design, with catastrophic results (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2007). Root causes of the Chernobyl accident include (G. Medvedev, 1991):

 Plant personnel had little awareness or understanding of the risks inherent in their plant design, potential accident conditions, or appropriate emergency procedures. Personnel had an uneducated blind faith in the safety and superiority of their plant that prevented them from reacting appropriately.

 Plant design and safety systems were extremely poor, resulting in a very high level of risk.

 Plant operators were very poorly trained, and what little training they had was inaccurate and incomplete.

A poor understanding of design was also a major contributor to the severe accidents at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan in 2011. Major contributing design and safety issues include (Nuclear Reform Special Task Force, 2012; Yasui, 2012):

 Power plants were not designed for such a big earthquake or tsunami. The plant was designed for a 15 foot tsunami. The actual tsunami was 42 feet.

 Site elevation was too low. The diesel generator fuel tanks floated out to sea, leaving the plant without fuel to provide emergency power.

 Plant personnel did not learn from nuclear power industry events (which are globally disseminated), and did not design the plant or safety systems to handle multiple simultaneous problems.

 Poor plant design, especially for the Mark I containment structure. Poor

ventilation system and failure to install containment design updates as plants in the United States did.

 Weak safety culture. As an example, cultural tendencies to save face severely hampered and delayed decision making during accident conditions.

Users should not be ignored, especially where human error could be critical, but it is also important to focus on non-human aspects of design (Oliva & Hubbard, 2015).

A general knowledge of other types of user behavior, such as human-computer

interaction, technology acceptance or avoidance, information overload and anxiety, and emotional and social aspects of design is beneficial to understanding user research and system design. For example, research has shown that emotions and affect have a role in decision making (Norman, 2004). These studies have generally focused on observation, things, and aesthetics, not cognitive collaborating structures, with an organizational or external concept of performance that is not based on user’s uses or effective movement (D'Eredita & Nilan, 2007; Nilan & Mundkur, 2007).

A user-based approach could provide additional useful data and perspectives, as has recently been shown through application of Dervin’s Sense-Making approach in new emotionally and aesthetically intensive contexts, such as spirituality and the arts (B. Dervin et al., 2011; Foreman-Wernet & Dervin, 2011).

Finally, human-computer interaction research has made substantial contributions to user behavior research. Some examples include increases focus on the needs of discretionary computer users as opposed to those mandated to use a system or

program, attention to individual differences, and support of novice users. The growth of the Internet and graphical user interfaces increased involvement in user testing, but often decreased research rigor for hardware and software to keep pace with explosive

growth in the consumer market. By the late 1990s, information sharing and cognitive research (decision making, performance modeling, etc.), and virtualization were new areas of interest. Recently, social networking, web design and marketing, global

usability, security, ubiquitous computing, and ergonomics have shown growth in user research (Grudin, 2012).