User Centered

Out of curiousity, do the buttons actually depress or are they simply touch sensitive?

Yum

They do depress and light up after pressing on that little stripe at the top of the button.

I was having a conversation as I entered the elevator and wasn't paying attention all that much -and pressed the black label.

So those illuminatable bars are the buttons, not the circular discs they rest on?

Yum

The cirles on the right are the buttons. When pressed, the white strip at the top of each circle lights up (if I recall correctly)

That reminds me of my toaster, which has a diagonal line of buttons with labels to the left of them, but the labels do no refer to the buttons that you think they do: you automatically assume the button to the right of the text is the one being labelled since you read from left to right and your eye continues on to the hutton, but in fact each label refers to the button underneath it. If they hadn't have chosen the stupidly ambiguous (but presumably "edgy") diagonal arrangement but gone for vertical or horizontal, the problem wouldn't have arisen.

Anonymous writes:

Seriously? You're don't know how to work it?

You, sir, are a moron then.
And secondly, they're right next to each other, so you should be able to figure it out.

"It's an elevator, I think we should be able to figure out the buttons by now."

Last, ever think that if the BRAILLE part was on the push button instead of the floor label, that blind people would be making a large amount of unneeded stops on an elevator?

Anonymous, in all your glorious genius you fail to take into account subtly.

He figured it out just fine, just that the nonstandard design meant he had to perform a problem-solving exercise instead of just use a tool. Which begs the question, is that necessary? Or perhaps when using nonstandard designs there should be better indication?

Your point on the braille is excellent but doesn't explain the design choices.

Anonymous writes:

It's obvious he eventually figured it out.....

.....unless he's posting this from the elevator still....?

Hmmm.....

As for "subtleness," the first part of the previous post would be (or at least should obviously be) hyperbole.

I get the feel/slant of this whole blog, having read multiple entries by various users....but seriously, all this post shows is that the poster was dumb enough and/or not paying enough attention to press an incorrect button. Would you not figure out in .01 seconds that the illuminating bar/disc is the button?

If the UI isn't "right," then maybe we should hear a proposed solution to make it better.....since it is supposedly "wrong," and the poster knows what is or is not right......instead of just some inane whining. Then we can see if the proposed solution is actually "better" or not to the anyone else.

What is being considered "nonstandard design" anyway, and by whom?
Who is to say that this is standard or nonstandard design?
Especially for elevators.

Do an image search, and you will notice that nearly all elevator buttons with braille are side-by-side, yet those without braille are split 50-50, with the modern ones trending towards side-by-side. What's the standard then?

Outside of the braille/pressing buttons issue, maybe it is considerably cheaper in the long run (durability, longevity of both the buttons and the silver coating of the numbers) to separate the number/braille from the light/button, considering the button part surely gets worn out. It's cheaper to replace a "standard" button/light then one with a number, braille, and paint/coating.

I'm assuming stuff like that changes the "standard."



Or just maybe it should have had this for some people:
PRESS HERE -->

:rolleyes

Anonymous, such enlightened views.

Here we define usability as usable by the vast majority of users who would encounter the interface... the more people who can "figure it out", the better the UI. To put it basically. This sort of thing can be tested.

More broadly in this blog we've discussed many "could it be better?" options. The answer is most cases is... yes. With thought and consideration.

We all know that market forces are not enough to make the best design, in this instance it could have been some small changes that made the situation better. Many buttons in elevators I've used are bulkier and the entire button lights up.

Now, in this instance, being an Art Institute, I almost like that it isn't standard and it perhaps it was an intentional choice to make riders think about it. Though personally, I would have preferred something more fun.

Unfortunately, elevators must live by some standard as firefighters must use them as rescue vehicles during fires.

In any case, the point here is to generate discussion, not berate.

Yum

Anonymous writes:

"More broadly in this blog we've discussed many "could it be better?" options. The answer is most cases is... yes. With thought and consideration."
Again, I know that is the slant of this blog, as I've read many entries here. And I appreciate the concept.
But....
That's a subtle point of any posting I've done here....
Where is that in this case?


"Here we define usability as usable by the vast majority of users who would encounter the interface... the more people who can "figure it out", the better the UI."

usability =/= standard

Secondarily.....who cannot seriously "figure this out?'


"We all know that market forces are not enough to make the best design, in this instance it could have been some small changes that made the situation better. Many buttons in elevators I've used are bulkier and the entire button lights up."

None of this changes anything I've said above, about both blind/braille and button reliability/durability. Why is this not the "best" design when taking into account factual issues? How was this situation "not good?"
Again, because someone wasn't paying attention?
If we're going to base design on people not paying attention, we've got problems.
I agree that many times in other elevators that whole button lights up, but what does that have to do with anything here? That wasn't the original complaint.

"Now, in this instance, being an Art Institute, I almost like that it isn't standard...."

Again, why/how is it not standard?
It seems to me it very well may/could be.


regardless, true about firefighter usage :thumbsup

Anonymous, you seem to be under the impression that I believe strongly that this was a serious affront to the world of usability. It's not.

That said I think it is worthy of small attention because it could be a little better. I believe you keep reemphasizing that it's ridiculous that no one could figure this interface out. As I read the postings, no one is claiming that. Simply that it may require a tactile examination. Our question here is can we make it easier for people who've used elevators in the past figure it out without having to conduct an examination (however, short it may be).

When I initially looked at the elevator controls I assumed that the high contrast numbers were the buttons and the low contrast same color as panel bars were only indicators.

This was true of the author as well. We both assumed, based on past experiences, that what looks like a button, will be a button and what looks like the rest of the panel will simply be apart of the panel. By keeping the buttons the same color as the panel they tend to look like part of the panel. This might not be so bad if it weren't next to very high contrast information (the floor #s).

With no scientific based, I dare to suggest that most elevators follow this high contrast rule, making it a near standard. This situation would only present a minor obstacle to most users, in fact, I can't imagine many not being able to figure it out. Perhaps elderly users might approach the interface and take a little longer than average, 10 to 15 seconds instead of the 3 to 5 I'd expect is average? It'd be interesting to study.

You ask, "How is this situtation 'not good'"? -- First, it's not 'that bad'. It could be better, especially for users who might find it challenging, elderly, developmently disabled, children and I might suggest even those with mild vision problems, who could see the numbers but not the low contrast buttons (as they are the same color). Though the indicator bar on each button would be a strong hint.

It's not good because what may be a small challenge to the vast majority of users grows expotentially when you add other variables. As such this makes a valuable case study for examining other more complex interface systems.

I hope I've done a better job of explaining the complaint and the value of it.

Yum

I will not add anything- WillYum gets it quite well. This blog isn't always about "can you figure it out.." it's about taking existing designs and user experiences and making them better- iteration of designs and experiences. Even a millisecond of "doubt" or "huh?" that can be corrected is worth discussion in my book. Of course, I understand that's not always possible, but at least it's worth noting somewhere.

Merry Christmas all!

(I promise to revisist this blog in 2009! -new baby, new home)