IxDA SF Presents When UX Research is Evil

25 Apr 2009 - 9:27pm
7 years ago
1 reply
904 reads
San Francisco IxDA

*When UX Research is Evil*
Usually when you design and conduct a user research study, you're focused on
keeping the methods sound, recruiting good users, and asking the right
questions, which is already a tall order. Unfortunately, no matter how well
you conduct your studies, your methods have little to do with how the
research ultimately gets used. Everyone's a little bit to blame for this:
researchers can do evil by conducting useless research and presenting it
ineffectively; clients can do evil by misconstruing findings, or by
undervaluing research to begin with.

This talk will cover the ways that research can be misconducted,
misinterpreted, and misunderstood, and on the other hand, how you can
involve your clients in your research, to show them how and why it's done,
and get inspired to think about design problems through the eyes of real

*NOW EXTRA SPICY! this panel promises to be a knock-down, drag-out, battle
to the last! Not for the squeamish or the faint of heart.*

*Nate Bolt*
After pioneering and directing the User Experience department at Clear Ink
in 1999, Nate Bolt co-founded Bolt | Peters. He now serves as the CEO, where
he has overseen hundreds of user research studies for Sony, Oracle, HP,
Greenpeace, Electronic Arts, and others. Beginning in 2003, he led the
creation of the first moderated remote user research software, Ethnio, which
is being used around the world to recruit hundreds of thousands of live
participants for research. Nate regularly gives presentations on native
environment research methods in both commercial and academic settings, and
is currently co-authoring Remote Research, a book on remote testing,
published by Rosenfeld Media.
Mark Trammell*
Mark Trammell is the User Experience Architect at Digg in San Francisco. His
work on the Web spans more than a decade and includes co-authoring two books
on Web standards and tenures with the United States Navy, the University of
Florida, the Web Standards Project Educational Task Force, and PayPal. While
leading a standards-based rebuild of the University of Florida Web presence,
he started an extensive user research program including tests throughout
Florida and taught user-centered design in UF's Digital Worlds Institute.
Trammell now leads user research at Digg. Trammell enjoys live music,
photography, and burritos.

*Peter Merholz*
Peter Merholz is a founding partner, board member, and president of Adaptive
Path. For more than seven years, Peter has been instrumental in developing
Adaptive Path's ability to provide world-class consulting, training, and
public events

*Jared M. Spool*
If you’ve ever seen Jared speak about usability, you know that he’s probably
the most effective, knowledgeable communicator on the subject today. What
you probably don’t know is that he has guided the research agenda and built
User Interface Engineering into the largest research organization of its
kind in the world. He’s been working in the field of usability and design
since 1978, before the term "usability" was ever associated with computers.

Jared spends his time working with the research teams at the company, helps
clients understand how to solve their design problems, explains to reporters
and industry analysts what the current state of design is all about, and is
a top-rated speaker at more than 20 conferences every year. He is also the
conference chair and keynote speaker at the annual User Interface
Conference, is on the faculty of the Tufts University Gordon Institute, and
manages to squeeze in a fair amount of writing time.

Hot Studio
585 Howard Street, First Floor
San Francisco 94105

6:30 pm – Socializing with light refreshments and Hiring Salon
(employers/recruiters, bring job descriptions to share)
7:00 pm – Presentation

This event is FREE and open to the public.


26 Apr 2009 - 10:33pm
Christopher Monnier

Although I won't be able to make it, one thing I would (if I could
make it) like to hear discussed is the issue of allowing users who
don't otherwise struggle with using something to hold misperceptions
about how that something works, and when that's appropriate or not
appropriate. I tried to explain what I mean on my blog, but as I
thought about this problem myself my conclusion was that if the cost
of misperception is low, then allowing misperception may be
appropriate, while if the cost of misperception is high, then
allowing misperception is inappropriate.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org

Syndicate content Get the feed