User Experience - Revision history

Tom: /* Full Title or Meme */

2025-03-20T17:16:13Z

‎Full Title or Meme

Tom: /* Full Title or Meme */

2025-03-20T17:15:21Z

‎Full Title or Meme

Tom: /* Human Factors */

2024-02-26T06:19:33Z

‎Human Factors

Tom: /* Human Factors */

2024-02-26T06:17:35Z

‎Human Factors

Tom: /* Context */

2024-02-26T06:05:19Z

‎Context

Tom: /* External Sites */

2019-03-24T19:34:41Z

‎External Sites

Tom: /* References */

2018-12-16T20:33:33Z

‎References

Tom: /* References */

2018-12-16T20:33:13Z

‎References

Tom: /* Context */

2018-11-19T21:47:04Z

‎Context

Tom: /* Context */

2018-11-19T21:36:58Z

‎Context

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:16, 20 March 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	==Full Title or Meme==	+	==Full Title and Meme==
	If the [[User Experience]] is not producing the desired results, it doesn't help to blame the [[User]], as it is likely to be a rather ordinary human being.		If the [[User Experience]] is not producing the desired results, it doesn't help to blame the [[User]], as it is likely to be a rather ordinary human being.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==Full Title or Meme==
 If the [[User Experience]] is not producing the desired results, it doesn't help to blame the [[User]], as it is likely to be a rather ordinary human being.
 ==Context==

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 ===Human Factors===
-Ever since machines have been implemented, the need to accommodate Human Factors to get predictable results from the machine have been clear. When airplanes were designed to be warplanes during World War II it was realized that the complexity was beyond human capability to get right consistently from one flight to another. It was only by introducing the checklist that human errors dropped to acceptable levels. Now with the proliferation of computers and even more complex tools for humans to use in situations where attention is not assured, more attention needs to be focused on how the human uses the machines.<ref>JCF de Winter and PA Hancock, ''Why human factors science is demonstrably necessary: historical and evolutionary foundations'' (2021) Ergonomics Vol 64 Issue 9 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00140139.2021.1905882</ref><blockquote>Various writers have reflected on the importance of human factors science by emphasizing that the design of technology must cater to the information-processing (cognitive) capacities and limitations of their human users. Although the importance of human factors has been well-established and documented in science, the discipline still has a low exposure amongst engineers who design and fabricate modern-day technologies. As a result, systems are sometimes produced that exhibit little or no understanding of, or empathy with, human needs or capabilities, nor are they specifically acknowledging human foibles, failures, and propensity to error. In consequence, we witness catastrophic systems failures that can be explained by improper human-machine interaction (such as industrial accidents involving robotic manipulators: self-driving cars being involved in fatal accidents; crashes of aircraft using automation features: Woods Citation2019; or incidents with oil platforms. We believe that an evaluation of this scientific discipline’s nature is required, from developmental and theoretical perspectives, to disseminate its rightful utility more fully.</blockquote>
+Ever since machines have been implemented, the need to accommodate Human Factors to get predictable results from the machine have been clear. When airplanes were designed to be warplanes during World War II it was realized that the complexity was beyond human capability to get right consistently from one flight to another. It was only by introducing the checklist that human errors dropped to acceptable levels. Now with the proliferation of computers and even more complex tools for humans to use in situations where attention is not assured, more attention needs to be focused on how the human uses the machines.<ref>JCF de Winter and PA Hancock, ''Why human factors science is demonstrably necessary: historical and evolutionary foundations'' (2021) Ergonomics Vol 64 Issue 9 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00140139.2021.1905882</ref><blockquote>Various writers have reflected on the importance of human factors science by emphasizing that the design of technology must cater to the information-processing (cognitive) capacities and limitations of their human users. Although the importance of human factors has been well-established and documented in science, the discipline still has a low exposure amongst engineers who design and fabricate modern-day technologies. As a result, systems are sometimes produced that exhibit little or no understanding of, or empathy with, human needs or capabilities, nor are they specifically acknowledging human foibles, failures, and propensity to error. In consequence, we witness catastrophic systems failures that can be explained by improper human-machine interaction (such as industrial accidents involving robotic manipulators; self-driving cars being involved in fatal accidents; crashes of aircraft using automation features; or incidents with oil platforms. We believe that an evaluation of this scientific discipline’s nature is required, from developmental and theoretical perspectives, to disseminate its rightful utility more fully.</blockquote>
 ===Transparency===

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 ===Human Factors===
-Ever since machines have been implemented, the need to accommodate Human Factors to get predictable results from the machine have been clear. When airplanes were designed to be warplanes during World War II it was realized that the complexity was beyond human capability to get right consistently from one flight to another. It was only by introducing the checklist that human errors dropped to acceptable levels. Now with the proliferation of computers and even more complex tools for humans to use in situations where attention is not assured, more attention needs to be focused on how the human uses the machines.<ref>JCF de Winter and PA Hancock, ''Why human factors science is demonstrably necessary: historical and evolutionary foundations'' (2021) Ergonomics Vol 64 Issue 9 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00140139.2021.1905882</ref>
+Ever since machines have been implemented, the need to accommodate Human Factors to get predictable results from the machine have been clear. When airplanes were designed to be warplanes during World War II it was realized that the complexity was beyond human capability to get right consistently from one flight to another. It was only by introducing the checklist that human errors dropped to acceptable levels. Now with the proliferation of computers and even more complex tools for humans to use in situations where attention is not assured, more attention needs to be focused on how the human uses the machines.<ref>JCF de Winter and PA Hancock, ''Why human factors science is demonstrably necessary: historical and evolutionary foundations'' (2021) Ergonomics Vol 64 Issue 9 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00140139.2021.1905882</ref><blockquote>Various writers have reflected on the importance of human factors science by emphasizing that the design of technology must cater to the information-processing (cognitive) capacities and limitations of their human users. Although the importance of human factors has been well-established and documented in science, the discipline still has a low exposure amongst engineers who design and fabricate modern-day technologies. As a result, systems are sometimes produced that exhibit little or no understanding of, or empathy with, human needs or capabilities, nor are they specifically acknowledging human foibles, failures, and propensity to error. In consequence, we witness catastrophic systems failures that can be explained by improper human-machine interaction (such as industrial accidents involving robotic manipulators: self-driving cars being involved in fatal accidents; crashes of aircraft using automation features: Woods Citation2019; or incidents with oil platforms. We believe that an evaluation of this scientific discipline’s nature is required, from developmental and theoretical perspectives, to disseminate its rightful utility more fully.</blockquote>
 ===Transparency===

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 ==Context==
-Buckminster Fuller provided a good description of human behavior as pretty damn stabile - as in very, very hard to change. He didn't have much patience with any social engineering that was basically trying to change people that were very actively resisting change.<ref>Amando Veve, Farsighted. (2018-10) Wired p. 20</ref> Human's are not engineered entities. They are not intelligently design. They are just a bunch of hacks all the way back to the primordial ooze. So don't try to guess how they will react, just do your best guess and test your design really well.
+Buckminster Fuller provided a good description of human behavior as pretty damn stable - as in very, very hard to change. He didn't have much patience with any social engineering that was basically trying to change people that were very actively resisting change.<ref>Amando Veve, Farsighted. (2018-10) Wired p. 20</ref> Human's are not engineered entities. They are not intelligently design. They are just a bunch of evolutionary adaptations all the way back to the primordial ooze. So don't try to guess how they will react, just take your best guess and test your design really well.
 ===Transparency===
 Is well defined in paragraph 58 of the [[GDPR]].
-The principle of transparency requires that any information addressed to the public or to the data subject be concise, easily accessible and easy to understand, and that clear and plain language and, additionally, where appropriate, visualisation be used. Such information could be provided in electronic form, for example, when addressed to the public, through a website. This is of particular relevance in situations where the proliferation of actors and the technological complexity of practice make it difficult for the data subject to know and understand whether, by whom and for what purpose personal data relating to him or her are being collected, such as in the case of online advertising. Given that children merit specific protection, any information and communication, where processing is addressed to a child, should be in such a clear and plain language that the child can easily understand.
+The principle of transparency requires that any information addressed to the public or to the data subject be concise, easily accessible and easy to understand, and that clear and plain language and, additionally, where appropriate, visualization be used. Such information could be provided in electronic form, for example, when addressed to the public, through a website. This is of particular relevance in situations where the proliferation of actors and the technological complexity of practice make it difficult for the data subject to know and understand whether, by whom and for what purpose personal data relating to him or her are being collected, such as in the case of online advertising. Given that children merit specific protection, any information and communication, where processing is addressed to a child, should be in such a clear and plain language that the child can easily understand.
 ==References==

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:34, 24 March 2019
Line 14:		Line 14:
	===External Sites===		===External Sites===
	[https://medium.com/s/user-friendly Articles available on Medium.]		[https://medium.com/s/user-friendly Articles available on Medium.]
		+
		+	==References==
		+
		+	[[Category:Glossary]]
		+	[[Category:User Experience]]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==References==
-<referces />
+<references />
 ===External Sites===
 [https://medium.com/s/user-friendly Articles available on Medium.]

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:33, 16 December 2018
Line 10:		Line 10:

	==References==		==References==
		+	<referces />
		+
		+	===External Sites===
		+	[https://medium.com/s/user-friendly Articles available on Medium.]