Abstract
We demonstrate a front-end, user-centered method to prioritize unmet needs previously generated from large groups. Several hypotheses were tested: (1) Needs submitted first will be less likely to be high quality than needs submitted after a sustained period of time; (2) Semantically similar need statements will be rated as equivalent in quality; (3) Need statements will be rated as higher quality if a detailed description of the need context was available. Over 20 000 ratings for 1697 statements across three common product areas were analyzed. The results showed needs that first come to mind are not lower quality than needs that come to mind later and can inform early design phases to balance in-depth research and size of user groups.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-27 |
| Number of pages | 27 |
| Journal | Design Studies |
| Volume | 44 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - May 2016 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:This work was funded in part by internal University of Minnesota grants. We thank the Statistical Consulting Service at the University of Minnesota, and in particular Felipe Acosta, helped with the analysis of these experiments. We also thank William Durfee, PhD for early guidance on experimental design.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords
- design methods
- needfinding
- research methods
- user centered design
- user participation