WebWord.com > Moving WebWord > Representations and PIA  (17-Oct-2001)


If you want to know when new articles go online,
subscribe to the WebWord.com Usability Newsletter!

Representations and Perceived Information Architecture (PIA)

Article by John S. Rhodes


Summary

This article discusses two key ideas. First, it briefly outlines four ways to represent the same information. Second, it provides a high level overview of Perceived Information Architecture.


Modes

As you can see below, I created a diagram that represents four different ways to represent the same information. The first mode of representation is a hierarchy. Actually, it doesn't need to be a hierarchy, it just looks like a hierarchy. But, that is how we treat it. We need not flow top to bottom, yet it affords a top to bottom flow. 

The second mode is a simple diagram of nested sets. Of course, the nested diagram is represents exactly the same information as the hierarchy.  

The third mode is a generic set representation of the information. Using numbers and parentheses, this is very compact way to represent the information.

The final mode is an English description of information.


These four modes of representation are interesting because they are at the same time very similar and very different from each other. They all basically represent exactly the same information. However, the first mode affords flow, the second mode is visual and inclusive, the third mode is extremely compact, and the final mode is driven by language.


Representation and Perceived Information Architecture

Depending on what you want to capture, your mode of representation will probably change. When you are doing usability research is it very important to think beyond just capturing user comments. It is also important to think beyond other typical metrics, such as errors and reaction time. There is so much more you can capture!

In our consulting, we have taken this idea to new levels. In particular, we have developed a very interesting technique that helps us get at how users think about the information architecture of a web site. After conducting a full usability test, with many scenarios, we work with users to develop a Perceived Information Architecture (PIA).

We basically have users draw out a map of the site as they perceive it on large sheets of paper. We literally get users to create a diagram of the information architecture. We passively work with them, but they are in control. They use any language they want, any colors, and any concepts. They can use layers, circles, numbers, or anything else. We let them represent the information any way they want. In a semi-structured way, we help them express the architecture of the site from their point of view.

To our knowledge, this is a new and innovative technique. It is aimed at capturing the perceived information architecture of a web site. We can compare these representations to the actual information architecture, as the designers developed. We can look for static points, areas of failure, black holes, burning concepts, flow, and much more. 

We developed this new method because other methods of testing did not provide us with the right representations. Users were unable to articulate their perceptions of the structure and flow of the web sites. Also, we found that card sorting was not effective at the end of the usability testing because users were getting polluted by the existing concepts on the sites being tested. They were having a hard time getting beyond the concepts we used on the cards. Using our new Perceived Information Architecture method, we have found that users are not nearly as inhibited. Indeed, users love drawing their impressions of the structure of the sites. The ownership of the representation liberates users.


Final Thoughts

At WebWord, we think it is important to think beyond the current ideas in usability. You don't always need to use the same old testing methods. I'd also like to point out that I think we have a lot to learn from other folks. For example, usability could use a serious injection of marketing. By that I mean usability should investigate how marketing is done, and usability should learn how to market itself. 

One of the main points of this article was to get you to think about how to do things differently in usability. If you have unique problems, you should be able to create new solutions. 

Here is a simple algorithm. First, understand the problem. You need to map it out. You need to have a representation of the problem. Then, start generating possible solutions and representations of solutions. Finally, map those representations to each other. When there is a match, you are probably on to something really great.


Comments?
 

Send them to me:  john@webword.com  

 


What next?


Home | Services | Moving WebWord | Cool Books | Hot Web Sites | Reports
Newsletter Archive | Weblog Archive | Interviews | About WebWord

Subscribe to the Webword.com Newsletter
Receive the best free usability newsletter on the Internet.

 

Contact John S. Rhodes, the WebWord.com Editor and Webmaster

URL: http://webword.com/moving/representations.html

© 2001 by WebWord.com. All rights reserved.
Do not reproduce or redistribute any material from this document,
in whole or in part, without explicit written permission from WebWord.com.