11th
October
2000
“In an earlier work (Buxton, 1986), I speculated on what conclusions a future anthropologist would draw about our physical make-up, based on the tools (namely computers) used by our society. The objective was to point out that these tools reflect a very distorted view of our physiology and the motor/sensory skills… The thesis of this chapter is that we should consider technology in terms of the fidelity with which it reflects human capabilities on three levels: *physical: how we are built and what motor/sensory skills we possess; *cognitive: how we think, learn, solve problems and what cognitive skills we possess; *social: how we relate to our social milieu, including group structure and dynamics, power, politics, and what social skills we possess. Our metaphor is one of three separate mirrors, each reflecting one of these levels. In order to be judged acceptable, designs must provide an acceptable degree of fidelity in how they reflect each of these three aspects of human makeup and activity.”
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, October 11th, 2000 at 12:00 am and is filed under Usability.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
11th
October
2000
“In an earlier work (Buxton, 1986), I speculated on what conclusions a future anthropologist would draw about our physical make-up, based on the tools (namely computers) used by our society. The objective was to point out that these tools reflect a very distorted view of our physiology and the motor/sensory skills… The thesis of this chapter is that we should consider technology in terms of the fidelity with which it reflects human capabilities on three levels: *physical: how we are built and what motor/sensory skills we possess; *cognitive: how we think, learn, solve problems and what cognitive skills we possess; *social: how we relate to our social milieu, including group structure and dynamics, power, politics, and what social skills we possess. Our metaphor is one of three separate mirrors, each reflecting one of these levels. In order to be judged acceptable, designs must provide an acceptable degree of fidelity in how they reflect each of these three aspects of human makeup and activity.”
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, October 11th, 2000 at 12:00 am and is filed under Interface design.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
