A New Method in User-Centered Design: Collaborative Prototype Design Process (CPDP)

Christopher Andrews Texas Tech University ; Debra Burleson Texas Tech University ; Kristi Dunks Texas Tech University ; Kimberly Elmore Texas Tech University ; Carie S. Lambert Texas Tech University ; Brett Oppegaard Texas Tech University ; Elizabeth E. Pohland Texas Tech University ; Danielle Saad Texas Tech University ; Jon S. Scharer Texas Tech University ; Ronda L. Wery Texas Tech University ; Monica Wesley Texas Tech University ; Gregory Zobel Texas Tech University

Abstract

To build upon user-centered design methods, we used a collaborative and multi-modal approach to involve users early in the design process for a website. This article presents our methods and results and addresses the benefits and limitations of the Collaborative Prototype Design Process (CPDP), including ways in which this new method can be implemented. The CPDP is an innovative approach to user-centered website design that emphasizes collaboration, iterative testing, and data-driven design. The CPDP balances the power and needs of users with those of designers and, thus, enables design teams to test more tasks and involve more users. We divided our initial team into three independent design teams to separately profile users, test usability of low-fidelity paper prototypes, and then create and test usability of resulting wireframes. After completing the user-centered design and usability testing, the three teams merged to analyze their diverse findings and create a final prototype.

Journal
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Published
2012-04-01
DOI
10.2190/tw.42.2.c
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (10)

  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. Communication Design Quarterly
  3. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  5. Computers and Composition
Show all 10 →
  1. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  2. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  3. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. Communication Design Quarterly
  5. Computers and Composition

References (27) · 3 in this index

  1. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  2. 10.1162/074793604772933748
  3. 10.1145/175276.175288
  4. Heuristic Evaluations on Usability.gov Website retrieved November 10 2010 from http://www.usability.gov/metho…
  5. 10.1145/634067.634127
Show all 27 →
  1. 10.7551/mitpress/6814.001.0001
  2. Nielsen J. Why You Only Need to Test with 5 Users Alertbox: Current Issues in Web Usability March 19 2000 ret…
  3. Nielson J. Usability 101: Introduction to Usability Alertbox: Current Issues in Web Usability n.d. retrieved …
  4. Expanding Usability Testing to Evaluate Complex Systems
    Journal of Usability Studies
  5. Snyder C. Using Paper Prototypes to Manage Risk User Interface Engineering website (n.d.) retrieved March 28 …
  6. Becker L. 90% of All Usability Testing Is Useless Adaptive Path website June 16 2004 retrieved July 25 2010 f…
  7. 10.1080/0144929032000173951
  8. Scanlon T. Paper Prototypes: Still Our Favorite User Interface Engineering website 1998 retrieved July 25 201…
  9. Klee M. Five Paper Prototyping Tips User Interface Engineering website 2000 retrieved July 25 2010 from http:…
  10. Spool J. M. Looking Back on 16 Years of Paper Prototyping User Interface Engineering website 2005 retrieved J…
  11. 10.1006/ijhc.2001.0478
  12. How Google is Showing Off Chrome
    Business Week Online
  13. 10.3233/IKS-1999-00011
  14. 10.1080/0144929021000025245
  15. Switch! Energy Ecologies in Everyday Life
    International Journal of Design
  16. 10.1386/jvap.7.2.153_1
  17. 10.1145/1028014.1028060
  18. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  19. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  20. A Practical Guide to Usability Testing
  21. Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes
  22. Rhetorical accessability: At the intersection of technical communication and disability studies