Akatombo Web Log
Tuesday, March 09, 2004
Physical Design Principles in Web Design
Recently we have been pondering the principles of fields such as industrial design and how they might apply to web design in general, and usability in particular. One that has piqued our interest recently is the concept of the average person. This is a set of specific average measurements for a population or group, things like height, arm length, ratio of lower body to torso, eyesight, and finger length. We have been thinking about what we can consider to be the measurable properties of an Internet user. The potential audience comes from such a wide range of possible areas and has such a variety of hardware and Internet connections this can be quite a chore. The task does become slightly easier when your target demographic is in a certain range (i.e. 20-35 year old males living in the greater Tokyo area), but still what can we assume to be a measurable average for an Internet user?
Often “the average user” is used to assert beliefs on what websites should look like. These measurements are almost never based on an actual measurable average of anything. Things such as the three-click rule, which doesn’t matter nearly as much as having well-organized information, are often attributed to what the average user needs. This is not what we are talking about. We are considering whether or not there might be actual measurable, specific attributes of a majority of web users (at least in a particular demographic)? Would eyesight be one? We are brainstorming here, and your input would be greatly appreciated.
- Posted by mj
Eyesight - well it’s been noted that it’s often a good idea to have not just adjustable text, but to even point out that you can change the text size on the page itself to help less tech-savvy users.
For me desk and chair, and consequently screen, height seems to play a role in how I look at sites. At one desk i work at the screen is much lower than the one I usually work at and I find myself focusing on the top of the browser window. At the usual desk I focus more on the middle of the browser.
So maybe the relation of screen height does play a role in how the user reacts to a site.
March 10th, 2004 03:06 AM - Posted by UltraBob
Thanks for the comment MJ. I agree with you about the environment of a user affecting the way that they react or interact with a website. I also agree that adjustable text sizes are a very important feature for an accessible website.
I think it would be extremely difficult to come up with a reasonable average for things like distance from screen or relative height of screen. There have been some attempts to measure average user screen resolutions, but those seem to be dubious at best.
Perhaps age would be a good starting point for a measurable average. From that we could determine averages about the age group in question such as average eyesite, presence of corrective lenses, educational background, etc. Of course a lot of these measurements would be determined by who your target market is.
All this raises another question: Should we cater our websites to the average or to the low end of the scale. for example, is it better to design with your target market of urban women 20-30 with only (and this is just a guess) slight vision problems on average, or should we design for those who have poor eyesight and/or colorblindness?
Akatombo Media, of course, usually goes for serving each individual whenever possible through such things as user resizable type. When we can’t cater to individuals we usually try to design our sites to be accessible to as many people as possible, but there are arguments to be made on both sides. One of the recipients of the web standards award that I linked to earlier, Wildly Sophisticated Media, comes down on the side of designing specifically for their intended target: young women whom, they believe, generally have good eyesite. What do you think?
March 10th, 2004 03:51 AM - Posted by Kristen
You might be interested in Jakob Nielsen and Marie Tahir’s book, 50 Websites Deconstructed. Although it doesn’t say much about the average user, it does give a lot of information about the average website--including labels that are de facto standards (Contact, About Us, etc) and the amount of screen real estate devoted to content vs navigation, ads and so on.)
Rather than the “average user” why not build yourself some imaginary audience people for each project? This is something you can get your client involved in, too. Who do they think is looking at their site?
Make the people detailed. i.e. Jane is a 34 year old middle manager at XYZ company who likes to shop online during lunch. She has three kids, a dog and prefers gold to silver.
Then you can use Jane as your test case. “If Jane wants to buy a necklace today, how will the site help or hinder her?”
March 10th, 2004 06:46 AM - Posted by UltraBob
Thanks for the comment Kristen!
Actually developing an imaginary audience is a technique that we do utilize, but actually have never involved the client in it before which seems kind of a glaring oversight once you mention it.
We generally develop an imaginary audience before we begin designing the site, and design with them in mind. When we get into the testing stage we generally add a few more imaginary members (with tasks to perform) to our original group. We find that adding new audience members after the site is mostly formed often gives us a fresh outlook on things that a user might do. In addition to this we like to do some testing with actual people in our target market, but this can be tough to do under many budgets.
The average user idea that we are kicking around is more something to help us set some broad overall specs for most products. What font size is generally appropriate as a starting point? Is flash ubiquitous enough to be intermingled with other elements in the page, etc.
What kind of web page properties do you think it is acceptable to set as a standard accross most web projects? What properties are better to look at on a case by case basis?
Also I’m quite interested in hearing more about you handle your imaginary audience technique. What kind of insight to you gain from it?
March 10th, 2004 07:02 AM