My hopes for this semester are focused on preparing for my capstone project. I’ve been asked to develop a solution that will help student clinicians better orient themselves to electronic medical records (EMR). My project draws from usability studies, user experience (UX) research, and the rhetoric of health and medicine (RHM).
Usability is one of the ways the field of technical communication is visible in my project design. Usability testing is my collection method for the data I’ll use for solution development. Both interviews and observations will be used.
According to Redish and Barnum’s (2011) arguments in “Overlap, Influence, Intertwining: The Interplay of UX and Technical Communication,” technical communication has been coevolving with usability since the 1970s. This was before it was even called usability.
My second area of study is UX research. I’ll be using UX methodology in the development and implementation of a solution. Technical communication’s connection to UX is more debated. Redish and Barnum (2011) highlighted a controversy that has held back technical communicators from contributing their skills to UX teams. The backlash started when the field of UX opened to technical communicators in the 1990s. Redish and Barnum (2011) quote Joe Dumas, who wrote a history of usability emerging from human factors engineering. Dumas wrote that “some people with psychology and human factors backgrounds saw this as a watering down of the skills of the profession,” a view Dumas doesn’t agree with (Redish & Barnum, n.d., para. 66).
Redish and Barnum (2011) shared how this attitude is counterproductive to UX teams, product development, companies, users, and technical communicators. Technical communicators have struggled to make it onto UX teams, even though technical communicators bring skill sets such as user analysis, user advocacy, team collaboration, multidirectional communication, rhetoric, usability testing, adaptability in complex environments, and an ability to simplify complex information for users.
Redish and Barnum (2011) share a call to action to improve interdisciplinary collaboration between UX teams and technical communicators. Their reasoning—why wait until after the development of a less than user-friendly product to then ask technical communicators to write documentation to help users with the issues they will encounter. There are missed opportunities for all parties here.
UX and usability play a key role in human-computer interaction (HCI). HCI was included under sociocultural theories in our first lecture. My capstone project is designed to move me closer to my dream career in HCI—improving usability of assistive technology based on UX research. According to Redish and Barnum (2011), I have more of an uphill battle than I previously anticipated.
The last area of study in preparation for my project is RHM. The field of rhetoric is visible through RHM. I’m less clear if this also includes digital rhetoric, or how RHM aligns with technical communication. My directed readings course this semester will help me answer these questions. Additionally, during my studies, I’ll be looking for greater clarity on how usability and UX are distinguished from each other and are related to technical communication and digital rhetoric. Feedback to this blog post will likely provide some additional clarity.
Reference
Redish, G., & Barnum, C. (2011). Overlap, influence, intertwining: The interplay of UX and technical communication. JUX Journal of User Experience, 6(3), 90-101. https://uxpajournal.org/overlap-influence-intertwining-the-interplay-of-ux-and-technical-communication/
Your capstone project sounds neat! Getting more usability testing and usability researching experience will perfect your skills. What kind of “assistive technology” do you ultimately want to be involved in later on? (I’d like to see dictation technology improve.)
ReplyDeleteI think there’s a lot of potential directions for technical communicators to explore. I think “user advocacy” is incredibly important since the wording of instructions, surveys, or even passive signage (posters in the testing area) can greatly influence how a user performs. I don’t think it’s just a matter of simplifying word choices, technical communicators can identify negatively charged words or phrases. They can point out biases and ambiguity.
I also agree that having technical communicators involved during the development phase of a product could help with efficiency. Human interaction with an interface is crucial. Plus, a lot of money could be saved and frustration averted if a quirk is caught early in production (you won’t have a manual with a huge chapter devoted to troubleshooting or a beleaguered helpline).
Are you planning on your interviews being recorded (just audio or audio/video) or will you jot down answers? Will you be conducting your observations from inside the room? Do you plan to ask participants questions or will you encourage think aloud behavior?
I’m looking forward to the project you devise!
Cisalee, I appreciate your interest in my project and thoughtful response. To your question, what kind of assistive tech? I’m in exploration mode. My current focus is assistive tech for blind people and for cerebral palsy (CP). For CP, I’m interested in hands-free writing and speaking tech with eye tracking. For the blind, I’m exploring what is currently available both in mainstream apps and expensive specialized tech.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, you made a good point, the technical communicators’ role goes way beyond word choices all the way to the rhetoric of how to reach people and not offend them in the process. I appreciate how you see the value of technical communicators’ on UX teams—like better user advocacy and bug fixes before a product or service is in the hands of users.
On collecting my research data, I haven't ironed out if I’ll record interviews and observations. It may prove better to use EMR simulations so I can ask student clinicians to think aloud, and so I can stop them and ask about what is challenging. I also see the value of observing documentation processes during patient procedures at the clinic. In the second option, I won’t record. I ambitiously want to use both methods, but this will depend on time and the willingness of my participants.
Thanks Cisalee!