What You Can’t Learn
什么是你学不到的？

• Look: color, font, white space, etc
  看到的：颜色，字体，空格等
• Feel: Fitts’s Law issues
  感觉到的：符合规范的问题
• Response time  反馈时间
• Are small changes noticed?
  是否注意到小的改变
  －Even the test change to a paper prototype clearly visible to user
  　纸上原型在测试上的变化，对用户也是清晰可见。
• Exploration vs. deliberation  冒险VS 慎重思考
  －Users are more deliberate with a paper ;they don’t explore or thrash as much
  　用户在纸面上会更多的思考。他们不会冒险或推敲。

But paper prototypes don’t reveal every usability problem, because they are low-fidelity in several dimensions. Obviously, graphic design issues that depend on a high-fidelity look will not be discovered. Similarly, interaction issues that depend on a high-fidelity feel will also be missed. For example, Fitts’s Law problems like buttons that are too small, too close together, or too far away will not be detected in a paper prototype. The human computer of a paper prototype rarely reflects the speed of an implemented backend, so issues of response time – whether feedback appears quickly enough, or whether an entire task can be completed within a certain time constraint –can’t be tested either.
但是，纸上原型不能揭示每个可用性问题，因为，他们在很多维度上是低精度的，很显然，在视觉上，基于高精度的图形设计方面，（纸上原型）达不到（精度），类似的，在感觉上，基于高精度的交互效果，（纸上原型）也比较欠缺。例如，在符合规范的问题上，类似按钮太小，太挤或者太散（等问题），在纸上原型中不易被发现。纸上原型的“人类计算机”（角色扮演）很少考虑反映机器反馈的速度，于是，出现了响应时间的问题――响应时候是否足够快？或者，在规定的时间内，一个完整的任务是否能完成？这两个问题都是测试不出来的。

Paper prototypes don’t help answer questions about whether subtle feedback will even be noticed. Will users notice that message down in the status bar, or the cursor change, or the highlight change? In the paper prototype, even the tiniest change is grossly visible, because a person’s arm has to reach over the prototype and make the change. (If many changes happen at once, of course, then some of them may be overlooked even in a paper prototype, a clearly discernible. This is related to an interesting cognitive phenomenon called change blindness.)
纸上原型不能帮助解答类似一些细微的反馈是否被注意的问题。用户是否通过状态条、指针的变化或高亮显示的改变注意到信息的下载？在纸上原型中，即使是细微的变化也是被粗略的表示，因为（交互行为）是通过人的胳膊伸到纸面原型上面操作的。（如果很多交互是在瞬间完成的，当然，它们的一些就能够在纸上原型清楚的看到，这与一个有趣的认知现象相关叫做瞬间变化（视觉停留））

There’s an interesting qualitative distinction between the way users use paper prototypes and the way they use real interfaces. Experienced paper prototypers report that users are more deliberate with a paper prototype, apparently thinking more carefully about their actions. This may be partly due to the simulated computer’s slow response; it may also be partly a social response, conscientiously trying to save the person doing the simulating from a lot of tedious and unnecessary paper shuffling. More deliberate users make fewer mistakes, which is bad, because you want to see the mistakes. Users are also less likely to randomly explore a paper prototype.
在用户使用纸上原型和真实界面之间，存在有趣的本质差别。有经验的纸上原型研究者提供的报告说：用户使用纸上原型时更加慎重，明显的，更谨慎的思考他们的行为。原因或许部分出于电脑模拟人的缓慢反馈，（这种行为）也许有点像社会交往。在一些单调的和多余的排列纸片等模拟电脑操作中，自觉的试图保存人的行为方式。更谨慎的用户犯错少一些，这点不好，因为你希望看到（原型的）问题。用户也很少愿意随便在纸上原型冒险。

These drawbacks don’t invalidate paper prototyping as a technique, but you should be aware of them. Several studies have shown that low-fidelity prototypes identify substantially the same usability problems as high-fidelity prototypes (Virzi, Sokolov, & Karis, “Usability problem identification using both low-and hi-fidelity prototypes”, CHI ’96; Catani & Biers, “Usability evaluation and prototype fidelity”, Human Factors & Ergonomics 1998).
这些不足并不说明纸上原型没有用，但是，你需要知道这些。一些研究已经证实了，那些低精度的原型能够像高精度原型那样充分的识别可用性问题。(Virzi, Sokolov, & Karis, “使用低精度和高精度原型识别可用性问题”, CHI ’96; Catani & Biers, “可用性评估和原型的精度”, Human Factors & Ergonomics 1998).

出处：大智交互设计
责任编辑：moby

上一页 纸张上设计软件产品原型的方法 [3] 下一页 纸张上设计软件产品原型的方法 [5]