Carsten Yssing

Getting access to what goes on in people's heads?: reflections on the think-aloud technique

One of the basic usability testing techniques the HCI community draws on, and which stands out as unique, is thinking aloud. We introduce the many names, uses and modifications of the classical think aloud technique, and ask the rhetorical question: What do researchers think they get when they ask people to think aloud? We answer it by discussing the classical work of Ericsson and Simon(1984), in particular their distinction between vocalisation, verbalisation and retrospective reports and the relation to short term memory. Reintroducing the psychological perspective and the focus on higher order cognitive processes, we argue that access to subjective experience is possible in terms of introspection and describe a technique that invites the user to become a participant in the analysis of his or her own cognitive processes. We suggest that use of think aloud has as a prerequisite explicit descriptions of design, test procedure and framework for analysis. We point out, however, that if the aim is to get access to human thinking, HCI research may benefit from experimental research.

Embedding complementarity in HCI methods and techniques: Designing for the "cultural other"

Differences in cultural contexts constitute differences in cognition and research, which shows that different cultures may use different cognitive tools for perception and reasoning. The cultural embeddings are significant in relation to HCI, because the cultural context is also embedded in the methodological framework, the techniques and the tools that we apply. We lack a framework for discussing what and who we are, when we talk about a person as the user of an ICT system that has to be designed, developed and implemented. As a framework, we will suggest a theory of complementary positions that insists on solid accounts from all observer positions in relation to perspective, standpoint and focus. We need to develop complementary theories that embed complexity, and we need to reflect critically upon the forty years dominated by a rationalistic, empirical understanding of the user as illustrated in the literature and practice within the HCI paradigm in system development.