Motivation
The main motive of this research paper is to expand the research around the user base of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) for users who may not be as global or educated or financially stable as traditional users (these users are termed as emergent users). This was accomplished by establishing a novel user usage model to help analyse how these users’ skills progress based on a variety of factors, and how these factors influence that progression, in the context of this research, the main ICT device used is a mobile phone. The motivation behind this research is due to the enabling ability of ICT in development in multiple contexts and also due to the necessity of richer models to describe users’ usage of ICTs.
Methodology
To gather data for studying how users adopted the technology at various stages, semi-structured interviews were conducted across five villages in geographically diverse locations in India using an ethnographic approach by Beyer and Holtzblatt. The interviewers and moderators were given appropriate training in a 3-day workshop to learn about the methods for the data collection and analysis. The users for the study were selected based on their education level and age. 29 users were selected, 23 males and 6 females, most in the 20-30 year old age group with the rest being older. None of the users had more than 12 years of education. The device that the users would be using and tested on was a mobile phone, chosen due to its importance and abundance in modern society. The level of difficulty, whether the task was sequentially memorized as steps or understood as a concept, and the various stages the users skills were at during the completion of the task were all noted during the interviews and observation periods. The users were also grouped together according to their type and state of usage and were further analysed to find determining characteristics of these types and stages to help further define the model.
The model proposed is a two dimensional model. One dimension being the stage a user is at, which is dependent on the time spent with the technology, and the other characterizes the type of user, which depends on various factors like age, economic status, availability of technology in their social circle and more. The full list of user type variables are detailed in the paper. The paper details the five stages they have outlined for the model. The five stages are Unexposed, Novic, Rote Learning, Fluent and Competent. There are four types of barriers that are described as well to identify the different hindrances to a users adoption of the technology and their skill progression. The stages vary based on how much exposure the user has to the technology and their proficiency with it, Unexposed being the least exposed and Competent being the most, with a good conceptual model developed by this stage. The stages are also distinct in terms of which tasks the user can complete at each stage and how they go about the tasks, whether through memorization of the task sequence or complete understanding of the technology’s workings. The key barriers for each stage are mentioned as well.
The paper then goes on to detail the different types of users, based on 5 types of users from Cooper and Reinmann. The types described are the Basic, Navigator, Text Inputter, Saver and Account Holder user types. A persona is given for each type of user, and they vary in terms of attitudes, age, education and economic background. For example, the Basic user, 40years old and educated till 6th grade with a monthly salary of 15,000 INR has a phone only out of absolute necessity and he takes minimum utility from it, due to both simple reluctance to learn and fear of failure of more complicated tasks. On the other hand, the Text Inputter is younger, around 30 years old and much more willing to learn how to use the mobile phone for more tasks and they derive more utility out of it. After each persona, there is a synopsis that explains which of the 29 users attributes defined the category and how the categories derived from them, For example, linking the users attitudes, education and ages to the categories.
The model has been proposed to help designers classify their user base and also to help those who have products that have iterative and incremental life cycles, this user model helps keep a tab on how users adopt and adapt to those versions. A few drawbacks of the model are mentioned, namely the incomplete sampling that could be more uniform, and the possibility of fleshing out different combinations for the user model more.
Critique and Opinion
The main takeaway from this paper is the actual user model itself, it’s clearly defined and seems like it has a lot of scope for helping out designers map the different user types they’ve defined for their product to a formally defined system. The definition of various stages of usage and types of users can especially be useful to projects which rely on design that caters specifically to a targeted group, for example users with limited literacy. This is especially relevant due to huge amounts of growth in emergent user numbers in countries like India.
The diagram in the paper was also useful and gave clarity as to how the tested users were classified with respect to the model. One drawback to the research seems to be that only one model of phone was given to the users to test with. If the users conceptual modelling was to be truly tested, then they should have been given different models of mobile phones, with a slight difference, maybe a change in operating system or so, these slight variations would test if the user actually understood the task or just memorized a sequence of steps. The user personas were limited in terms of gender, only male personas being written. The research also could have showcased an actual application of the model or compare it with the previous models they critiqued to give researchers an idea on how to maximize the utility of the model and the benefits of using it. The few other drawbacks were already mentioned in the discussions section of the paper.