Linking to my classmate’s Joseph’s post: Task 10 – Attention Economy
I really appreciate the approach Joseph chose for his Task. While a few of our classmates (including myself) expressed our frustration with the User Inyerface game, Joseph took on a more “glass half full” approach and expressed his enjoyment with the game. He points out a really important aspect of human behaviour and how many of us consumers have been conditioned to follow certain patterns on the Internet. This also reminds me of the idea of the concept of usability from ETEC 511 when designing tools, especially learning tools. Woolgar’s (1990) article mentions the dangers “configuring the user” when designing a tool because the system will create a set of actions that predicts what the user will do.
I recall during one of my undergrad courses that my prof mentioned how many of us will overlook the terms and conditions and by default click “okay” without knowing what we have agreed to. When we don’t see these default features on an application, we start to question the accessibility and usability of the interface and this game provides an excellent example of it. Joseph brought up another valid example of the dangers when downloading programs. At times when we want to download a program and the system asks which version or type we want to install, if I’m not familiar with the program (which I am usually not) I will by default click the one that is recommended for us. However, this can be dangerous if we accidentally downloaded a virus or malware into our computer. A few years ago I installed Norton security onto my devices that passively scans for malware and if it detects a shady website or program, it will warn me ahead of time and asks me to confirm if I still want the program/website to be installed. It serves as an additional level of comfort but definitely not something I am immune to and should always be careful with what kind of websites and programs I’m installing.
References:
Woolgar, S. (1990). Configuring the user: The case of usability trials. The Sociological Review, 38, 58-99.