Artefact 2 Evaluation

Testing artefact 2 gave me the clarification that I need to be concentrating on practitioner based views as opposed to users. However the users view needs to be wholly kept in mind as they are the end result of the responsive product. I tested on users by placing a frame of a tablet and touch screen phone in front of them and giving them three elements to place on the frame; navigation, content and images. These placements reflected generic news pages that they were shown before testing. It taught me that when users are given freedom to choose where the elements of the page lie they opted for the more aesthetically pleasing choices rather than a content-now approach, they did not think about the ergonomic problems that would have occurred with placing the elements where they did. I initially expected for the users to place it in a traditional layout based on elements they had seen before. However when they were given the freedom, the results came up extremely varied and random. This was both good and bad for my research document, although I had no previously read into user requirements for responsive design, it gave me the confirmation I needed when it came to the decision on whether to focus on practitioner or user. However it has changed my opinion on user knowledge with responsive design with regards to users imitating and expecting a repeat of what they have seen before. In a way this opens up the scope for designers to be able to design fresh ideas without it being a total flop. However now I’m at a bit of a crossroads, I need to read over my research document again to find out what I concluded. Also to find what I initially set out to find and how I can test this based on the opinions of practitioners.