Creativity Support for Mock-up Design: n/a
Authors
Larsen, Morten Læburgh ; Matynia, Konrad
Term
4. term
Education
Publication year
2021
Submitted on
2021-05-27
Pages
13
Abstract
Dette studie undersøger, om indbyggede kreative prompts ('Sparks') i en mockup-generator kan hjælpe folk med at designe modulbaserede mobilapplikationer og få nye idéer. En mockup-generator er et værktøj til hurtigt at sammensætte skærmlayouts. Vores prototype, bygget med web-rammeværket Vue.js, fulgte Visiolinks modulbaserede udgivelsesmetode (Visiolink er en virksomhed inden for digital publicering). Vi lavede to versioner af værktøjet: en med Sparks og en uden. Vi testede fire typer Sparks: hand-holding (trin-for-trin vejledning), informative (tips og forklaringer), bad example (hvad man ikke bør gøre) og challenging (begrænsninger, der fremprovokerer nye løsninger). Deltagere med forskellige niveauer af designerfaring brugte begge versioner. På tværs af alle fire typer så vi potentiale. Deltagerne foretrak versionen med Sparks både for systemets brugervenlighed og for kvaliteten af de endelige designs. Vi fandt også en signifikant forskel i de hedoniske kvaliteter (hvor behagelig og tiltalende oplevelsen var). De fleste deltagere rapporterede, at Sparks påvirkede deres designbeslutninger og deres overordnede planlægning ved opbygning af mockups.
This study evaluates whether built-in creativity prompts ('Sparks') in a mock-up generator can help people design module-based mobile applications and spark new ideas. A mock-up generator is a tool for quickly assembling screen layouts. Our prototype, built with the Vue.js web framework, followed Visiolink's module-based release approach (Visiolink is a digital publishing company). We created two versions of the tool: one with Sparks and one without. We tested four kinds of Sparks: hand-holding (step-by-step guidance), informative (tips and explanations), bad example (what not to do), and challenging (constraints that provoke new solutions). Participants with different levels of design experience used both versions. Across all four types, we found potential benefits. Participants preferred the version with Sparks for both the usability of the system and the quality of the final designs. We also found a significant difference in hedonic qualities (how enjoyable and appealing the tool felt to use). Most participants reported that the Sparks influenced their design decisions and their big-picture planning when creating the mock-ups.
[This summary has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]
Keywords
Documents