UX professionals shouldn't be afraid of stepping on the toes of web designers! That is the message from Stephen Turberk over at UX'ers home turf Boxes And Arrows.
Turbek recounts how a black and white wireframe can often alienate it's audience because it is so far from looking like the real thing. This is especially a problem when conducting usability tests with wireframes, writes Turbek:
"Visual affordances, such as color and underlining links are key to
using a site, and these cues make a significant difference in a
usability test. Users cannot confidently predict how they would use a
page if they don’t recognize links or can’t read what the page expects
them to."
I tend to agree with Turbek and see a necessity for including such basic elements as logos, brand colors and some graphics when wireframing. Otherwise the person or group who are giving feedback will be too far removed from the onset. Over time this practice has landed me quite a few comments from both UX colleagues and web designers who think I have stepped over the line. It seems to be the common perception that wireframes ought to be toned down - invisible almost!
Like me, Stephen Turbek doesn't think so and puts it this way:
"Just because project teams understand the purpose of wire frames, that
doesn’t mean everyone will. Similar to listening to someone sing out
loud to his iPod: we only hear the singing, while the person hears the
whole orchestra. Likewise, the test subject knows only that “the page
isn’t going to look like what they see,” but what they see is all they
have to react to."
Eloquently put!
Share on Facebook |