Commentary on ‘scenarios and task analysis’ by Dan Diaper
Fabio Paternò · Interacting with Computers · 2002
Both Carroll's book and Diaper's paper address fundamental issues for the HCI field and stimulate important discussion that can help to clarify at least some of them. I have noticed that in recent years some tension has arisen between scenario-based approaches and task analysis, with the risk of degenerating into a kind of religious war. To some extent, the solution to this tension is simple: both approaches are important and complementary. However, this solution is often interpreted as a diplomatic, polite position in which people do not actually believe. So, some more in-depth reflections should prove to be useful. We can start with scenarios. I think the importance of scenarios is generally recognized and their adoption in current practice is impressive. However, I have some concerns on this topic. I have seen scenarios being used even by people who have no knowledge of the HCI literature. When people want to discuss design decisions or requirements for a new system it is very intuitive to propose scenarios in terms of examples of possible use. So, I would expect that the role of researchers in HCI be, not be recall the importance of scenarios, but to provide techniques to identify scenarios relevant to current aims, to extend and elaborate scenarios and better use the information that they contain. Unfortunately, I feel such aspects have not been dealt with extensively enough in Carroll's 350-page long book. There is a section devoted to seven techniques for eliciting scenarios, but I agree with Diaper when he comments that these are general HCI methods that have been developed in a broader context (such as ethnographic studies and participatory design. Chapter 10 (which I found to be the book's most interesting) also addresses some aspects of this issue but I would have expected this to be a central theme in the book.