atw: Re: Should we always give users what they ask for?

  • From: "John Catania" <jcatania@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 10:39:02 +1000

Hi everyone,

I think it's appropriate to provide required materials in a variety of media: 
available in print and online; or online as a video link, where appropriate.  I 
think the key here is choice, to maximize the meaning of information for 
consumers.  

I understand that many organisations also have an imperative to comply with 
disability communication standards; providing a variety of formats takes this 
into account.  

It seems reasonable, then, to provide as many feasible options to consumers, to 
maximize their understanding of the information.

John   
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Michelle Hallett 
  To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 8:59 AM
  Subject: atw: Re: Should we always give users what they ask for?


  Interesting question, my thought:

   

  Do we provide information in the most comprehensible format or the format 
which will actually be consulted and read? Which is more likely to prevent 
death or injury, comprehensive instruction materials no one reads, or less 
easily comprehended materials that people are reading?

   

  Best regards

  Michelle

   

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Geoffrey Marnell
  Sent: Monday, 9 March 2009 9:51 AM
  To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Subject: atw: Should we always give users what they ask for?

   

  Hello austechies,

   

  The digital age has changed the way we gather information. Where once we had 
only printed texts, we now have printed texts and a vast range of digital 
media. There is some evidence to suggest that some readers (especially younger 
readers) now prefer to source information from digital media and that some are 
shunning printed texts altogether. Some commentators suggest that this requires 
a radical rethink about how technical writers deliver information. There is 
good reason to think that the younger generation will carry their preferences 
with them as they become the middle generation and then the old generation; 
thus all readers will eventually prefer digital media. Best to get ready, then, 
and start leaving behind old technologies, such as printed texts.

   

  But hang on a minute. Should user preferences be the sole determiner of the 
media we choose for delivering technical documentation?

   

  Consider this case:

   

    a.. We are writing instructional materials to accompany a product whose 
misuse might lead to death or injury (say, a lathe, the control system of a 
nuclear-power plant, a dialysis machine, or the like). 
    b.. We have an option to deliver the material in printed form or in digital 
form (via a visual display unit attached to, or near, the product). 
    c.. We discover that the majority (even all) our intended audience prefers 
to gather information online rather than from printed texts. 
    d.. We know from research that the comprehension of online material is 
poorer than that of printed material. That is, our understanding of material 
read online is poorer than of the same material read offline, as judged by our 
ability to correctly answer questions about it. (Cognitive psychologist and web 
usability expert Jakob Neilsen reports that comprehension can be up to 25% 
lower; other studies suggest as much as 60% lower: see "Effects of online 
reading" by M. Macedo-Rouet et al., Science Communication, vol. 25. no. 2, Dec. 
2003, pp. 99-128. Also see "Online v. print reading: which one makes us 
smarter?", Scientific American, December 2008). 
   

  In these circumstances, would we accept our audience's preference for online 
delivery knowing that comprehension of material read online can be as low as 
60% of the comprehension of the same material read in printed form? Is there 
not, in such cases, a moral dimension to the choice of delivery media? In cases 
where death or injury might result from misuse, are we not morally obliged to 
produce documentation in whatever medium minimises the risk of 
misunderstanding, regardless of user preferences?

   

  Even in cases where misunderstanding is unlikely to lead to death or injury, 
there may be good reasons to override user preferences. Suppose, for example, 
that you manage a call centre. You have to decide whether the printed 
knowledgebase that your support staff now relies on should be converted to 
online and then decommissioned. You poll the staff and they all say that they 
prefer online reading. But if comprehension of online instructions is markedly 
less than of printed materials, the risk of customers getting poor advice from 
support staff is higher if support staff have only online references to rely 
on. Hence online delivery would potentially lead to greater customer 
dissatisfaction, and possibly even more support calls (as disgruntled callers 
call back for further assistance). Online might be cheaper, easier to maintain 
and preferred by your staff - and yet possibly a poor business decision in the 
long run.

   

  By all means let's explore new ways to deliver instructional material. But we 
need to temper our enthusiasm for new media with the realisation that not all 
media is be equally effective in transmitting understanding. Readers' 
preferences for particular media are important and need to be considered. But 
there are cases where considerations of effectiveness, and perhaps ethics, are 
of equal, if not greater, importance.

   

  Some questions for young readers (and others who prefer to read online)

    1.. Suppose you are studying for an exam. If you are like most students, 
you will want to get as high a mark as possible. Suppose you need to master the 
contents of a particular textbook to do well in the exam, and suppose further 
that the textbook is available for loan from the library and available online. 
Like all young readers, you prefer digital to paper media (or so we are told). 
But you happen to discover that comprehension of online material is poorer than 
that of printed material (up to 60% poorer in fact). Will you now study the 
textbook online or borrow it from the library? 
   

    2.. Suppose, now, that you have got your degree and have started your first 
job. You want to get on quickly in the company, be seen as bright and 
enthusiastic, and not goof up. Your job requires you to consult lots of 
policies, procedures and work instructions. If you misunderstand these 
policies, procedures and work instructions, you may goof up. The policies, 
procedures and work instructions are available online and in print. You know 
that comprehension of online material is poorer than that of printed material. 
Will you opt to read the policies, procedures and work instructions online? 
   

   

  Let the arguments begin.

   

   

  Geoffrey Marnell

  Principal Consultant

  Abelard Consulting Pty Ltd

  T: +61 3 9596 3456

  F: +61 3 9596 3625

  W: www.abelard.com.au

   

Other related posts: