How and When Prototyping Practices Affect Design Performance

[Repsejras]

If anyone is interested in some examples of early prototypes together with some explanation of the methods you can find more on this site: akosta.dk/en/category/prototyp­­ing/ :) Happy prototyping developers!

[Omirion]

It's not by how MUCH one differs from the other it's WHICH ONE is better.

And the study in itself is pointless to be sure, but the point is to prove a concept so that the concept can be used as a constant and not as a variable in future studies.

[code933k]

I agree with the people below.

The study conducted by them was not about "how good" iteration is or "how much" iteration is sane. Conversely, what they test is how bad can things go when conditions for development are limited... (name it materials, time or experimentation)

Surprice! Products aren't that good.

...And here we re-discover what Plato knew 2500 years ago but thought with an empty logic and added impact by means of a slide-show, buzzwords and a conference room projector.

[julesjacobs1]

You can design a better egg dropper if you are allowed to test it. Surprise!!

Then he compares how much "already experienced" and "no experience" groups learn from experimentation. How many people are we talking here? 28 people. So at best that's 7 per group. Not possible to draw any conclusion from this other than the obvious.

[xr0]

And you need thousands of people to draw any conclusions?

I'm guessing you're NOT a PhD.

[julesjacobs1]

The ad study. The critique made the ads worse. Obviously the critique wasn't helpful and the sequential people got more focused on critique wit less thinking for themselves. You got ~30 clicks per participant and 445 vs 398, so it doesn't mean much anyway. You can absolutely NOT draw conclusions about parallel vs sequential from this.

I'm sorry that I'm so harsh, but you're a PhD!