Key Idea: Theme A asked you to EXPLAIN user-centred design. Theme B asks you to do it, and everything here is something you hand in. A plan runs question → method → data → decision. Most plans stop at the method. Every method has a blind spot, so real research pairs a watching method with an asking method. A persona is one named person, every field traced to a finding. Usability is five separate objectives, each with its own measurement. A task analysis ends at critical points and the change each one produces.
Paper 1 — multiple choice
- Pick the method that answers a stated question
- Spot the fault in a research question or a persona
- Match a complaint to the usability objective it belongs to
- Identify what makes a step a critical point
Paper 2 — analysing a product
- Construct a research plan for a named product
- Present a primary persona from given findings
- Evaluate a product against three usability objectives
- Apply task analysis and identify critical points
Carried into the design project
- Criterion A — analysing the need through real user research
- Criterion B — a specification whose lines come from findings
- Your persona and task analysis are assessed evidence, not decoration
Every statement in this topic produces an artefact a marker can look at. Learn what each one must contain and the topic stops being abstract.
| The output | What it must contain | The half students leave out |
|---|---|---|
| Research plan | Question, method, who and how many, what you record, the decision | The design decision the data will settle |
| Applied methods | Two methods chosen so their blind spots differ, on the right population | Why the PAIR was chosen |
| Primary persona | Who, behaviour, environment, goal, frustration — each from a finding | Behaviour, environment and frustration |
| Usability evaluation | Five objectives, each with a measurement and a specific change | The measurement, which is what makes it an evaluation |
| Task analysis | Goal, real steps, uneven depth, critical points, one change each | The critical points and the changes |
Research that changes no design decision was decoration. Whatever you are asked to construct, present, evaluate or apply, finish by naming the thing about the product that is now different.
Four links, three worked plans. Notice that the decision is written before any research happens.
🔒 Interactive diagram
Explore the labelled diagram, charts and maps for this topic in study mode.
| Method | You get | You cannot see |
|---|---|---|
| Field research | The setting, the constraints, the workarounds | Why any of it happens |
| User observation | Hesitations, errors, features never touched | What the user was thinking |
| Interviews | Reasons, history, priorities | What they actually did |
| Questionnaires | How many, how often, how strongly | Anything you did not ask about |
| Focus groups | Disagreement, and the users' own words | The quiet member's real view |
Important: Researching whoever is available. Your class is not the target population, and findings about them describe them. Stopping at a quotation. Climb from the record to the theme to the user characteristic to the need. Drawing a tidy task tree with no critical points. That is the first half of an answer.
Five objectives on one product. The measurement row is what separates an evaluation from an opinion.
🔒 Interactive diagram
Explore the labelled diagram, charts and maps for this topic in study mode.
A school is replacing the water fountains in its corridors. Construct a user-centred research plan for the two weeks before any concept work begins.
🔒 Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
A library self-issue machine is disliked by students but praised by staff. Evaluate it against three usability objectives and say what this split tells you.
🔒 Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
What are the four links in a research plan?
Why pair a watching method with an asking method?
Which three persona fields actually change a design?
Learnability or memorability?
What makes a step a critical point?
Why is convenience sampling a serious fault, not a minor one?
Exam tips
- Finish every answer by naming the design decision that is now different.
- Say who and how many you would research, and where.
- Justify the pair of methods by their blind spots — that is a standing mark.
- A persona field with no finding behind it should be deleted, not padded.
- Every usability objective needs a number, and a specific change.
- A task analysis is only finished when the critical points have changes attached.