Oops! After having sent my posting I noticed the other part of this thread ... and the list narrowing issues. I have something to add ... What I did was to make my autocompleter search not only the displayed item descriptions but also related keywords associated with the "official" names, that were not displayed. Including colloquial terms that the user never sees in the page. Thus, one looking for "accelerator" would also find items containing "autocomplete". In your case it might be useful to gather information on what the user searched for and what occupation finally chose and build an associations map from eral life data. -- Juan Lanus
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 10:59, Juan Lanus <juan.la...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Paul, > > Firstly, I would look at the existing information (industry, occupation) to > detect strange numbers: too high or too low. These might be indicating a > misplaced occupation or a wrong labeled industry. this could be useful for > fixing classification error or a complete waste of time, but I could not > resist doing the analysis. > > Secondly, I would make the selection process as transparent to the user as > possible, so they clearly realize that the "industry" question is a means to > help them by narrowing the choices in the second question. > I would consider adding an "all of them" option in the industry question. > I would make the reaction to an industry selection change highly > performant, sub-second, through the use of some simple javascript, so the > user can experiment without the pain of annoying waits, and without losing > the focus. > This is to help a user that does not share the mental model of those who > made the taxonomy. For example, I work for a software factory and might find > things under consulting, software or outsourcing. Because "industry" is not > a parent classification for "occupation", think of the guy who works as a > gardener in a pharmaceutical laboratory. Or an accountant in a casino. > > Additionally, depending on the characteristics of the audience, I could set > an accelerator so they can type words or parts of words and get the list > shortened by means of al AJAX script. Like thus: > http://www.tecnosol.com.ar/ui/CG012.htm > Notice that for the accelerator to be useful it must find occurences of the > typed text not only at the beginning of the list items but anywhere, > including inside words. It is very important for this feature to be useful > that it beared zero time learning, and also that it could be bypassed > without noticing it. > > If applicable I would also implement a multihierarchy in order to be able > to add an occupation into more then one industry. > -- > Juan Lanus > > > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 12:05, Amy Jones <ajo...@convio.com> wrote: > >> Have you thought of doing a survey and having people self-identify their >> occupation? No constraints, just a text field (or two- one for industry >> and one for occupation). You could even do it as a fill in the blank, >> eg, "I work as a _____ in the ______ industry." >> You'd need a fairly large sample size, but it sounds like you may be >> working with a well-defined audience. >> >> Once you have a large list of how people think of their industry and >> occupation, you can normalize it and that becomes your list. >> >> You're never going to have a truly exhaustive list, though (unless >> you're dealing with a very constrained system), so the choice becomes >> having people not answer or answer incorrectly, vs having an optional >> "not listed" selection and having them write-in their occupation if they >> don't see it on the list. The first means you'll get less accurate >> data, the second means you'll get more data that will be hard to do >> anything with, so there are trade-offs either way. >> >> Good luck! >> >> --Amy Jones >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: discuss-boun...@lists.interactiondesigners.com >> [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of >> Paul Trumble >> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 9:34 AM >> To: disc...@ixda.org >> Subject: [IxDA Discuss] Designing a long list of items that people >> mustchoose from. >> >> All: >> >> I'm looking for some advice, examples or even recommendations of who >> might >> be good at solving this particular problem for us. >> >> In the context of a longish multi-page web form we have a need for the >> user >> to tell us at a fairly granular level what their occupation is. the >> total >> length of the list is long, more than 1,000 choices. The accuracy of >> the >> answer is pretty important to our business as is our desire not to stop >> the >> users flow through the application because of either the difficulty or >> perceived intrusiveness of the question. I should add that most users >> don't >> view the question as being necessary based on their understanding of >> what >> they are filling out. >> >> Currently we use an introductory question (labeled currently 'industry', >> but >> in the past 'line of work' - the better version) to narrow down the list >> of >> occupations that are presented to the individual. This approach may >> well be >> the best solution to a difficult problem, but it brings a little >> emotional >> and cognitive overhead with it. Regularly when we observe users they >> will >> grumble that we are asking the same question twice, less so with the >> 'line >> of work' label I believe. >> >> Part of the problem with we have with this approach is that the choices >> in >> the industry list are not very good. The selections for industry are >> confusing and users don't always grasp that if their occupation is not >> showing up as a choice the solution to the problem might be to choose a >> different industry. The actual list has some regulatory constraints and >> a >> fair amount of internal political baggage. >> >> We are looking for a way to develop a new taxonomy that might make the >> process more understandable to the user, while preserving the level of >> detail the business requires. Card-sorting doesn't seem like a good >> tool >> here since ultimately we need to know how individual users categorize >> their >> own occupation, not how they classify a list of occupations with which >> they >> have varying degrees of familiarity. Because of the regulatory >> constraints >> we can't experiment with different versions of the list at any given >> time. >> We've used surveys to test particular taxonomies in the past. Generally >> surveys have proved a good way to rule things out, not develop something >> that works well. >> >> What thoughts do you all have on this? I really haven't found any >> examples >> of folks who do something similar well. I'm interested in advice, or if >> you >> know someone (or if you are someone) who could do a good job of putting >> a >> new taxonomy together that would be good too. We may well have to bring >> in >> the magic aura of expertise that only consultants possess in order to >> sell >> any changes. >> >> You can email me directly or reply to the list. Thanks in advance. >> >> Paul Trumble >> >> -- >> Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana. - Groucho Marx >> >> http://www.trumbling.com/ >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/paultrumble/ >> http://www.twitter.com/trumbling >> ________________________________________________________________ >> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! >> To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org >> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe >> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines >> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help >> ________________________________________________________________ >> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! >> To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org >> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe >> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines >> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help >> > > ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
