Weekly Reading:Interaction Design 11.2 4th Edition(Due 2/17)

Prototyping is the topic of this week’s reading and gives an idea about what it is.  It says that it is not for any quality check of the product instead is a way to test a problem or idea. It is important to realize that prototypes will represent some compromise from the actual final production design. It also talks about the dilemma between building a prototype to throw away or evolving that prototype into a working product. Due to differences in materials, processes and design fidelity, it is possible that a prototype may fail to perform as expected whereas the production design may have been sound. Alternatively the prototypes may actually perform acceptably whereas the production design may be flawed since prototyping materials and processes may occasionally outperform their production counterparts. When stakeholders sees something as a ready made product or just a replica of it, they understand their needs better, it helps them to actually evaluate, what they want and what they don’t.This paper talks about a complete spectrum of prototypes from low-fidelity to high-fidelity. Low-fidelity -it may look overly basic but you can count on it not intimidating the client. At this stage they may feel more comfortable expressing themselves since this step feels less permanent.  High-fidelity-It looks slick, it looks like you put a lot of time into it, it practically looks done and if it happens to by chance fulfill what the client wanted, without having done a low fidelity prototype first, they’ll be  impressed.If the client doesn’t like it, you have to go back and start over, which is wasted time and budget, time that could have been better used toward a low fidelity prototype from the start. The author also goes through some basic methods of prototyping from familiar ones, such as storyboarding and sketching, to more interesting ways like the “Wizard of Oz” method.Engineers and prototyping specialists seek to understand the limitations of prototypes to exactly simulate the characteristics of their intended design.So, basically the article talks about what it is and what it is not and even what it compromises of.


Preece, J., Rogers, Y., & Sharp, H. (2015). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction (4th ed.). New York, NY: J. Wiley & Sons.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s