Skip to main content
7 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Oct 30, 2019 at 17:55 vote accept Roman Susi
May 24, 2019 at 9:24 comment added Roman Susi This is true. However, there are already some approaches like www-ihm.lri.fr/~mbl/ENS/FundHCI/2013/papers/… to speak in generalized terms about cognitive dimensions in HCI. So basically if we use an analogy of IQ being muscle power, then no user-centered design is needed to understand most humans can't move 200 kg without some equipment.
May 24, 2019 at 9:06 comment added Cameron Brick Perhaps. Or it's (trivially) true and not very useful, since you can't manipulate user intelligence. Imagine it were personality type; still not useful. The best UX tool is still user-centered design, regardless of individual differences.
May 24, 2019 at 8:06 comment added Roman Susi The question is only partially about "pure" abstractions. Of course, in reality linguistic aspects are involved. But I still believe IQ predicts users' abilities to understand user interfaces. So far most of research I've seen was about mental retardation IQ range. In this question I am more interested in the area around 100 for working age people. The topic seems to be avoided. Maybe, it's somehow "politically incorrect" and avoided by researchers or I just do not know what terms to use for search?
May 24, 2019 at 7:16 comment added Cameron Brick Great. I meant generally that the matrices don't correspond to anything in semantic or linguistic memory; they are themselves abstractions.
May 23, 2019 at 15:47 comment added Roman Susi This answer is reassuring. Any concrete pointer how IQ ranges correspond to levels of abstractions? Or do you mean levels of Raven's matrices roughly corresponds to abstraction levels?
May 23, 2019 at 14:39 history answered Cameron Brick CC BY-SA 4.0