Trying to understand what the authors meant by ‘interface transparency’, led me to reading around this term in publications on UX. My very quick take…
- It seems that the idea of the only good interface being a transparent interface took hold within the design world, as the opinion of designers (?) A quote from Norman (1990) on this ideal: “The real problem with the interface is that it is an interface. Interfaces get in the way. I don’t want to focus my energies on an interface. I want to focus on the job“.
- More nuanced thought by designers recognise that a transparent interface is unlikely to always be the best option and the degree of transparency can vary (it’s not just transparent or opaque, there are degrees in between).
My example of transparent and opaque interfaces:
I think in days past, when a student studied a programme, the transparent interface left the student with very little knowledge of the underlying mechanism; they simply had to follow the timetable, take the exams and leave (“…focus on the job”) This interface between student and academy was transparent; ‘easy’ for the student but leaving them in quite a weak position as the institution, and perhaps learning itself, is presented as a blackbox. Of course, the student may have preferred this as it simply allowed them to study the subject without any ‘distractions’, but it’s worth remembering that this was chosen for them without consultation and may not have been done for their benefit.
Now the student has a great deal more shared with them at every level, in fact they are invited to take an active role in the process. We probably would not think they should be protected from the details of the programme, in fact they benefit as a student by being an active participant. This interface between student and the institution is opaque; it is ‘tougher’ for the student as they are brought face to face with detail with which they may not wish to engage, with but makes them potentially stronger, as they are able to deal with issues since they can begin to understand why things are as they are.
I suspect that it’s tempting to know what is best for users and that’s to keep details hidden and not to frighten them. This is an issue if any hint that users are not constantly delighted might be felt to reflect badly on the service providers. Hence the conflict between designing what users want and what users need, not to mention who decides the success of a design if it’s based on user satisfaction measured in how easy it was to use (see Week 1).
references
Carvalho, L. and Goodyear, P. (2018) ‘Design, learning networks and service innovation’, Design Studies. (Design Processes in Service Innovation), 55, pp. 27–53.
Norman, D. (1990b). ‘Why interfaces don’t work’. In: Laurel, B. (ed) The Art of Human-Computer Interface Design. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, p. 210.
