Analysis and critique to the Semiotic Inspection Method (de Souza, 2006). Final presentation for INFO 502 "Human-Centered Research Methods" class at Indiana University, Bloomington. PhD in Informatics. Prof. John Paolillo. Spring, 2013. By Omar Sosa Tzec. Tzek, Tzek Design. HCI PhD.

1. The Semiotic
Inspection Method
Overview, Analysis and Critique
By Omar Sosa Tzec
info 502
Human-Centered Research Methods
Prof. John Paolillo
PhD in Informatics
Spring 2013

2. analyzed work
• de Souza, C., Leitão, C., Prates, R., da Silva, E. (2006)
The Semiotic Inspection Method
• de Souza, C., Leitão, C., Prates, R., Bim, S., da Silva, E. (2010)
Can inspection methods generate valid new knowledge in HCI? The case of
semiotic inspection
• Peixoto, D., Prates, R., Resende, R. (2010)
Semiotic Inspection Method in the Context of Educational Simulation Games

3. “In HCI the purpose of theory-based evaluation
methods is to assess the quality of the interfaces
and the interaction in the light of a given
perspective on human-computer interaction.”
de Souza, C., Leitão, C., Prates, R., da Silva, E. (2006)

4. Semiotic Engineering
theory evaluation
Message Semiotic Inspection
Method (SIM)
Signs
Communicability
Metacommunication Evaluation Method (CEM)
Communicability
Communication
breakdowns

5. d Interface u

6. signs
d Interface u

7. “Unlike cognitive theories, which have tended to
follow a generalization path, semiotic engineering
views human-computer interaction as a set of
unique and contingent instances of
metacommunication from designer-to-user”
de Souza, C., Leitão, C., Prates, R., da Silva, E. (2006)

8. meta-communication
d Interface u

9. “Evaluators using semiotic engineering methods
are the ‘producers’ (and reporters) of knowledge
referring to unique cases of HCI... Semiotic
engineering evaluation methods are qualitative
and interpretative.”
de Souza, C., Leitão, C., Prates, R., da Silva, E. (2006)

10. the metacommunication template
“Here is my [the designer’s] understanding of who
you [users] are, what I’ve learned you want or need
to do, in which preferred ways, and why. This is the
system that I have therefore designed for you, and
this is the way you can or should use it in order to
fulfill a range of purposes that fall within this view.”
de Souza, C., Leitão, C., Prates, R., da Silva, E. (2006)

11. signs
Interface u
signs
Documentation

12. semiotic engineering sign classes
1. Static signs
2.Dynamic signs
3.Metalinguistic signs
de Souza, C., Leitão, C., Prates, R., Bim, S., da Silva, E. (2010)

13. steps of the semiotic inspection method
de Souza, C., Leitão, C., Prates, R., Bim, S., da Silva, E. (2010)

14. case 1: analysis of feedback on simple css editor
de Souza, C., Leitão,
C., Prates, R., Bim,
S., da Silva, E. (2010)
Fuente: http://cloud.addictivetips.com/wp-content/uploads/
2010/11/Simple-CSS.png

15. case 1: validation
Exogenous
Sources Google
SCSS
Groups
Endogenous
sim
Sources
Google Groups
Help Forum
sim triangulation

16. case 1: results
• “It’s important to evoke the perceptible qualities that a configurable
object may acquire. These perceptible qualities are effectively signified by
‘iconic’ signs, that is, signs that bring up the firstness of their referent.”
•“The systematic association between parameter values and prototype
object qualities [...] is a sign of secondness. [...] The user become skilled in
anticipating the correct effects of using conventional symbols.”
•“Once they dominate the symbolic representations that must be used to
achieve their specific configuration goals, uses can be said to have learned
a conventional configuration language, an unmistakable sign of
thirdness.”

17. case 2: analysis of feedback on simse game
Peixoto, D., Prates,
R., Resende, R.
(2010)
Fuente: http://cloud.addictivetips.com/wp-content/uploads/
2010/11/Simple-CSS.png

18. case 2: validation
SimSE Endogenous
Sources
sim triangulation

19. case 2: results
•It was found that “the consistent use of icons, indices, and symbols
that refer to the same feedback (redundancy) may improve the designer
metacommunication.
•This study reaffirms the “importance of the perceptible change of the
iconic representation of the elements after changing of their attributes
[in the game].”
•It’s important to take in count the “correct visual effect of the indices
[in the game].”
•It’s also important to take in count “an explicit and consistent symbolic
representation of partial results and strategies used to calculate them
[in the game] could improve the feedback [from the game].”

20. analysis
1. SIM vs. cognitive approaches
2. Consistency/relevance of the triad icon-index-symbol
3. Human-centered research method for HCI
4. Contribution to development of design competences*
5. Expansion on design/evaluation of GUI
* Nelson & Stolterman, 2012

21. limitations (based on analyzed work)
1. Possible theoretical barrier
2. Expertise vs. development of researcher’s repertoire*
3. Resources
4. Validation through “triangulation” as a factor of error
5. Adaptation to other styles of interaction
* Schön, 1987

22. integration/expansion
sim Communication in the context of
designers and technical communicators
Metalinguistic Content
Signs Analysis

23. integration/expansion
HCI, Design, and the everyday life and
sim decision-making
Dynamic Observation/
Signs Ethnomethodology

24. integration/expansion
Dynamic
Signs
sim observation
Static
Signs
Styles of interaction beyond the GUI

25. Thank you!
omarsosa@indiana.edu