TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Hm, interesting. Your comments about full screenshots with callouts are
well-taken. I like to think that I use those kinds, but it never hurts to
have a reminder of what really helps.
It seems we may differ on a more fundamental level: to user-monkey or not
user-monkey? :-) As you said, there is room for both approaches. I
certainly agree with that. You write that you prefer teaching users to be
self-directed. But for the situation I'm in at my company, I think of my
goal as supporting users who forget, or wonder, how to do something, or
what some function call is, or what some term means, or users who wonder
whether they *can* do something in our environment.
More generally, I guess my goal is to support the people who don't want, or
have, the time to become an expert in our product. And I think that even
experts will forget how to do things from time to time (they may just know *
what* *to look for* more quickly than a novice.)
I've never expressed it like that, and I"m not sure how I arrived at that
philosophy, but those words feel accurate to me. Thanks for helping me
formulate it :-)
To everyone else who is submitting research: keep it coming ...
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Porrello, Leonard
<lporrello -at- illumina -dot- com>wrote:
> Your theory is excellent, Ryan, and can probably be considered as part of
> the folklore of tech writing, but the research that I have seen doesn't
> bear out what your assertions. Instead, what the little research that has
> been done has found is that the only screen captures that notably help a
> user are those that are of a full screen AND which include call-outs.
> Otherwise, in timed performance, users of documentation with full screen
> captures (for the types of tasked being performed in the test--this is a
> big caveat) fared little better than users of documentation without screen
> captures. Users of documentation with only partial screen captures actually
> fared worse. Granted this and the additional cost that including screen
> captures adds in non-regulated environments, the argument from ROI for not
> including "too many" screen captures is pretty strong.
> Apart from the empirical research, there is the matter of better or worse
> theories. While the theory you present is compelling, I find John Carroll's
> minimalist theory much more compelling. The aim of Carroll's approach, in
> short, is to facilitate users in becoming self-directed learners.
> Having said all of that, I would argue that there is room for both
> approaches. If you don't mind the additional overhead of adding copious
> screen captures and only want user-monkeys who just follow the bread-crumbs
> through a procedure, then including lots of full-screen captures isn't a
> problem. If you want your users to become self-directed users, screen
> captures aren't generally necessary.
> PS, I seem to have misplaced the studies I had read several years ago.
> However, Steve Janoff is the one who shared them with me and he may still
> have them. As I recall, they were done by a PhD candidate in Sweden.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: techwr-l-bounces+lporrello=illumina -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com [mailto:
> techwr-l-bounces+lporrello=illumina -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf Of
> Ryan Pollack
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 7:31 AM
> To: Erika Yanovich
> Cc: Techwr-l
> Subject: Re: Screen captures
> As others have said, "it depends". Screenshots are like anything else
> (tables, bulleted lists, videos, paragraphs, etc); they are a tool you can
> use in order to bring about understanding in your readers. Here are some
> reasons why I find screenshots very useful:
> - Instead of "Select blah>>blah>>blah", a screenshot helps users follow
> a path visually instead of mentally translating steps into actions. This
> saves effort and time on their part.
> - The above goes doubly true if you have a dialog box with, say, 15
> options and the user has to act on one or two. Without a screenshot, the
> user has to spend a few seconds scanning the dialog box and trying to
> the option you wrote down, following the menu tree you set out as they
> With a screenshot, you can highlight the necessary option, saving them
> - People don't read; they skim. People's eyes go straight to
> screenshots, which can save a lot of reading time, thus getting the user
> back into the software quicker and helping them feel better about the
> - If a user is switching back & forth between the help and the software,
> a screenshot helps users keep their place in the column of text, so they
> can quickly return to the docs where they left off. It's much harder to
> find your place in a wall of text.
> - Screenshots generally add color to a document, making it more pleasing
> to the eye (if your UX person has done their job ;-)
> - Screenshots make the doc look less intimidating by breaking up, or
> obviating, large chunks of text. The less intimidating a doc looks, the
> more likely someone will be to read it, and the better they will feel
> it overall.
> Of course screenshots have drawbacks:
> - They generally take multiple steps to generate (open your software
> program, get it into a proper state for taking a relevant screenshot,
> screenshot, possibly annotate it, save it, insert into document, etc.
> - They are larger in size than text, which can affect storage space on
> disk, download times if you are doing online help, or file sizes if you
> delivering a PDF.
> - They are larger in dimension than a block of text, increasing
> scrolling in online help and page count if you are delivering a printed
> - They are not searchable, although if you are doing online help or
> adding captions, you can associate text w/screenshots in order to work
> around this. Keep in mind that not only can users not search, *you*
> -- which makes it harder to determine what portions of your
> need to change when a new feature comes around.
> - They are binary, so if you use a source code control system, changes
> to them cannot be merged or tracked.
> - They can be a pain for localization departments, who have to recreate
> your setup in order to translate the screenshot.
> As with anything else, these are all just my opinions. In many situations,
> I think the benefits of screenshots outweigh the drawbacks. I have topics
> in my help system that are literally just a title and a screenshot :-)
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Erika Yanovich <ERIKA_y -at- rad -dot- com> wrote:
> > Users like to be reassured they got to the right screen after passing
> > through several other ones. I don't give screen captures of the
> > passing-through ones where the user just clicks something to get to
> > another screen, just of the final screen, where the actual work is done.
> > Erika
Senior Technical Writer | Click Security
STC Vice President Nicky Bleiel is giving a free webinar on best practices
for creating mobile help.