Cited by 152Health Policy Implementation ScienceUsability and User Interface DesignInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Leveraging human-centered design to implement modern psychological science: Return on an early investment.

Open access
Lyon, Aaron R., Brewer, Stephanie K., Areán, Patricia A.·2020·American Psychologist

Abstract

Although classic models of implementation emphasized the importance of innovation characteristics in their adoption and sustained use, contemporary implementation research and practice have deprioritized these variables. Human-centered design (HCD) is an approach that grounds product development in information collected about the people and settings that will ultimately use those products. HCD has strong roots in psychological theory, but its application is typically limited to the development of digital technologies. HCD is rarely applied to the design of psychosocial innovations-including both service-recipient-facing interventions and implementation strategies-within the applied psychological disciplines. The current article reviews the psychological origins of HCD and details pathways through which HCD theories and methods can be leveraged to advance the "core tasks" of contemporary implementation research and practice in psychology. These include (a) identification of multilevel implementation determinants through specification of user needs and contexts; (b) tailoring of implementation strategies, such as contextually driven intervention redesign; and (c) evaluating implementation mechanisms and outcomes, including disentangling how the core HCD focus on usability relates to closely associated implementation variables such as acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness. Collectively, these applications provide directions through which to leverage the mature field of HCD, maximize psychology's return on its early theoretical investment, and promote the large-scale impact of findings from across the applied fields of psychology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/amp0000652

Cites

84 of 84 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The project's approach was grounded in HCD, an iterative approach to problem solving in which stakeholders are involved in all steps.

    “The project’s approach was grounded in HCD, an iterative approach to problem solving in which stakeholders are involved in all steps, from problem identification through prototype testing and evaluation (7, 8).”
  • The authors used human-centered design methods across multiple internal medicine residency programs to create and iteratively prototype a structured ICU-to-ward transfer tool embedded within the EHR.

    “Accordingly, we used human-centered design methods across multiple internal medicine residency programs to create and iteratively prototype a structured ICU-to-ward transfer tool embedded within the electronic health record (EHR) [11].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Cooper A, Reimann R, & Cronin D (2007). About Face 3: The essentials of interaction design (3rd edition). Indianapolis, IN: Wiley.
  2. Lund A (2001). Measuring usability with the USE questionnaire. Usability Interface, 8(2), 3– 6.
  3. Lyon AR, Coifman J, Cook H, Liu F, Ludwig K, Dorsey S, … McCauley E (2018, 12 3). The Cognitive Walk-through for Implementation Strategies (CWIS): A pragmatic methodology for assessing strategy usability. Presented at the 11th Annual Conference on the Science of Dissemination and Implementation, Washington D.C.
  4. Rogers EM (2010). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
  5. Rogers EM (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press of Glencoe.
  6. Shneiderman B (1980). Software psychology. Winthrop, Cambridge, Mass, 48, 161– 172.
  7. Turns J, Borgford-Parnell J, & Ferro T (2015). Exploring the usefulness of personas in engineering education. 6th Research in Engineering Edu. Symposium, Dublin, Ireland.
  8. Wensing M, & Grol R (2005). Characteristics of successful interventions In Grol R, Wensing M, & Eccles MP (Eds.), Improving patient care: The implementation of change in clinical practice (pp. 60– 70). Edinburgh, UK: Elsevier/Butterworth Heinemann.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lyon, A. R., Brewer, S. K., & Areán, P. A.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Venue
American Psychologist
Published
2020-11
Volume
75
Issue
8
Pages
1067-1079
ISSN
  • 0003-066X (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-990X
OpenAlex
W3110183584
Cited by
152
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 3
FWCI
17.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Psychologist (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R34MH109605, P50MH115837)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
human-centered design, implementation research, implementation strategies, psychosocial interventions, user needs, usability, implementation factors, implementation mechanisms, acceptability, feasibility, appropriateness, applied psychology
MeSH terms
Implementation Science, Humans, Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review