Live-action Communication Design: A Technical How-To Video Case Study

Figures & data

Figure 1. A stylized image showing the design research process of the video.

Figure 2. A screen-shot from the antipredator fence instructional video, showing the fence-building instructor in action as he shows how a “parallelogram” is constructed. To the right, macroscaffolding (“Chapters”) in the form of text and graphics are visible.

Figure 3. A stylized image showing that the video’s content is structured in accordance with key themes and their associated communication ideals.

Table 1. Table shows video sequences’ content and the associated focus group’s feedback, and, in turn, how this relates to live-action affordances and possible design measures.

Description of Video Sequence/Actions	Summaries of Focus Group’s Feedback	Live-action Affordance	Design Measure
Workflow: Expert talks into the camera, describes how and in what order key actions should be executed.	No comment.
Fence Posts: Sequence shows expert and construction team fastening the posts. Expert and videographer talk about the reasons why a sturdy fence consists of straight lines. Expert gives team feedback on how to make them stand up straight. Sequence also shows ideal digging and refilling methods. Expert gives feedback on pole’s position in hole and the depth of the hole.	Key information with respect to sizes and distances is missing. Understands extent of force required. Understands how much time is required. Understands position of tool and workers. Inferred differences of refilling methods unclear. Yardstick used in action provides key information, but numbers on yardstick are small.	Comparability - No way of seeing/understanding distances and sizes, comparisons cannot be made. Visibility/Verifiability/Recordability - Clearly sees bodily effort and facial gestures that communicate exertion. Sees/hears how force gradually drives posts downwards, understands extent of workload. Visibility - Key materials and tools not clearly visible. Verifiability/Visibility/Recordability/Comparability - Yardstick provides approximate information about sizes and distances.	Reedit sequence. If possible, insert footage that shows distances and sizes more clearly. Explanatory cues and graphics may also be added.
Parallelogram: Expert describes what a “parallelogram” consists of. Expert also describes the placement of horizontal pole that connects vertical poles. Expert and assistant show how the vertical pole is connected using a chain saw. Expert secures pole with two nails. Expert fastens the parallel wire in the shape of a number eight, explains why this should be, and why it needs to be attached to the vertical poles. Expert inserts wire into Gripple and tightens wire by hand. Expert tightens the gripple with the Gripple Torq Wire Tensioning Tool and explains why it is used.	Expert fails to motivate in a coherent way why a parallelogram is needed. Impressed by the fact that the post is fastened in a nail-free fashion (nails only secure pole’s position), this is motivational. Do not see the “eight shape”, do not fully understand the reference to the “eight shape”. Uttering with explanatory sentence is unfinished. Understands how Gripple functions and understands how tension is regulated by the tensioning Tool. Understands how the Gripple fits into overall construction.	Verifiability/Visibility/Recordability – Key explanatory soundbites are missing in recorded video. Camera movement - a pan - visually reveals the posts’ and wire’s and the complete parallelogram’s inherent flexibility and strength. Comparability - Discrepancy between audio and video track - video shows shape, audio is inconsistent with this. Verifiability/Visibility - Lack of perspective/illusion of 3D in combination with relative smallness of wire render meaning of shape-metaphor unclear. Gripple’s interaction with wire is visible, wire’s increased tension is verified audiovisually. Comparability - Audio information can be compared with visual clues in video footage.	Reedit sequence. If possible, insert footage that includes introductory statements about the specific function of the parallelogram in the overall system. If possible, find footage that shows the “eight shape,” combine this with better explanatory audio. Locate and include close-up that displays wire. Explanatory cues and graphics may also be added.
Isolation: Expert explains the function of insulators and why certain insulators are better than others. Together with a fence construction member, the expert shows how and where (on the post) the insulator is placed.	Alternative, potentially valid methods are mentioned, but not explained, nor shown. Understands required workload and placement of insulators, but is not convinced of the superiority of the material chosen.	Comparability - Markings on insulator placement tool are visually comparable. Visibility/Verifiability/Recordability - Sees/hears how relatively little force is required to drive in nails.	Record and add sequence with other isolation materials that are of the how/why kind.
Power: Expert explains how electricity gets transmitted in all directions and how the predatory animal receives an electrical shock.	Keep it short, no need to expand on this topic. Electricity and circuits are key, but not in this video.		Shorten sequence to make it less redundant.
Connection/Support Materials: Expert explains why post support is required. Shows how one kind of post support is constructed with a chainsaw. Secures it with a nail. Expert shows how to tie two different wire knots. Explains why mere twisting will not suffice.	Does not fully understand how to tie one of the knots. Understands why they need to be tied that way. Does not see isolation in spite of what it is referenced to.	Comparability - Imperfect knot’s untying can be compared with expert’s explanation. Visibility/Verifiability/Recordability - Sees how imperfect knot gets untied. Sees stiffness of knot. Isolation has poor visibility. Camera fails to reveal complete sequence of knot-tying, initial bending sequence is not visible.	Locate and include close-ups that display the wire-tying procedure, insulators and conductors. Explanatory cues and graphics may be added.

Table 2. Summaries of fence construction teams’ feedback from the in-field try-out, some of which relate to specific video sequences. In the table, this is in turn related to certain live-action affordances and possible design measures.

Summaries of Feedback of Fence Construction Team 1 (General and sequence specific)	Summaries of Feedback of Fence Construction Team 2 (General and sequence specific)	Live-action Affordance	Design Measure
General comments: Overall video was helpful. Mostly easy to copy procedures, easy to follow, video is well-structured, but difficult to revisit parts of sequences - do not know how far along video has played. Rewind function works poorly in the field. Materials and tools are clearly shown. Bad weather (in video) is discouraging. Video does not include methods that pertain to construction of fence at waterways and ditches. Choice of materials imply that video is probably geared toward sheep owners, as opposed to cattle owners. Understands necessity of careful execution for the fence to last. Watching on a bigger screen (bigger than a normal smartphone) works best. Expert talks too much at times.	General comments: Video is useful, it is well-structured, but probably works better for novices. Video’s instructional content is too circumscribed, (our) previous knowledge not fully acknowledged. Some techniques are completely new for us and require more thorough instructions. In general, there is too much talk, too little doing and showing. One chapter heading/rubric (graphics) includes a spelling error. Video does not include methods that pertain to making fences work properly in snowy/icy conditions – which it should. Ideal thickness of wire is not communicated.	Visibility - Some actions and materials are visible, while others are not. Verifiability - Degree of force, exertion, complexity and materials’ ontological dimensions can be verified audiovisually. Comparability/Verifiability - Interplay between visual and audio stimuli makes certain comparisons possible. Previously known methods, sizes and dimensions can be compared with new ones and, therefore, verified. Others cannot. Recordability - Some unwanted phenomenon/elements (such as bad weather, unwarranted silence or odd utterings) become prominent.	Re-edit sequences or re-shoot material that does not exist in the original recordings. Add visual cues and explanatory graphics. Add graphics that allow for greater user interactivity that permits revisits and status of procedural content.
Subsidy: No comment.	Subsidy: Government official in the video (in the “subsidy sequence”) is no longer a government official, but works elsewhere now.
Parallelogram: Shape of wire in parallelogram is unclear, requires multiple re-screenings.	Parallelogram: Safety concerns when handling-chain saw are not touched upon	Verifiability/Visibility - Lack of perspective/illusion of 3-D in combination with relative smallness of wire render meaning of shape-metaphor unclear. Verifiability/Comparability - Preconceptions about safe chainsaw handling are inconsistent with actions portrayed in the video.	Reedit sequence. If possible, insert footage that shows the “eight shape” more clearly.
Isolation: No specific feedback	Isolation: Placement of insulators reveals ideal position of wire - but the sequence is not about the wires, which is confusing.	Comparability/Visibility/Verifiability - Placement of insulator provides critical information about other materials that are not visible.	Add graphics and/or explanatory audio that are consistent with video footage.
Power: Perhaps needs to be discussed/shown in a separate video. Topic too complex.	Power: What about safety distances to power lines?	Visibility/Verifiability -Video does not show and/or address ideal distance to power lines.	Insert footage showing ideal distance, add explanatory graphics.
Connection/Support Materials: Gallagher-knot difficult to discern (on a smartphone). No idea tying, as very strenuous (and suitable only for very strong hands), this is not communicated. Sequence requires several re-screenings to be fully grasped.	Connection/Support Materials: We are still unsure of position of wire, inside or outside of posts? How does the wire’s thickness influence overall quality of fence? Includes several novel expressions that are not explained. Cannot see lower part of “stötta”(support) - sequence lacks adequate information.	Visibility - Knot tying has poor visibility. Visibility/Verifiability/Recordability - Video footage cannot show what is beyond visual obstructions.	Locate and include close-ups that display the wire-tying procedure. Locate and include footage that shows how the “stötta” (support) is formed before it is put into the ground. Add graphics that explain/translate novel expressions.
Welded Sheep Fence Method Sequence: No specific comments (not applicable method for team).	Welded Sheep Fence Method Sequence: Thinks Gripple method insufficient - decided not to follow instruction. Instruction lacks information about electrical wire’s insulation that would prevent it discharging into sheep fence.	Comparability/Verifiability - audiovisual communication is not relatable to users’ preunderstandings about electrified sheep fences.	Briefly, expand on alternative methods for stretching a sheep-fence. Locate and insert footage that communicates isolation-methods.

Figure 4. Figure shows the YouTube analytics’ viewers’ relative attention graph. The figure consists of a screen-shot from the YouTube analytics page (in Swedish) and, below, added stills from some of the video’s sequences.