A comparison of usability evaluation methods for evaluating e-commerce websites

The importance of evaluating the usability of e-commerce websites is well recognised. User testing and heuristic evaluation methods are commonly used to evaluate the usability of such sites, but just how effective are these for identifying specific problems? This article describes an evaluation of these methods by comparing the number, severity and type of usability problems identified by each one. The cost of employing these methods is also considered. The findings highlight the number and severity level of 44 specific usability problem areas which were uniquely identified by either user testing or heuristic evaluation methods, common problems that were identified by both methods, and problems that were missed by each method. The results show that user testing uniquely identified major problems related to four specific areas and minor problems related to one area. Conversely, the heuristic evaluation uniquely identified minor problems in eight specific areas and major problems in three areas.     

Usability Principles for Augmented Reality Applications in a Smartphone Environment

Through the rapid spread of smartphones, users have access to many types of applications similar to those on desktop computer systems. Smartphone applications using augmented reality (AR) technology make use of users' location information. As AR applications will require new evaluation methods, improved usability and user convenience should be developed. The purpose of the current study is to develop usability principles for the development and evaluation of smartphone applications using AR technology. We develop usability principles for smartphone AR applications by analyzing existing research about heuristic evaluation methods, design principles for AR systems, guidelines for handheld mobile device interfaces, and usability principles for the tangible user interface. We conducted a heuristic evaluation for three popularly used smartphone AR applications to identify usability problems. We suggested new design guidelines to solve the identified problems. Then, we developed an improved AR application prototype of an Android-based smartphone, which later was conducted a usability testing to validate the effects of usability principles.     

Tracking the effectiveness of usability evaluation methods

. We present a case study that tracks usability problems predicted with six usability evaluation methods (claims analysis, cognitive walkthrough, GOMS, heuristic evaluation, user action notation, and simply reading the specification) through a development process. We assess the method's predictive power by comparing the predictions to the results of user tests. We assess the method's persuasive power by seeing how many problems led to changes in the implemented code. We assess design-change effectiveness by user testing the resulting new versions of the system. We concludethatpredictivemethodsarenot as effective as the HCI field would like and discuss directions for future research.     

Tracking the effectiveness of usability evaluation methods

Abstract

We present a case study that tracks usability problems predicted with six usability evaluation methods (claims analysis, cognitive walkthrough, GOMS, heuristic evaluation, user action notation, and simply reading the specification) through a development process. We assess the method's predictive power by comparing the predictions to the results of user tests. We assess the method's persuasive power by seeing how many problems led to changes in the implemented code. We assess design-change effectiveness by user testing the resulting new versions of the system. We concludethatpredictivemethodsarenot as effective as the HCI field would like and discuss directions for future research.     

Heuristic evaluation: Comparing ways of finding and reporting usability problems

Research on heuristic evaluation in recent years has focused on improving its effectiveness and efficiency with respect to user testing. The aim of this paper is to refine a research agenda for comparing and contrasting evaluation methods. To reach this goal, a framework is presented to evaluate the effectiveness of different types of support for structured usability problem reporting. This paper reports on an empirical study of this framework that compares two sets of heuristics, Nielsen’s heuristics and the cognitive principles of Gerhardt-Powals, and two media of reporting a usability problem, i.e. either using a web tool or paper. The study found that there were no significant differences between any of the four groups in effectiveness, efficiency and inter-evaluator reliability. A more significant contribution of this research is that the framework used for the experiments proved successful and should be reusable by other researchers because of its thorough structure.     

Understanding usability issues addressed by three user-system interface evaluation techniques

Three structured judgment evaluation techniques were applied to a system with a graphical direct manipulation style interface, to understand the types of usability problems they address. These evaluation techniques were cognitive walkthrough, heuristic evaluation, and the Smith and Mosier (1986) guidelines. The authors wanted to learn whether the techniques identify problems: across all stages of user activity, which noticeably affect users' performance with the system, and which are important to the usability of direct manipulation-style systems. Results showed that the cognitive walkthrough method identifies issues almost exclusively within the action specification stage, while guidelines covered more stages. The walkthrough was best, however, and the guidelines worst at predicting problems that cause users noticeable difficulty (as observed during a usability study). All the techniques could be improved in assessing semantic distance and addressing all stages on the evaluation side of the HCI activity cycle. To evaluate the directness of engagements, improved or new techniques are needed.     

Interface-usability evaluation: science of trade-offs

The effectiveness of four techniques in evaluating the usability of a graphical user interface is presented. The techniques are heuristic evaluation, usability testing, guidelines, and cognitive walkthrough. The techniques are compared as to the number, type, and severity of the problems each could identify for a specific product.<>     

Skills,rules and knowledge in aircraft maintenance: errors in context

Automatic or skill-based behaviour is generally considered to be less prone to error than behaviour directed by conscious control. However, researchers who have applied Rasmussen's skill-rule-knowledge human error framework to accidents and incidents have sometimes found that skill-based errors appear in significant numbers. It is proposed that this is largely a reflection of the opportunities for error which workplaces present and does not indicate that skill-based behaviour is intrinsically unreliable. In the current study, 99 errors reported by 72 aircraft mechanics were examined in the light of a task analysis based on observations of the work of 25 aircraft mechanics. The task analysis identified the opportunities for error presented at various stages of maintenance work packages and by the job as a whole. Once the frequency of each error type was normalized in terms of the opportunities for error, it became apparent that skill-based performance is more reliable than rule-based performance, which is in turn more reliable than knowledge-based performance. The results reinforce the belief that industrial safety interventions designed to reduce errors would best be directed at those aspects of jobs that involve rule- and knowledge-based performance.     

Skills,rules and knowledge in aircraft maintenance: errors in context

Automatic or skill-based behaviour is generally considered to be less prone to error than behaviour directed by conscious control. However, researchers who have applied Rasmussen's skill-rule-knowledge human error framework to accidents and incidents have sometimes found that skill-based errors appear in significant numbers. It is proposed that this is largely a reflection of the opportunities for error which workplaces present and does not indicate that skill-based behaviour is intrinsically unreliable. In the current study, 99 errors reported by 72 aircraft mechanics were examined in the light of a task analysis based on observations of the work of 25 aircraft mechanics. The task analysis identified the opportunities for error presented at various stages of maintenance work packages and by the job as a whole. Once the frequency of each error type was normalized in terms of the opportunities for error, it became apparent that skill-based performance is more reliable than rule-based performance, which is in turn more reliable than knowledge-based performance. The results reinforce the belief that industrial safety interventions designed to reduce errors would best be directed at those aspects of jobs that involve rule- and knowledge-based performance.     

Evaluation of e-commerce websites accessibility and usability: an e-commerce platform analysis with the inclusion of blind users

Considering the importance associated with e-commerce website accessibility and usability, a study on one of the most relevant Portuguese e-commerce websites has been performed using both automatic and manual assessment procedures. In an initial stage, we evaluated the chosen website with a Web accessibility and usability automatic tool called SortSite; after that, we performed a manual evaluation to verify each previously detected error and present possible solutions to overcome those faults. In a third phase, three usability specialists have been used to perform a heuristic evaluation of the chosen website. Finally, user tests with blind people were carried out in order to fully assess the compliance with accessibility and usability guidelines and standards. The results showed that the platform had a good score regarding the automatic evaluation; however, when the heuristic and manual evaluations were performed, some accessibility and usability problems were discovered. Moreover, the user test results showed bad marks regarding efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction by the group of participants. As a conclusion, we highlight user interaction problems and propose seven recommendations focused on enhancing accessibility and usability of not only the evaluated e-commerce website, but also of other similar ones.     

A Usability Checklist for the Usability Evaluation of Mobile Phone User Interface

In the last decade, the research of the usability of mobile phones has been a newly evolving area with few established methodologies and realistic practices that ensure capturing usability in evaluation. Thus, there exists growing demand to explore appropriate evaluation methodologies that evaluate the usability of mobile phones quickly as well as comprehensively. This study aims to develop a task-based usability checklist based on heuristic evaluations in views of mobile phone user interface (UI) practitioners. A hierarchical structure of UI design elements and usability principles related to mobile phones were developed and then utilized to develop the checklist. To demonstrate the practical effectiveness of the proposed checklist, comparative experiments were conducted on the usability checklist and usability testing. The majority of usability problems found by usability testing and additional problems were discovered by the proposed checklist. It is expected that the usability checklist proposed in this study could be used quickly and efficiently by usability practitioners to evaluate the mobile phone UI in the middle of the mobile phone development process.     

Developing SMASH: A set of SMArtphone's uSability Heuristics

The smartphone market is nowadays highly competitive. When buying a new device, users focus on visual esthetics, ergonomics, performance, and user experience, among others. Assessing usability issues allows improving these aspects. One popular method for detecting usability problems is heuristic evaluation, in which evaluators employ a set of usability heuristics as guide. Using proper heuristics is highly relevant. In this paper we present SMASH, a set of 12 usability heuristics for smartphones and mobile applications, developed iteratively. SMASH (previously named TMD: Usability heuristics for Touchscreen-based Mobile Devices) was experimentally validated. The results support its utility and effectiveness.     

Comparison of evaluation methods using structured usability problem reports

. Recent HCI research has produced analytic evaluation techniques which claim to predict potential usability problems for an interactive system.Validation of these methods has involved matching predicted problems against usability problems found during empirical user testing. This paper shows that the matching of predicted and actual problems requires careful attention, and that current approaches lack rigour or generality. Requirements for more rigorous and general matching procedures are presented. A solution to one key requirement is presented: a new report structure for usability problems.It is designed to improve the quality of matches made between usability problems found during empirical user testing and problems predicted by analytic methods. The use of this report format is placed within its design research context, an ongoing project on domain-specific methods for software visualizations.     

一种可行的可用性测试过程

文章综述用户模型法、用户调查法、专家评审法和观察法4类可用性测试方法,根据可用性测试的经验,总结出一套合理实用的可用性测试过程,使得可用性测试的效率高、代价低,尽可能发现更多的可用性问题;提出在程序设计类课程的教学中,应适当向学生介绍可用性测试的方法和过程,以培养学生对自己开发的软件系统进行可用性测试的能力。     

Determining the effectiveness of the usability problem inspector: a theory-based model and tool for finding usability problems

Despite the increased focus on usability and on the processes and methods used to increase usability, a substantial amount of software is unusable and poorly designed. Much of this is attributable to the lack of cost-effective usability evaluation tools that provide an interaction-based framework for identifying problems. We developed the user action framework and a corresponding evaluation tool, the usability problem inspector (UPI), to help organize usability concepts and issues into a knowledge base. We conducted a comprehensive comparison study to determine if our theory-based framework and tool could be effectively used to find important usability problems in an interface design, relative to two other established inspection methods (heuristic evaluation and cognitive walkthrough). Results showed that the UPI scored higher than heuristic evaluation in terms of thoroughness, validity, and effectiveness and was consistent with cognitive walkthrough for these same measures. We also discuss other potential advantages of the UPI over heuristic evaluation and cognitive walkthrough when applied in practice. Potential applications of this work include a cost-effective alternative or supplement to lab-based formative usability evaluation during any stage of development.     

Perspective-based Usability Inspection: An Empirical Validation of Efficacy

Inspection is a fundamental means of achieving software usability. Past research showed that the current usability inspection techniques were rather ineffective. We developed perspective-based usability inspection, which divides the large variety of usability issues along different perspectives and focuses each inspection session on one perspective. We conducted a controlled experiment to study its effectiveness, using a post-test only control group experimental design, with 24 professionals as subjects. The control group used heuristic evaluation, which is the most popular technique for usability inspection. The experimental design and the results are presented, which show that inspectors applying perspective-based inspection not only found more usability problems related to their assigned perspectives, but also found more overall problems. Perspective-based inspection was shown to be more effective for the aggregated results of multiple inspectors, finding about 30% more usability problems for 3 inspectors. A management implication of this study is that assigning inspectors more specific responsibilities leads to higher performance. Internal and external threats to validity are discussed to help better interpret the results and to guide future empirical studies.     

Comparison of evaluation methods using structured usability problem reports

Abstract

Recent HCI research has produced analytic evaluation techniques which claim to predict potential usability problems for an interactive system.Validation of these methods has involved matching predicted problems against usability problems found during empirical user testing. This paper shows that the matching of predicted and actual problems requires careful attention, and that current approaches lack rigour or generality. Requirements for more rigorous and general matching procedures are presented. A solution to one key requirement is presented: a new report structure for usability problems.It is designed to improve the quality of matches made between usability problems found during empirical user testing and problems predicted by analytic methods. The use of this report format is placed within its design research context, an ongoing project on domain-specific methods for software visualizations.     

Model mismatch analysis: towards a deeper explanation of users' usability problems

An evaluation method is proposed based on walkthrough analysis coupled with a taxonomic analysis of observed problems and causes of usability error. The model mismatch method identifies usability design flaws and missing requirements from user errors. The method is tested with a comparative evaluation of two information retrieval products. Different profiles of usability and requirements problems were found for the two products, even though their overall performance was similar.     

Internationalization and localization: evaluating and testing a Website for Asian users

The objective of this study was to combine internationalization and localization of Websites and improvement of Website usability with user-centred design methods. This study designed for internationalization and localization of Websites for Asian users, and implemented usability engineering into every phase of Website usability testing, based on the internationalization and localization perspectives of the honeywell.com/your home Website. The first step was to develop the usage scenarios. Three Asian usability specialists carried out one heuristic evaluation session for the current honeywell.com/your home Website. The usability problems were analysed and possible solutions to these problems were discussed. In the next phase, cluster analysis was utilized to test current information architecture. The results provided options for future information architecture development for this Website. Finally, a performance measurement test was conducted to investigate the performance for Asian users. Based on the results, suggestions for improving the Website usability from the localization perspective were provided. The results demonstrate the user-centred design (UCD) approach and stress international and local issues in Website development to Website designers.