Usability - Science topic

I want to read the research because I am a master student and the teacher asked me to look for research, translate it and read it only

Gibran Ahmed ......Gibran, .....There’s information available on the web as shown below

1)__ A ResearchGate article by by Chin-CVhao Lin 2013 “Exploring the relationship between technology acceptance model and usability test”

2)__¸The Unified System Usability Technology

Acceptance Model (USUTAM) — A users’ acceptance and perceived usability evaluation

model for information systems by Linda de Jonge Testroote

3)__ This is Google Scholar and found at :

Type your question into the search, “Combining TAM / UTAUT with Usability Metrics in Research”.

You’ll receive many results.

4)__ An article from the Journal of Human Factors related usability testing of a health care application

No I don't.

I'm so sorry.

Hi Egon. I would agree with you if you take the whole context into consideration. Then, yes, PEOU and Usability can also be seen as what the user experience is (UX) is like. However, UX, PEOU and usability could also have bad outcomes, or side affects. For example in relation to TAM, the experience might be good and the software might be easy to use but they might not want to use it as they don't perceive it useful.

Dear Marco,

further methods that come to mind which are used in HCI research are Contextual Inquiry and the Think Aloud method:

Best,

Marius

Hello Subhankar Banerjee

There is actually a journal called "Journal of Usability Studies".

Other journals that might be useful:

Applied Ergonomics

Ergonomics in Design

I am sorry that I am also offering a rather critical comment concerning the project itself instead of recommending the tools you asked for.

Heart rate will vary with the degree of arousal, but emotion space is three-dimensional. Therefore, you will fail in distinguishing between emotions that vary on the other dimensions, especially between good and bad emotions. What is more, the emotions need to be fairly extreme to show up in the heartrate. A high heartrate can occur with joy or with fear, and a low heartrate can appear with sadness as well as with silent contentedness, as we all know from experience.

Ever since the idea of emotional computing has come up, people have tried to infer emotions from physiological or behavioural parameters (e.g. facial expressions) or both. No viable solution has ever been demonstrated in all these years, even if skin conductance, respiration or whatever has been included in the measurements. So better forget the whole idea.

Thanks for your answers!

I concur. Other than Youtube reviews of the software used to create 360 videos I don't know of any studies. My suggestion would be to use the alt version of Google called Google Scholar and look for media studies on the subject. In my experience in editing 360 / VR video I find a its a popular idea that continues to be rejected by the users. Mostly because its effects tend to distract from story telling. Our group has interest in AR video unless we simplify the effect we encounter the same results.

I'm from "back-in-the-day too.

One resource that has a list of topics that range from old to new ideas to the is :

Nielsen Norman Group web site...

I do agree with the previous comment, you will need to complete the additional tests listed to confirm the reliability of the survey. It could impact your data results, whereby it could be incorrect. Jurek Kirakowski gave a thorough response. Good luck with your research.

Interesting topic.

When the effect is negative, it indicates that the higher the moderator level the affected relationships are reduced in magnitude.

I would recommend taking a look into latency and cybersickness... It may be a good starting point.

Factors:

1. Differences in the central laws and rules as compared to local/regional regulations and their interpretations.

2. Regional language / habits / prejudices differences as compared to the rest of the country.

3. Level on the regional population literacy as compared to the rest of the country.

4. Service cost, network computers and IT professional equipment/hardware/software differences as compared to rest of the country.

Not a validated one commonly used per se. Depends on what you are looking for. Most will be from first-person and not reflective on other users. Maybe use SUS, but ask from other user's perspective. Would focus more on qualitative user feedback myself.

Passphrase guessing is exponentially higher than that of passwords.

Passphrase generally longer for added security. Most of humans are bad at creating randomness, and face difficulties at remembering things, so they prefer easy words. This kinds of password would be attacked easily by the hackers. Finally, "Security at the expense of usability comes at the expense of security".

Lewis, why are you bringing up these devices without knowing anything about what the device is they are evaluating? She is asking about the methods for usability evaluation.

Natalie, look at some of the literature regarding Human Factors at

https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/human-factors-and-medical-devices/human-factors-considerations.

Also some recognized standards such as IEC 62366.

There are also some dedicated service providers with expertise in usability engineering standards that might have free white papers.

I would let the teachers have a test run and then interview them afterwards about their pedagogical views. I see no real need for a CW with the teachers. I would include them in the test with children though. They will be of great help in verbalizing issues that the kids cannot identify themselves and they know the children and are expert about children’s behavior. Ideally you’d let the teachers play fist so they know the interface. My2Cents

I think Hadoop for sure due to the reason that it has a vast and robust ecosystem for handling Big Data.

Paul Louangrath . Although I never meant to, I sincerely apologize if me using the term 'Intellectually disabled' offended anyone. I have been working on this project for over 4 months now and everywhere, it was mentioned that 'Intellectually disabled' is the most polite term to use. In fact most of them mentioned that 'Mentally retarded' or 'Mentally disabled' have become derogatory and obsolete and hence must be avoided.

However, my question here was not concerning the use of the term, rather how can I help my experimentees understand my questions better and get reliable answers from them using a Pretest training. So if you could help me in this part, I would be really grateful.

Also, what pattern is better suitable? Fill in type like the very first question, or a straight forward question. or statements to respond on a 5 point scale or 7 point scale to.

I think this should be of interest:

Also, you can look into the Cognitive Dimensions framework:

The oriinal article:

A special issue of the Journal of Visual Languages & Computing on ten years of Cognitive Dimensions:

Ok Sir.

Hello Samaa,

I've previous experience creating apps for autism. I'm interested to know about your research. Please send me a private message.

Dear Ms. Janki Dodiya,

There are a few usability metrics methods that can be used to help map not only users' mental model, but also to understand the relation between users' expectations and affordances. I often like to use Think-aloud Protocol for digital experiences and Task-Flow observation for physical experiences.

Hope these are useful. Let me know if you would like to discuss further about the subject.

All the best,

Adriano Renzi

I use an opensource solution from many years and it works perfectly: oholist

you need to have a trusted SMTP server. I have an account at AWS Amazon and I can send up to 60K messages per day

hope this can help you. bests

I believe your approach has been quite appropriate and extensive, considering how this is usually done.

The ultimate evidence of the effectiveness of guidelines is their successful application by practitioners. However this application is often ill defined. Who do you envision to be using your guidelines, and how do they go about it in practice. If you know this, you can set up an experiment simulating this practice and check whether your guidelines lead to an improvement. This is a lot easier if the intended use is heuristic evaluation than if the intended use is design. So many things influence design that is merely impossible to establish the positive impact of a certain set of design guidelines.

An alternative, as you suggest, is to compare your guidelines to generic criteria for guidelines such as understandability, comprehensiveness etc. I would say guidelines need to be decisive (thus help to distinguish good from bad alternatives), specific (it should be very clear what they apply to and what not), practical (it should be easy to apply the guidelines) and robust (they should be based on the best evidence available). These are properties that can be evaluated by experts from practice or academia, and thus form the basis for a heuristic evaluation of your heuristics.

For each of these approaches, I think the most important thing is to have a clear idea of your users of the guidelines whether they are designers or evaluators and a model of their practices.

Thank you Very much for useful information. The KEYWORDS saved a lot of my time.

Furthermore, I have decided to write separate chapters, one for The Systematic Literature Review and the other for Prototype Evaluation,

You can try UI Automator

Hi Abhijai,

we've conducted quite some studies related to motorcycle HMIs at our institue (WIVW). As Patrick stated, your measures depend on your specific use case, research question etc. Some studies related to secondary task engagement and HMI have been conducted on our motorcycle riding simulator. Maybe these studies could help:

You should find both studies here on research gate.

Best regards, Sebastian

Dear Mohammad Salah,

Please look into some of these sources which may be useful to you.

Heuristic Evaluation on Mobile Interfaces: A New Checklist

Rosa Yáñez Gómez, Daniel Cascado Caballero, and José-Luis Sevillano

Emerging Perspectives on the Design, Use, and Evaluation of Mobile and Handheld Devices. Lumsden, Joanna

IGI Global, 17-Jul-2015 - Technology & Engineering - 334 pages

Human-Computer Interaction and Innovation in Handheld, Mobile and Wearable Technologies. Lumsden, Joanna

Information Science Reference, 30-Apr-2011 - Technology & Engineering - 406 pages

Emerging Perspectives on the Mobile Content Evolution

Aguado, Juan Miguel

IGI Global, 21-Sep-2015 - Technology & Engineering - 383 pages

How To Design A Mobile App Using User Interface Design Principles

A user-centered model for designing consumer mobile health (mHealth) applications (apps)

Journal of Biomedical Informatics. Volume 60, April 2016, Pages 243-251

Usability Evaluation Checklist for Smartphone App

MSc Thesis - Smartphone Evaluation Heuristics for Older ... - The Atrium

https://atrium.lib.uoguelph.ca/xmlui/bitstream/.../Calak_Piotr_201302_MSc.pdf?..

Supporting Cancer Patients in Illness Management: Usability Evaluation of a Mobile App

Jelena Mirkovic1, ; David R Kaufman2, ; Cornelia M Ruland1, RN,

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Usability and user perceptions of mHealth Mobile Health (mhealth) User-centred Design Case Studies Vol 2, No 3 (2014): Jul-Sep

All the best,

Ramaiah

A think aloud protocol would be a better way to validate the usage scenario.

Thanks so much Lode

Hi Jan,

The information you mentioned was very useful, thanks so much.

I also would like to know, if I use 3 responses for SUS, how can I calculate the total score. I know how to do this with 5 responses, but what about 3 responses?

Kind regards,

Othman

I'm not sure if it's suitable in this case, but what you can do is a heuristic evaluation, checking against known usability criteria. But if you do this type of testing you should take the role of a usability expert rather than the user. You can read more about e.g. Nielsen's criteria here: https://www.usability.gov/how-to-and-tools/methods/heuristic-evaluation.html

If this work is part of e.g. a thesis project and/or if it is going to be published as a scientific article, I would strongly suggest that you instead perform an evaluation where you let other users solve different tasks using the framework.

Thank you Mark for the answer.

I'm gonna check the reference right now.

Fares

I had to create a method that specifically suited the research I was working on. I called it the clinical user-experience evaluation, but is different from the clinical trial. So I used a contextual inquiry, then interviews, then anonymous surveys again. In addition another questionnaire called QUEST 2.0. ( Since it was a PhD  To analyze the data I used contextual design and then for interviews had to use content analysis).   I would suggest for you to use the expert review for the usability and then also in the lab study with at least 8 users after that. If you have the resources. In terms of UX, I really think you can just do a rapid observation/ethnography.... put the thing you want to test with a user with no instruction at all and capture how they make sense of it.  Now my suggestion is based on assumptions; I am assuming you want to get publications out of your work? In that case you can do like I suggested. Else as you already figured out... you are correct about your comment below. The best UX is to ask the users through an ethno approach.

"I think it could have a focus beside "pure" usability and functionality. But I don't know such an approach.

Often people use heuristic evaluation to evaluate the UX but use heuristics from Nielsen/Molich which are made with usability in mind - not UX.

"

HI. I have never used it, but was able to find it. see attached.

Kevin

What exactly is the focus of these interviews?

Substantiating the research question will be the first half of the answer, already.

Joris,

Unless you are standing over the user with a gun, they are.

Dear Tylakshana, 

I understood your question that you want to know about any types of possible empirical test. If so, you can test your prototype in two perspectives. Firstly, you can measure the task performance of the users. For example, for the given text entry, you can measure the time for typing given text with your prototype, and then you can compare the result with the conventional keyboards. During such experiment, you can also measure the typographical error rate for each participant. Secondly, you also can measure some emotional and ergonomic factors of the users. For example, ease of use and physical fatigue may be measured with a questionnaire after the experiment.

Hi Rita,

The Nielsen's argument to consider 5 users is based on the fact that you have a well defined target audience and that your focus is on qualitative results.

When you have similar goals and you are also considering accessibility, challenging contexts of use should be considered, for instance, different types of disability, multiples assistive technologies in place, and even different configurations/customizations of the assistive technologies in place.

In a recent text Nielsen presents that the best ROI comes when you consider 8 users: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-many-test-users/

In the same text, Nielsen says that for larger number of participants "Some design projects had multiple target audiences and the differences in expected (or at least suspected ) behaviors were large enough to justify the expense of sampling additional users"

This said, I've seen works presenting qualitative in depth studies involving specific target audiences where authors considered less than 5 people due to the difficulty of finding representative participants. Thus, if you are planning to consider a wide range of disabilities/capacities, I suggest you to consider few participants for each of the main characteristics of your target audience, this way you can cover the main accessibility barriers and/or usability problems. If you have a specific target audience, I suggest you to follow the approach presented by Nielsen, with multiple cycles of evaluation involving 5-8 participants.

Best regards,

Vagner

Hi Mohamed,

Thanks for the links! I'll have a read tonight and see what works best for me.

Cheers,

Pieter

Ask Nadine: Nadine Levick <objectivesafety@gmail.com>

She is active in this area.

Alex

No tool out there, only the feedback you receive.

integration - ability to integrate with existing materials, methods, etc.

To Whom It May Concern - CFP: Ageing in a Network Society http://ojs.meccsa.org.uk/index.php/netknow/announcement/view/35

thank sir. I found the answer from Brown et al. (2002) where they talked about mandated vs voluntary technology. :). In mandated technology actual use does not matter only intention to use measurement will be fine.

Your question is not specific enough. What are you trying to prove? That one web based learning application is easier to use than another. This does not say that subjects are able to acquire more skills through an easier to use application as learnign depends on the content proposed by the application. 

While there are numerous ways to measure usability, once you have measured the usability of an application, what will you do with the results? I guess, you would recommend the use of an easier to use application. However, you need to ensure that the contents in the two applications, you are comparing, are the same to be able to make your recommendation. 

In one of my publications, I measured the usability of two versions of a web-based info retrieval application. In one version, some usability heuristics were implemented while in the second application, all web usability heuristics were implemented. Through usability trials, the study tried to identify if the extra efforts to implement all usability heuristics had a significant positive impact on usability. The study showed that it took less time to find the information in the second version. However, subjects committed more errors using the second version. Moreover, subjects had higher "Ease of use perceptions" for the first version. Finally, there was no significant statistical difference between the three measures (time, error EOU perceptions) between the two groups. This led to the conclusion that the extra efforts was not worthhwhile for an application developed without user participation and user task analysis.  

The above study shows that while usability experts will find the second version as easier to use due to the implementation of all user interface design heuristics, subjects undertaking a usability trial find the first version as easier to use. So which of the two applications should we recommend to users? To find out, as well as usability, other criteria should be measured.  

Best of luck! The tutorials are fairly helpful, and they have a few papers that are useful for understanding the terms and practices. Consider carefully whether you want to use the default setting for the Pearson correlation, or choose Spearman instead. I tend to use Spearman with RNA-Seq data; it is less powerful, but has fewer assumptions and may be more appropriate for the discrete count RNA-Seq  datasets.

thanks all

I am using the MediniQVT Engine in Eclipse Kepler. The MediniQVT plugin is built on top of the MediniQVT engine, which runs stand-alone.This plugin is not compatible with newer versions of Eclipse, but I see no reason why the engine should not run in newer versions of Eclipse. The trickiest part was to figure out how to run the engine without the plugin, because it is documented nowhere. I could give you instructions how to get it running if you are interested.

Furthermore, I also took a look at QVTd. I actually use QVTd for the generation of QVTr scripts. I am not really up to date concerning the project status, but I think QVTd is not ready to execute QVTr transformations. You might also be interested in the Fujaba TGG interpreter or Henshin TGG.

thank you Reece George

Hi,

Are you using the surface to collect or store the water? In either case, I have seen many systems use a geomembrane as an impermeable liner. Benefits of these are that they can be welded to suit your site, and are used for pond and dam liners, so they are already widely applied. Apologies if I have misunderstood your query though!

The only possible answer is: it depends.

It depends on the scope of your system/website how many users you need to elicit all the problems. It depends on how sure you want to be that you have found every problem (this is less crucial when more iterations are foreseen). In my view, usability testing is not about creating generalisable results, but about finding problems. And a problem that has only been found once, may be just as important as a problem that has been found numerous times. Proper classification of problem severity should solve this. Therefore, I'm not really fond of publications that state you should have 10 users. period.

Still one possiblity would be to use "intuitive", with some further explanation like Gunter Dubrau said (users find it easy to discover the location of...).

OK, thanks a lot for your help. I will try to ask them for highly doped silicon.

Best, Jan

Thanks Matthias, may ihave a copy of your questionnaire?

So you have 16 cases in which you want to get the users' feedback on and then rank the cases.

Did I understood the question well?

If so, (Shahab PourTalebi) I don't think merging the variables to two is a good idea. You should define (maybe 5 to 10) metrics for the users to vote on. I don't know which type fits your case, but probably all of these metrics have 3 / 5 or 7 answers (Likert Scale):

3: Good/Average/Bad

5: Very Good/Good/Average/Bad/Very Bad

7: Completely Agree / Agree / Maybe yes / Neutral / Maybe no / Disagree / Completely disagree

And devote between 0 to 6 (for the last one, for example; 6="Completely Agree") to each answer.

Now you can do many things on the test results of (let me say 100 users) on your metrics;

You can determine the importance of each metric, consider weights for each one, and then define a final formula to consider different aspects with respect to their importance and rank your 16 cases.

You can also do analyses like Correlation Analysis on the metrics.

Check out "Dyslexie: a typeface/font designed to mitigate some of the issues that dyslexics experience when reading." http://essay.utwente.nl/60474/

Here is an online tool that you can use to test iPhone, Blackberry, Small Droid, Nokia:

The answer to your question is YES. It's both and neither and more options. It depends on who is reading the instructions. Someone with Asperger's Syndrome or milder forms of Autism, or who reads only at a 5th grade level would probably prefer the comic strip. Someone who reads at a 4th grade level or lower, would probably prefer to have the text read to them. Someone with dyslexia would probably want the text read to them with the current word being read out loud appearing in a black box with white letters in the text material to help them follow along, and would want corresponding pictures on the side. Someone without any reading difficulty would prefer the presentation style that will take the least amount of time to assimilate, and of those you will have people who prefer the comics more than the text and visa-versa.

It's all preference, and the personal preference is determined by the students reading level, whether or not they have a learning disability, the level of severity of that disability and their ability to process comics and texts. Some people are great at reading, but are not picture-based learners. Others are not strong in text-based learning and would prefer picture representations. And others still would want the text written in brail.

The right answer is to allow users to choose which option works best for them. Hope that helps. One of the biggest problems in education today is this idea of uniformity in the delivery of education. We aren't manufacturing children with the same one-size-fits-all brain. And the sooner we start realizing this, and affording a choice of educational delivery methods, the sooner we'll stop throwing teens away just because they aren't text-based learners.

You could always look at::

Enrico Bertini, Silvia Gabrielli, and Stephen Kimani. 2006. Appropriating and assessing heuristics for mobile computing. In Proceedings of the working conference on Advanced visual interfaces (AVI '06). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 119-126. DOI=10.1145/1133265.1133291 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1133265.1133291

Yes, nowadays we have a serial of tools we can use to get usability information from users like social web or comments to news and other added value services showed in digital newspapers

Hi,

from my experience most critical issues with error messages in interactive systems are:

1) The user is not able to relate the message and the UI element (for example, a form field that is not filled out correctly) that caused the error. Thus, it is clever to display the error message close to the element that caused the error.

2) The text of the message does not clearly indicate what is the reason for the error and how to fix it. This is sometimes hard to fix, since such unusable error messages do often not only occur because the person that created the message does not spend enough effort to formulate an adequate text, but from a bad underlying software design, that simply makes it impossible to clearly state what is wrong.

3) Visibility of the message (somehow related to 1). Often messages come up on the screen outside the actual visual focus of the user. In many cases users simply do not see such messages (this is especially problematic if the messages are shown in a certain message area which is in some distance to the area that caused the issue). In such situations decent animations (e.g. fade in the message) can help a lot to increase visibility.

There is no definitive answer for at least three reasons:

(1) Usability and UX are complex qualities. If your goal is to measure as complete as possible, you will have to use a variety of measures.

(2) For selecting the most relevant measure you have to first state your business goal. To give some examples:

- Your product is an e-commerce website where users decide in a fraction of a second whether they buy here or step over to the competitor. A very relevant measure is the visual appeal, as this is known to shape users' first impression.

- Your product is a productivity application, being used by trained professionals. Focus is on effectiveness and efficiency. You should also consider learnability, as first encounter measures may not reflect performance after repeated use (or training).

- Your product is from the entertainment/infotainment category. Success of the product hinges on long term motivation of the user. You could, for example, measure the capability to induce Flow.

(3) For any component of usability/UX you can choose from a variety of measurement paradigms. For example, the most straight-forward measure for efficiency is time-on-task. This may, however, not reflect the subjective effort. If this is an issue, you should add measures of cognitive workload, either a validated rating scale, or the secondary task paradigm.

Other issues to consider are:

- some measures strongly influence the testing situation (such as the secondary task paradigm)

- especially in UX, there is an undue use of poorly validated rating scales. While rating scales are extremely economic and flexible, validity is often unknown, and the result is not metric. You never know whether an average value of, let's say, 4.5 is actually good or bad.

Recommended reading:

Bargas-Avila, J. A., & Hornbæk, K. (2011). Old wine in new bottles or novel challenges. Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI ’11 (pp. 2689 – 2698). New York, New York, USA: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/1978942.1979336

Hornbæk, K. (2006). Current practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(2), 79–102. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.06.002

I would like to add two additional challenges faced in doing in the wild studies.

First, the logs make it very clear what people are doing, but they cannot tell you why. If possible, it is always great to get a little qualitative information to ground the insights pulled from the logs.

Second, a hypothesis driven approach to analysis is not always best. It is important to be open to discovery. If you are releasing a novel system, and not a redesign of a current system, you need to be open to seeing how people appropriate new technology for uses never imagined during their development. A simple example used by Schön describes how when 3M release Scotch tape as a way to repair books, people began to use it to remove lint. If you are doing a longitudinal study, do you have the ability to see this kind of appropriation?

Hmm. Try to gamify the experience. I would suggest:

- for starters, as suggested, a simple 3D orientation game will do (like a dice manipulation)

- 3D labyrinth game; user has to move through 3D space and rescue his avatar

- shuffle pong game

Whichever game you will choose, try to reward the user/gamer with a sense of progress and achievement (achievement badges, scores) and try to adapt the difficulty level to the user's progress. In this way you can motivate the users to use your system longer and even be happy about it.