|
ABSTRACT
This paper reports on two studies in which teams of two or three trainee designers evaluated a user interface by observing a user working through some set tasks. These users were instructed to think aloud as they worked. The instruction received by the designers took the form of a brief how-to-do-it manual. Study 1 demonstrates that this method is effective. Study 2 found that more problems were detected by the designers of the system than other groups. Also, designers cannot predict the problems users will experience in advance of user testing.
REFERENCES
Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.
 |
1
|
William L. Bewley , Teresa L. Roberts , David Schroit , William L. Verplank, Human factors testing in the design of Xerox's 8010 “Star” office workstation, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, p.72-77, December 12-15, 1983, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
[doi> 10.1145/800045.801584]
|
 |
2
|
|
 |
3
|
|
| |
4
|
|
| |
5
|
Wright, P. C. Monk, A. F. & Carey, T. (1989) Cooperative evaluation: The York manual. Technical report, Dept of Psychology, York UK.
|
CITED BY 3
|
|
Claire-Marie Karat , Robert Campbell , Tarra Fiegel, Comparison of empirical testing and walkthrough methods in user interface evaluation, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.397-404, May 03-07, 1992, Monterey, California, United States
|
|
|
|
|
|
Renan G. Cattelan , Cesar Teixeira , Rudinei Goularte , Maria Da Graça C. Pimentel, Watch-and-comment as a paradigm toward ubiquitous interactive video editing, ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMCCAP), v.4 n.4, p.1-24, October 2008
|
|