ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Usability inspections by groups of specialists: perceived agreement in spite of disparate observations
Full text PdfPdf (106 KB)
Source Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems archive
CHI '02 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems table of contents
Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
POSTER SESSION: Interactive Posters table of contents
Pages: 662 - 663  
Year of Publication: 2002
ISBN:1-58113-454-1
Authors
Morten Hertzum  Riso&slash;National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark
Niels Ebbe Jacobsen  Nokia Mobile Phones, Copenhagen V, Denmark
Rolf Molich  DialogDesign, Stenlo&slash;se, Denmark
Sponsors
SIGCAPH: ACM SIGCAPH Computers and the Physically Handicapped
SIGGRAPH: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques
SIGGROUP: ACM Special Interest Group on Supporting Group Work
SIGDOC: ACM Special Interest Group for Design of Communications
SIGLINK: Hypertext, Hypermedia, and Web
SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 11,   Downloads (12 Months): 68,   Citation Count: 8
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/506443.506534
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Evaluators who examine the same system using the same usability evaluation method tend to report substantially different sets of problems. This so-called evaluator effect means that different evaluations point to considerably different revisions of the evaluated system. The first step in coping with the evaluator effect is to acknowledge its existence. In this study 11 usability specialists individually inspected a website and then met in four groups to combine their findings into group outputs. Although the overlap in reported problems between any two evaluators averaged only 9%, the 11 evaluators felt that they were largely in agreement. The evaluators perceived their disparate observations as mulitiple sources of evidence in support of the same issues, not as disagreements. Thus, the group work increased the evaluators' confidence in their individual inspections, rather than alerted them to the evaluator effect.


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
Heath, C., and Gonzalez, R. Interaction with others increases decision confidence but not decision quality: Evidence against information collection views of interactive decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 61, 3 (1995), 305--326.
 
2
Hertzum, M., and Jacobsen, N.E. The evaluator effect: A chilling fact about usability evaluation methods. To appear in International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction.
 
3
Lewis, C., and Wharton, C. Cognitive walkthroughs, in M. Helander, T.K. Landauer, and P. Prabhu (eds.), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction. Second, completely revised edition (pp. 717--732). Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1997.
4

CITED BY  8

Collaborative Colleagues:
Morten Hertzum: colleagues
Niels Ebbe Jacobsen: colleagues
Rolf Molich: colleagues