ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Modeling analyst performance for usability inspection
Full text PdfPdf (167 KB)
Source Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems archive
CHI '04 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems table of contents
Vienna, Austria
SESSION: Doctoral consortium table of contents
Pages: 1053 - 1054  
Year of Publication: 2004
ISBN:1-58113-703-6
Author
Alan Woolrych  University of Sunderland, Sunderland
Sponsors
SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 6,   Downloads (12 Months): 51,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   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/10.1145/985921.985975
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

This research takes an analyst-centred approach to improving Usability Inspection Methods. The research approach adopts novel instruments and methods, especially manipulation and monitoring of analyst's knowledge resources during usability inspection. The research aims to develop and validate a predictive model of analyst performance that supports improvement of usability inspection, resulting in a positive impact on design quality.


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
Cockton, G. & Woolrych, A., "Understanding Inspection Methods: Lessons from an Assessment of Heuristic Evaluation," in People & Computers XV, eds. A. Blandford & J. Vanderdonckt, Springer-Verlag, 171--192, 2001.
 
2
Cockton, G., Woolrych, A., Hall, L., and Hindmarch, H., "Changing Analysts' Tunes: The Surprising Impact of a New Instrument for Usability Inspection Method Assessment?" in People and Computers XVII, eds.P. Johnson and P. Palanque. Springer-Verlag, 2003.
 
3
Gray, W.D. & Salzman, M., "Damaged Merchandise? A Review of Experiments that Compare Usability Evaluation Methods", HCI, 13(3), 203--261 1998
 
4
Lavery, D. Cockton, G. and Atkinson, M.P.,"Comparison of Evaluation Methods Using Structured Usability Problem Reports," in Behaviour and Information Technology, 16(4), pp. 246--266. 1997
5
 
6
Woolrych, A. and Cockton, G., "Testing a Conjecture based on the DR-AR Model of UIM Effectiveness ," in Proceedings of HCI 2002, Volume 2, eds. H. Sharp, (et al), British Computer Society, 30--33, 2002.
 
7
Woolrych, A. Assessing the Scope and Accuracy of the Usability Inspection Method, Heuristic Evaluation, MPhil Thesis, University of Sunderland, UK, 2001.