Relaxing the homogeneity assumption in usability testing

Behaviour and Information Technology

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 1-7

  Caulton, David A ^a  

^a MICROSOFT   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROBABILITY; STATISTICAL METHODS; SUBJECTIVE TESTING;

HOMOGENEITY ASSUMPTION; USABILITY TESTING;

USABILITY ENGINEERING;

EID: 0035555104     PISSN: 0144929X     EISSN: 13623001     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01449290010020648     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Denning, S., Hoiem, D., Simpson, M. and Sullivan, K., 1990, The value of thinking-aloud protocols in industry: A case study at Microsoft. The Human Factors Society, Santa Monica, CA, Human Factors Society.
2. Dosher, B. A., 1981, The effects of delay and interference: A speed-accuracy study, Cognitive Psychology, 13, 541-574.
3. Hintzman, D. L. and Caulton, D. A., 1997, Recognition memory and modality judgments: A comparison of retrieval dynamics, Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 1-23.
4. Lewis, J. R., 1994, Sample sizes for usability studies: Additional considerations, Human Factors, 36, 368-378.
5. Nielsen, J. and Landauer, T. K., 1993, A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems, Proceedings of the ACM InterCHI’93 Conference (ACM: Amsterdam, The Netherlands)
6. Nielsen, J., 1993, Usability Engineering. (Boston: AP Professional).
7. Reed, A. V., 1973, Speed-accuracy tradeoff in recognition memory, Science, 181, 574-576.
8. Virzi, R. A., 1992, Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough?, Human Factors, 34, 457-468.
9. Wickelgren, W. A., 1977, Speed-accuracy tradeoff and information processing dynamics, Acta Psychologica 41, 67-85.