Remote Measurement Methods for User-Centered Design of Telesupport Systems

Assistive Technology

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 106-115

  Smith Jackson, Tonya L ^a   Williges, Robert C ^a  

^a VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Remote measurement; Telemedicine; Telesupport; Usability methods; User centered design

Indexed keywords

DESIGN; ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT; HANDICAPPED PERSONS; HUMAN ENGINEERING; METRIC SYSTEM;

TELESUPPORT SYSTEMS;

REMOTE CONTROL;

COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; DISABILITY; ELECTRONICS; ERGONOMICS; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; MEASUREMENT; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; TECHNOLOGY;

HUMANS; SELF-HELP DEVICES; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 0035784442     PISSN: 10400435     EISSN: 19493614     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10400435.2001.10132041     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Andre, T. S., Hartson, H. R., Belz, S. M., & McCreary, F. A. (2001). The user action framework: A reliable foundation for usability engineering support tools. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54(1), 107-136.
2. Campbell, V. L. (2000). A framework for using tests in counseling. In C. E. Watkins, Jr., & V. L. Campbell (Eds.), Testing and assessment in counseling practice (2nd ed., pp. 3-11). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3. Casali, S. P., & Williges, R. C. (1990). Data bases of accommodative aides for computer users with disabilities. Human Factors, 32, 407-422.
4. Castillo, J. C. (1997). The user-reported critical incident method for remote usability evaluation. Unpublished thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.
5. Chin, J. P., Diehl, V. A., & Norman, K. L. (1988). Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. In CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 213-218). New York: ACM.
6. Clapper, D. L., & Massey, A. P. (1996). Electronic focus groups: A framework forexploration. Information and Management, 30, 43-50.
7. del Galdo, E. M., Williges, R. C., Williges, B. H., & Wixon, D. R. (1987). A critical incident evaluation tool for software documentation. In L. S. Mark, J. S. Warm, & R. L. Huston (Eds.), Ergonomics and human factors (pp. 253-258). New York: Springer-Verlag.
8. Ericsson, A., & Simon, H. (1984). Protocol analysis: verbal reports as data. Boston: MIT Press.
9. Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51(A), 326-358.
10. Fleming, T. E., Morrissey, S. J., & Kinghom, R. A. (1997). Subjects in human factors: Who should they be? In W. A. Rogers (Ed.), Designing for an aging population: Ten years of human factors/ergonomics research (pp. 1241-1243). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
11. Gray, W. D., & Salzman, M. C. (1998). Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods. Human-Computer Interaction, 13(3), 203-261.
12. Hartson, H. R., Andre, T. S., & Williges, R. C. (2001). Evaluating usability evaluation methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction: Special Issue on Empirical Evaluation of Information Visualizations, 13, 373-410.
13. Hartson, H. R., Castillo, J. C., Kelso, J., & Neale, W. C. (1996). Remote evaluation: The network as an extension of the usability laboratory. In Proceedings of CHV96, ACM, human factors in computing systems (pp. 228-235). New York: ACM.
14. Jones, J. (1991). Racism: A cultural analysis of the problem. In R. Jones (Ed.), Black psychology (pp. 609-635). Berkeley, CA: Cobb and Henry.
15. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of Learning Sciences, 4, 39-103.
16. Kanis, H., Weekels, M. F., & Steenbekkers, L. P. A. (1999). The uninformativeness of quantitative research for usability focused design of consumer products. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 43rd annual meeting (pp. 481-484). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
17. Kwahk, J., Smith-Jackson, T. L., & Williges, R.C. (2001). From user-centered design to senior-centered design: Development of a health information portal for seniors. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th annual meeting (pp. 580-584). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
18. Lewis, C., Poison, P., Wharton, C., & Rieman, J. (1990). Testing a walkthrough methodology for theory-based design of walk-up-and-use interfaces. In CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 235-242). New York: ACM.
19. Lin, J. J., Williges, R. C., & Beaudet, D. B. (1995). Accessible remote controls for older adults with mildly impaired vision. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th annual meeting (pp. 148-152). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
20. Nardi, B. (1997). The use of ethnographic methods in design and evaluation. In M. Helander, T. Landauer, & P. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (2nd ed., pp. 361-366). Amsterdam, Holland: Elsevier.
21. Newell, A. F., & Gregor, P. (1997). Human-computer interfaces for people with disabilities. In M. Helander, T. Landauer, & P. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (2nd ed., pp. 813-824). Amsterdam, Holland: Elsevier.
22. Nielsen, J., & Molich, R. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 249-256). New York: ACM.
23. Phillips, V. L., Vesmarovich, S., Hauber, R., Wiggers, E., & Eg-ner, A. (2001). Telehealth: Reaching out to newly injured spinal cord patients. Public Health Reports, 116, 94-110.
24. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4thed.). New York: Free Press.
25. Scherer, M., & Lane, J. (1997). Assessing consumer profiles of “ideal” assistive technologies in ten categories: An integration of quantitative and qualitative methods. Disability and Rehabilitation: An International Multidisciplinary Journal, 19, 528-535.
26. Schuler, D., & Namioka, A. (1993). Participatory design. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27. Sears, A. (1997). Heuristic walkthroughs: Finding the problems without the noise. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 9(3), 213-234.
28. Smith, S. L., & Mosier, J. N. (1986). Guidelines for designing user interface software (ESD-TR-86-278/MTR 10090). Bedford, MA: MITRE Corporation.
29. Smith-Jackson, T. L., Williges, R. C., Kwahk, J., Capra, M., & Durak, T. (2001). User requirements specification for a prototype healthcare information Web site and an online assessment tool (Tech. Rep. No. ACE/HCI-2001-1). Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Grado Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering.
30. Stewart, D. W., & Shamdasani, P. N. (1990). Applied social research methods series: Vol. 20. Focus groups: Theory and practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
31. Strauss, S. G. (1997). Technology, group process, and group outcomes: Testing the connections in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Human-Computer Interaction, 12, 227-266.
32. Thompson, J. (1999). Usability evaluation of a voice email product using the critical incident technique. Unpublished thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.
33. Thompson, J. L., & Williges, R. C. (2000). Web-based collection of critical incidents during remote usability evaluation. In Proceedings of the 1EA 2000 /HFES 2000 Congress (pp. 6-602-605). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
34. Treitler, I. (1996). Culture and the problem of universal access to electronic information systems. Social Science Computer Review, 14, 62-64.
35. Vanderheiden, G. C. (1997). Nomadicity, disability access, and the every-citizen interface. In The Computer Science and Telecommunications Board of the National Research Council (Eds.), More than screen deep: Toward every-citizen interfaces to the nations information infrastructure (pp. 297-306). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
36. Vanderheiden, G. C., & Tobias, J. (1998). Barriers, incentives, and facilitators for adoption of universal design practices by consumer product manufacturers. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd annual meeting (pp. 584-588). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
37. Watts, L., & Monk, A. (1997). Telemedical consultation: Task characteristics. CHI, 97, 504-505.
38. Wilson, J. R., & Corlett, E. N. (1991). Evaluation of human work: A practical ergonomics methodology. London: Taylor and Francis.
39. Wilson, K. B. (1995). Assisted living as a model of care delivery. In L. M. Gamrothet al. (Eds.), Enhancing autonomy in long-term care: Concepts and strategies. New York: Springer.
40. Yeager, D. M. (1996). Independent living: Perceptions, realities, and guidelines. Activities, Adaptation, and Aging, 20, 1-11.