Use-cases and personas: A case study in light-weight user interaction design for small development projects

Informing Science

Volumn 7, Issue , 2004, Pages 105-116

  Randolph, Gary ^a  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Case study; Personas; Use cases; User interaction design; User interface design

Indexed keywords

EID: 18544381373     PISSN: 15214672     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.28945/505     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Anderson, D. (2000). Extending UML for UI. Retrieved 11 Dec. 2002 from http://www.uidesign.net/2000/papers/TUPISproposal.html
2. Anderson, D. (2001). Are use cases the death of good UI design? Retrieved 11 Dec. 2002 from http://www.uidesign.net/1999/imho/feb_imho.html
3. Barki, H. & Hartwick, J. (1994). Measuring user participation, user involvement, and user attitude. MIS Quarterly, 18 (1) 59-82.
4. Beyer, H., & Holtzblatt, K. (1998). Contextual design. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman.
5. Burns, J., & Madey, G. (2001). A framework for effective user interface design for web-based electronic commerce applications. Informing Science, 4 (2), 67-75.
6. Chen, Q., & Sharma, V. (2001). Human factors in interface design: An analytical survey and perspective. In M. Khosrowpour (Ed.), Managing information technology in a global economy: Proceedings of the 2001 Information Resources Management Association International Conference (pp. 10-13). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
7. Calde, S., Goodwin, K., & Reimann, R. (2002). SHS Orcas: The first integrated information system for long-term healthcare facility management. Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems, Case studies of the CHI2002/AIGA Experience Design Forum. New York, NY: ACM Press.
8. Cooper, A. (1999). The inmates are running the asylum. Indianapolis: Sams.
9. Dias, D. (2001). Motivation for using information technology. In M. Khosrowpour (Ed.), Managing information technology in a global economy: Proceedings of the 2001 Information Resources Management Association International Conference (pp. 326-328). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
10. Eriksson, H., & Magnus, P. (1998). UML (Unified Modeling Language) toolkit. New York: Wiley.
11. Foley, J. and van Dam, A. (1982). Fundamentals of interactive computer graphics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
12. Fowler, M., & Scott, K. (1997). UML distilled: Applying the standard object modeling language. Boston: Addison Wesley.
13. Gerlach, J. H. & Kuo, F. (1991). Understanding human-computer interaction for information systems design. MIS Quarterly, 15 (4), 526-549.
14. Hackos, J., & Redish, J. (1998). User and task analysis for interface design. New York: Wiley.
15. Kendall, J. E. & Kandall, K. E. (1993). Metaphors and methodologies: Living beyond the systems machine. MIS Quarterly, 17 (2) 149-171.
16. Kenworthy, E. (1997). Use case modeling: Capturing user requirements. Retrieved 9 December 2002 from http://www.zoo.co.uk/~z0001039/PracGuides/ pg_use_cases.htm
17. Kreitzberg, C. (1996). Ending the software struggle: A strategic analysis. Retrieved 10 December 2002 from http://www.cognetics.com/ presentations/charlie/p_struggle.html
18. Leffingwell, D., & Widrig, D. (2000). Managing software requirements: A unified approach. Boston: Addison Wesley.
19. Madsen, K. H. (1994). A guide to metaphorical design. Communications of the ACM, 37 (12), 57-62.
20. Mayhew, D. J. (1992). Principles and guidelines in software user interface design. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
21. Quesenbery, W. (2001). What does usability mean: Looking beyond 'ease of use'. Retrieved 10 December 2002 from http://www.cognetics.com/presentations/ whitney/more-than-ease-of-use.html
22. Randolph, G. (2002). Classroom exercises for improving understanding of user interaction design. In Proceedings of the 5th annual conference of the Southern Association for Information Systems (pp. 226-230). Savannah: SAIS.
23. Raskin, J. (2000). The humane interface: New directions for designing interactive systems. Boston: Addison Wesley Longman.
24. Satzinger, J. W. & Olfman, L. (1998). User interface consistency across end-user applications: The effects on mental models. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14 (4), 167-193.
25. Shneiderman, B. (1998). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
26. Staggers, N., & Norcio, A. (1993). Mental model: Concepts for human-computer interaction research. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38 (4), 587-605.
27. Tractinsky, N. & Meyer, J. (1999). Chartjunk or goldgraph? Effects of presentation objectives and content desirability on information presentation. MIS Quarterly, 23 (3).
28. Whitten, J. L., Bentley, L. D., & Dittman, K. C. (2001). Systems analysis and design methods (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
29. Woo, H., & Robinson, W. (2002). A light-weight approach to the reuse of use-cases specifications. In Proceedings of the 5th annual conference of the Southern Association for Information Systems (pp. 330-336). Savannah: SAIS.