A comparative evaluation of heuristic-based usability inspection methods

Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 2213-2220

  Chattratichart, Jarinee ^a   Lindgaard, Gitte ^b  

^a KINGSTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b CARLETON UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

CUE 4; Heuristic evaluation; Performance metrics; UEM

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SYSTEMS; HUMAN ENGINEERING; INSPECTION; RELIABILITY;

COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS; CONTROL GROUPS; CUE 4; EVALUATION METHODS; HEURISTIC EVALUATION; HEURISTIC EVALUATIONS; PERFORMANCE METRICS; UEM; USABILITY INSPECTIONS; USABILITY PROBLEMS; USER ACTIONS;

HEURISTIC METHODS;

EID: 57049146343     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1358628.1358654     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. AARP Audience-Centered Heuristics: Older Adults. http://www.redish.net/ content/handouts/Audience-Centered-Heuristics.pdf.
2. Andre, T. S., Hartson, H.R., Belz, S.M. & McCreary, F.A. The user action framework: a reliable foundation for usability engineering support tools. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54 (2001), 107-136.
3. Bailey, R. W. Heuristic evaluation vs User testing. UI design update newsletter - January 2001, http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/jan01.asp
4. Chattratichart, J. & Brodie, J. Extending the heuristic evaluation method through contextualisation. In Proceedings of the 46th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES (2002), 641-645.
5. Chattratichart, J. & Brodie, J. HE-Plus - Towards usage-centered expert review for website design. In Proc. forUse 2003, MA:Ampersand Press (2003), 155-169.
6. Chattratichart, J. & Brodie, J. Applying User Testing Data to UEM Performance Metrics, In Proc. CHI 2004, ACM Press (2004), 1119-1122.
7. Gray, W. D., & Salzman, M. C. Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods, iHuman-Computer Interaction, 13 (1998), 203-262.
8. Hartson, H. R., Andre, T. S., & Williges, R. W. Criteria for evaluating usability evaluation methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 15(1) (2003), 145-181.
9. Khalayli, N., Nyhus, S., Hamnes, K., Terum, T. Persona based rapid usability kick-off. In Proc. CHI 2007, ACM Press (2007), 1771-1776.
10. Levi, M. D. & Conrad G. F. A Heuristic Evaluation of a World Wide Web Prototype. http://www.bls.gov/ore/htm-papers/st960160.htm.
11. Lindgaard, G. & Chattratichart, J. Usability Testing: What Have We Overlooked? In Proc. CHI 2007, ACM Press (2007), 1415-1424.
12. Lund, A. M. The need for a standardized set of usability metrics. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting (pp. 688-691). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (1998).
13. Molich, R., & Dumas, J. S. Comparative usability evaluation (CUE-4). Behaviour & Information Technology, Taylor & Francis [electronic version] (2006).
14. Nielsen, J. Heuristic Evaluation. http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/.
15. Nielsen, J. Usability Engineering. SF: Morgan Kaufman (1993).
16. Norman, D. A. Cognitive engineering. In D. A. Norman & S. W. Draper (Eds.) User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 31-61. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (1986).
17. Perfetti, C. Usability Testing Best Practices: An Interview with Rolf Molich. http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2003/07/30/usability-testing-best- practices-an-interview-with-rolf-molich.
18. Redish, G., Chisnell, D., & Lee, A. A new take on heuristic evaluation: Bringing personas, tasks, and heuristics together with a new model for understanding older adults as users. http://www.redish.net/content/talks. html.
19. Schaffer, E. Why "how many users" is just the wrong question, UI Design Newsletter - May 2007: Insights from Human Factors International. http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/may07.asp.
20. Sears, A. Heuristic Walkthroughs: Finding the problems without the noise. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 9(3), (1997), 213-234.
21. The Webby Awards Judging Criteria. http://www.webbyawards.com/entries/ criteria.php.