Number of people required for usability evaluation: The 10±2 rule

Communications of the ACM

Volumn 53, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 130-133

  Hwang, Wonil ^a   Salvendy, Gavriel ^b,c  

^a Soongsil University   (South Korea)

^b SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING   (United States)

^c TSINGHUA UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY; COGNITIVE WALKTHROUGH; CRITICAL ISSUES; DETECTION RATES; FUNCTIONAL PROBLEMS; HEURISTIC EVALUATION; KEY COMPONENT; LABORATORY ENVIRONMENT; NEW PRODUCT; OVERALL CHARACTERISTICS; QUALITATIVE DATA; QUANTITATIVE MEASURES; REAL PROBLEMS; SAMPLE SIZES; SOFTWARE COMPANY; SOFTWARE PRODUCTS; TECHNICAL DETAILS; THINK ALOUD; USABILITY EVALUATION; USABILITY EVALUATION METHODS; USABILITY INSPECTION; USABILITY PROBLEMS; USER INTERFACE DESIGNS; USER TESTING; VERBAL PROTOCOLS;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; COSTS; EXPERIMENTS; HEURISTIC METHODS; INSPECTION; LABORATORIES; USER INTERFACES;

USABILITY ENGINEERING;

EID: 77951860739     PISSN: 00010782     EISSN: 15577317     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/1735223.1735255     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Caulton, D. A. ReLaxing the homogeneity assumption in usability testing. Behaviour & Information Technology 20, 1 (2001), 1-7.
2. Desurvire, H.W., KondzieLa, J. M. and Atwood, M. E. What is gained and lost when using evaluation methods other than empirical testing. In A. Monk, D. Diaper, and M.D. Harrison (EdS.), PeopLe and Computers Volume VII. CamBridge, EngLand: CamBridge University Press, 1992, 89-102.
3. Hertzum, M. and Jacobsen, N.E. The evaluator effect during frst-time use of the CW techniquE. In H.-J. Bullinger&J. ZiegLer (EdS.), Human-Computer Interaction: Ergonomics and User Interfaces (Vol. 1.), London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, InC., 1999, 1063-1067.
4. Law, L.-C. and Hvannberg, E.T. CompLementarity and convergence of HE and usability test: A case study of universal Brokerage pLatform. In Proceedings of the Second Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, ACM, 2002, 71-80.
5. Law, L.-C. and Hvannberg, E.T. Analysis of combinatorial user effect in international usability testS. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 2004, 9-16.
6. Lewis, J.R. SampLe sizes for usability studies: Additional considerationS. Human Factors 36, 2 (1994), 368-378.
7. Lewis, J.R. Evaluation procedures for adjusting probLem-discovery rates estimated from small sampLeS. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 13, 4 (2001), 445-479.
8. Nielsen, J. Estimating the number of subjects needed for a thinking aloud test. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 41, (1994), 385-397.
9. Nielsen, J. and Molich, R. HE of user interfacE. In CHI '90 Conference ProceedingS. ACM, 1990, 249-256.
10. SLavkovic, A. and Cross, K. Novice HEs of a compLex interfacE. In CHI '99 extended abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 1999, 304-305.
11. Virzi, R.A. Refning the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough? Human Factors 34, (1992), 457-468.