Erratum: Web usability evaluation with screen reader users: Implementation of the partial concurrent thinking aloud technique (Cognitive Processing DOI: 10.1007/s10339-009-0347-y);Web usability evaluation with screen reader users: Implementation of the partial concurrent thinking aloud technique

Cognitive Processing

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 263-272

  Federici, Stefano ^a   Borsci, Simone ^a,b   Stamerra, Gianluca ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PERUGIA   (Italy)

^b SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

Asymptotic test; Human computer interaction; Thinking aloud; Usability evaluation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BLINDNESS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COGNITION; COMPUTER INTERFACE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; INTERNET; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TASK PERFORMANCE; THINKING; VERBAL COMMUNICATION; VERBALIZATION; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

EID: 77956262867     PISSN: 16124782     EISSN: 16124790     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10339-010-0358-8     Document Type: Erratum

References (33)

1. Bettman JR (1979) An information processing theory of consumer choice. Addison-Wesley, Reading Cambridge
2. JR Bettman CW Park 1980 Effects of prior knowledge and experience and phase of the choice processes on consumer decision processes: a protocol analysis J Consum Res 7 234 248 10.1086/208812
3. G Biehal D Chakravarti 1982 Experiences with the Bettman-Park protocol coding scheme J Consum Res 8 442 448 10.1086/208884
4. G Biehal D Chakravarti 1982 Information-presentation format and learning goals as determinants of consumers' memory retrieval and choice processes J Consum Res 8 431 441 10.1086/208883
5. G Biehal D Chakravarti 1986 Consumers' use of memory and external information in choice: macro and micro processing perspectives J Consum Res 12 382 405 10.1086/208525
6. G Biehal D Chakravarti 1989 The effects of concurrent verbalization on choice processing J Mark Res 26 84 96 10.2307/3172671
7. Borsci S, Federici S (2009) The partial concurrent thinking aloud: a new usability evaluation technique for blind users. In: Emiliani PL, Burzagli L, Como A, Gabbanini F, Salminen A-L (eds) Assistive technology from adapted equipment to inclusive environments-AAATE 2009. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 421-425
8. Bowers VA, Snyder HL (1990) Concurrent versus retrospective verbal protocols for comparing window usability. Human Factors Society 34th Meeting, 8-12 October 1990 HFES, Santa Monica, pp 1270-1274
9. Chandrashekar S, Fels D, Stockman T, Benedyk R (2006) Using think aloud protocol with blind users: a case for inclusive usability evaluation methods. Proceedings of the 8th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on computers and accessibility. ACM, New York
10. EC Cherry 1953 Some experiments on the recognition of speech, with one and with two ears J Acoust Soc Am 25 975 979 10.1121/1.1907229
11. Coyne KP, Nielsen J (2001) Beyond ALT text: making the web easy to use for users with disabilities. Nielsen/Norman Group Reports
12. KA Ericsson W Kintsch 1995 Long-term working memory Psychol Rev 102 211 245 10.1037/0033-295X.102.2.211 1:STN:280:DyaK2M3lvVGlsQ%3D%3D 7740089
13. KA Ericsson HA Simon 1980 Verbal reports as data Psychol Rev 87 215 251 10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.215
14. Ericsson KA, Simon HA (1993) Protocol analysis: verbal reports as data, Revised edn. MIT Press, Cambridge
15. A Green 1995 Protocol analysis Psychologist 8 126 129
16. Guan Z, Lee S, Cuddihy E, Ramey J (2006) The validity of the stimulated retrospective think-aloud method as measured by eye tracking. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 1253-1262
17. K Hannu P Pallab 2000 A comparison of concurrent and retrospective verbal protocol analysis Am J Psychol 113 387 404 10.2307/1423365
18. JM Hoc J Leplat 1983 Evaluation of different modalities of verbalization in a sorting task Int J Man-Mach Stud 18 283 306 10.1016/S0020-7373(83)80011-X
19. Johnstone CJ, Bottsford-Miller NA, Thompson SJ (2006) Using the think aloud method (CognitiveLabs) to evaluate test design for students with disabilities and English language learners. University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes, Minneapolis
20. S Kemper RE Herman CHT Lian 2003 The costs of doing two things at once for young and older adults: talking while walking, finger tapping, and Ignoring Speech or Noise Psychol Aging 18 181 192 10.1037/0882-7974.18.2.181 12825768
21. H Kuusela MT Spence AJ Kanto 1998 Expertise effects on prechoice decision processes and final outcomes: a protocol analysis Eur J Mark 32 559 576 10.1108/03090569810216181
22. Minsky M (1975) A framework for representing knowledge. In: Winston P (ed) The psychology of computer vision. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 211-277
23. Nielsen J (1992) Finding usability problems through heuristic evaluation. In: CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, New York, pp 373-380
24. J Nielsen 1994 Estimating the number of subjects needed for a thinking aloud test Int J Hum-Comput Stud 41 385 397 10.1006/ijhc.1994.1065
25. Nielsen J (1994b) Heuristic evaluation. In: Nielsen J, Mack RL (eds) Usability inspection methods. Wiley, New York, pp 25-62
26. Nielsen J, Landauer TK (1993) A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems. In: Ashlund S, Mullet K, Henderson A, Hollnagel E, White E (eds) Proceedings of the InterCHI'93 conference. ACM, New York, pp 206-213
27. Strain P, Shaikh AD, Boardman R (2007) Thinking but not seeing: think-aloud for non-sighted users. CHI '07 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, ACM, New York
28. H Takagi S Saito K Fukuda C Asakawa 2007 Analysis of navigability of web applications for improving blind usability Comput-Hum Interact 14 13 37 10.1145/1279700.1279703
29. Turner CW, Lewis JR, Nielsen J (2006) Determining usability test sample size. In: Karwowski W (ed) International encyclopedia of ergonomics and human factors, vol 3, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 3084-3088
30. Van den Haak MJ, De Jong MDT (2003) Exploring two methods of usability testing: concurrent versus retrospective think-aloud protocols, IEEE international professional communication conference proceedings, Piscataway
31. Virzi RA (1990) Streamlining the design process: running fewer subjects. In: Human factors and ergonomics society 34th annual meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica, pp 291-294
32. RA Virzi 1992 Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: how many subjects is enough? Hum Factors 34 457 468
33. P Wright A Monk 1991 A cost-effective evaluation method for use by designers Int J Man-Mach Stud 35 891 912 10.1016/S0020-7373(05)80167-1