Usability inspection by metaphors of human thinking compared to heuristic evaluation

International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 357-374

  Hornbæk, Kasper ^a   Frøkjær, Erik ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; LEARNING SYSTEMS; PROBLEM SOLVING; USER INTERFACES; WORLD WIDE WEB;

HUMAN THINKING; KEY MANAGER-DEVELOPER; METAPHORS OF THINKING (MOT); USABILITY INSPECTION;

HEURISTIC PROGRAMMING;

EID: 9244224631     PISSN: 10447318     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15327590ijhc1703_4     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Cockton, G., & Lavery, D. (1999). A framework for usability problem extraction. In M. A. Sasse & C. Johnson (Eds.), Seventh IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction Incorporating HCI '99 (pp. 344-352). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
2. Cockton, G., & Woolrych, A. (2001). Understanding inspection methods: Lessons from an assessment of heuristic evaluation. In A. Blandford, J. Vanderdonckt, & P. D. Gray (Eds.), People and computers: Vol. 15. Joint proceedings of HCI 2001 and IHM 2001 (pp. 171-192). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
3. Erickson, T. D. (1990). Working with interface metaphors. In B. Laurel (Ed.), The art of human computer interface design (pp. 65-73). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
4. Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York: Wiley.
5. Frøkjær, E., & Hornbæk, K. (2002). Metaphors of human thinking in HCI: Habit, stream of thought, awareness, utterance, and knowing. In R. Kuchinsky, L. Johnson, & F. Vetere (Eds.), Proceedings of HF2002/OzCHI 2002 (CD-Rom). Australia: CHISIG.
6. Frøkjær, E., & Larusdóttir, M. (1999). Predicting of usability: Comparing method combinations. In M. Khosrowpour (Ed.), Managing Information Technology Resources in Organizations in the New Millenium (pp. 248-257) Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
7. Furnas, G. W., Landauer, T. K., Gomez, L. M., & Dumais, S. T. (1987). The vocabulary problem in human-system communication. Communications of the ACM, 30, 964-971.
8. Gardner, H. (1982). Art, mind and brain: A cognitive approach to creativity. New York: Basic Books.
9. Hartson, H. R., Andre, T. S., & Williges, R. C. (2001). Criteria for evaluating usability evaluation methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 13, 373-410.
10. Hertzum, M. (1999). User testing in industry: A case study of laboratory, workshop, and field tests. In A. Kobsa & C. Stephanidis (Eds.), User interfaces for all: Proceedings of the 5th ERCIM workshop (pp. 59-72). Sankt Augustin, Germany: GMD.
11. Hertzum, M., & Jacobsen, N. E. (2001). The evaluator effect: A chilling fact about usability evaluation methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 13, 421-443.
12. Hornbæk, K., & Frøkjær, E. (2002). Evaluating user interfaces with metaphors of human thinking. In N. Carbonell & C. Stephanidis (Eds.), Universal access: Theoretical perspectives, practice, and experience. Lecture note in computer science 2615 (pp. 486-507). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
13. James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology (Vol. 1). New York: Holt.
14. John, B. E., & Marks, S. J. (1997). Tracking the effectiveness of usability evaluation methods. Behaviour and Information Technology, 16(4/5), 188-202.
15. Johnson, J., Roberts, T., Verplank, W., Smith, D., Irby, C., Bear, M., et al. (1989). The Xerox star: A retrospective. IEEE Computer, 22(9), 11-29.
16. Kogan, N. (1983). Stylistic variation in childhood and adolescence: Creativity, metaphor, and cognitive styles. In J. H. Flavell & E. M. Markman (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Cognitive development (pp. 630-705). New York: Wiley.
17. Madsen, K. H. (1994). A guide to metaphorical design. Communications of the ACM, 37(12), 57-62.
18. Molich, R. (1994). Brugervenlige edb-systemer [User friendly computer systems]. Copenhagen, Denmark: Teknisk Forlag.
19. Molich, R., & Nielsen, J. (1990). Improving a human-computer dialogue. Communications of the ACM, 33(3), 338-348.
20. Naur, P. (1995). Knowing and the mystique of logic and rules. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
21. Naur, P. (2001). Anti-philosophical dictionary. Gentafe, Denmark: Naur.com Publishing.
22. Neale, D. C., & Carroll, J. M. (1997). The role of metaphors in user interface design. In M. G. Heiander, T. K. Landauer, & P. V. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (2nd ed., pp. 441-462). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
23. Nielsen, J. (1992). Finding usability problems through heuristic evaluation. In P. Baursfield, J. Bennet, & G. Lynch (Eds.), ACM CHI'92 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 373-380). New York: ACM Press.
24. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. San Diego, CA: Academic.
25. Nielsen, J. (1994). Guerrilla HCI: Using discount usability engineering to penetrate the intimidation barrier. In R. G. Bias & D. J. Mayhew (Eds.), Cost-justifying usability (pp. 245-272). Boston: Academic.
26. Nielsen, J., & Mack, R. L. (1994). Usability inspection methods. New York: Wiley.
27. Nielsen, J., & Molich, R. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In J. C. Chew & J. Whiteside (Eds.), Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing (pp. 249-256). New York: ACM Press.
28. Nielsen, J., Molich, R., Snyder, C., & Farrell, S. (2001). E-commerce user experience. Fremont, CA: Nielsen Norman Group.
29. Norman, D. (1983). Observations on mental models. In D. Gentner & A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 7-14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
30. Pascoe, J., Ryan, N., & Morse, D. (2000). Using while moving: HCI issues in fieldwork environments. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7, 417-437.
31. Pinelle, D., & Gutwin, C. (2002). Groupware walkthrough: Adding context to groupware usability evaluation. In D. Wixon & L. Terveen (Eds.), ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing (pp. 455-462). New York: ACM Press.
32. Raskin, J. (2000). The humane interface: New directions for designing interactive systems. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
33. Rosenbaum, S., Rohn, J., & Humberg, J. (2000). A toolkit for strategic usability: Results from workshops, panels, and surveys. In T. Turner & G. Szwillus (Eds.), Proceedings of the CHI 2000 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 337-344). New York: ACM Press.
34. Sawyer, P., Flanders, A., & Wixon, D. (1996). Making a difference-The impact of inspections. In M. J. Tauber (Ed.), ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing (pp. 376-382). New York: ACM Press.
35. Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and on the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4-13.
36. Shneiderman, B. (1998). Designing the user interface (3rd ed.) Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
37. Somberg, B. L. (1987). A comparison of rule-based and positionally constant arrangements of computer menu items. In J. Carroll & P. T. Tanner (Eds.), Proceedings of CHI+GI '87 (pp. 255-260). New York: ACM Press.
38. Vredenburg, K., Mao, J.-Y., Smith, P. W., & Carey, T. (2002). A survey of user-centered design practice. In L. Terveen, D. Wixon, E. Comstock, & A. Sasse (Eds.), Proceedings of ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 472-478). New York: ACM Press.
39. Whiteside, J., Bennett, J., & Holtzblatt, K. (1988). Usability engineering: Our experience and evolution. In M. Helander (Ed.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (pp. 791-817). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
40. Wixon, D. (2003). Evaluating usability methods: Why the current literature fails the practitioner, interactions, 10, 29-34.