Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Usability
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
===Inspection methods=== {{main|Usability inspection}} These usability evaluation methods involve observation of users by an experimenter, or the testing and evaluation of a program by an expert reviewer. They provide more quantitative data as tasks can be timed and recorded. ====Card sorts==== {{main|Card sorting}} [[Card sorting]] is a way to involve users in grouping information for a website's usability review. Participants in a card sorting session are asked to organize the content from a Web site in a way that makes sense to them. Participants review items from a Web site and then group these items into categories. Card sorting helps to learn how users think about the content and how they would organize the information on the Web site. Card sorting helps to build the structure for a Web site, decide what to put on the home page, and label the home page categories. It also helps to ensure that information is organized on the site in a way that is logical to users. ====Tree tests==== {{main|Tree testing (information architecture)}} [[Tree testing (information architecture)|Tree testing]] is a way to evaluate the effectiveness of a website's top-down organization. Participants are given "find it" tasks, then asked to drill down through successive text lists of topics and subtopics to find a suitable answer. Tree testing evaluates the [[findability]] and labeling of topics in a site, separate from its navigation controls or [[visual design]]. ====Ethnography==== {{main|Ethnographic}} [[Ethnographic]] analysis is derived from anthropology. Field observations are taken at a site of a possible user, which track the artifacts of work such as Post-It notes, items on desktop, shortcuts, and items in trash bins. These observations also gather the sequence of work and interruptions that determine the user's typical day. ====Heuristic evaluation==== {{main|Heuristic evaluation}} [[Heuristic evaluation]] is a usability engineering method for finding and assessing usability problems in a user interface design as part of an iterative design process. It involves having a small set of evaluators examining the interface and using recognized usability principles (the "heuristics"). It is the most popular of the usability inspection methods, as it is quick, cheap, and easy. Heuristic evaluation was developed to aid in the design of computer user-interface design. It relies on expert reviewers to discover usability problems and then categorize and rate them by a set of principles (heuristics.) It is widely used based on its speed and cost-effectiveness. Jakob Nielsen's list of ten heuristics is the most commonly used in industry. These are ten general principles for user interface design. They are called "heuristics" because they are more in the nature of rules of thumb than specific usability guidelines. *''Visibility of system status'': The system should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within reasonable time. *''Match between system and the real world'': The system should speak the users' language, with words, phrases and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-oriented terms. Follow real-world conventions, making information appear in a natural and logical order. *''User control and freedom'': Users often choose system functions by mistake and will need a clearly marked "emergency exit" to leave the unwanted state without having to go through an extended dialogue. Support undo and redo. *''Consistency and standards'': Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing. Follow platform conventions. *''Error prevention'': Even better than good error messages is a careful design that prevents a problem from occurring in the first place. Either eliminate error-prone conditions or check for them and present users with a confirmation option before they commit to the action. *''[[Recognition memory|Recognition]] rather than [[Recall (memory)|recall]]'':<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nngroup.com/articles/recognition-and-recall/|title=Memory Recognition and Recall in User Interfaces|website=www.nngroup.com|access-date=2017-01-04|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170105083720/https://www.nngroup.com/articles/recognition-and-recall/|archive-date=2017-01-05}}</ref> Minimize the user's memory load by making objects, actions, and options visible. The user should not have to remember information from one part of the dialogue to another. Instructions for use of the system should be visible or easily retrievable whenever appropriate. *''Flexibility and efficiency of use'': Accelerators—unseen by the novice user—may often speed up the interaction for the expert user such that the system can cater to both inexperienced and experienced users. Allow users to tailor frequent actions. *''Aesthetic and minimalist design'': Dialogues should not contain information that is irrelevant or rarely needed. Every extra unit of information in a dialogue competes with the relevant units of information and diminishes their relative visibility. *''Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors'': Error messages should be expressed in plain language (no codes), precisely indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution. *''Help and documentation'': Even though it is better if the system can be used without documentation, it may be necessary to provide help and documentation. Any such information should be easy to search, focused on the user's task, list concrete steps to be carried out, and not be too large. Thus, by determining which guidelines are violated, the usability of a device can be determined. ====Usability inspection==== {{main|Usability inspection}} [[Usability inspection]] is a review of a system based on a set of guidelines. The review is conducted by a group of experts who are deeply familiar with the concepts of usability in design. The experts focus on a list of areas in design that have been shown to be troublesome for users. ====Pluralistic inspection==== {{Main|Pluralistic walkthrough}} Pluralistic Inspections are meetings where users, developers, and human factors people meet together to discuss and evaluate step by step of a task scenario. As more people inspect the scenario for problems, the higher the probability to find problems. In addition, the more interaction in the team, the faster the usability issues are resolved. ====Consistency inspection==== In consistency inspection, expert designers review products or projects to ensure consistency across multiple products to look if it does things in the same way as their own designs. ====Activity Analysis==== Activity analysis is a usability method used in preliminary stages of development to get a sense of situation. It involves an investigator observing users as they work in the field. Also referred to as user observation, it is useful for specifying user requirements and studying currently used tasks and subtasks. The data collected are qualitative and useful for defining the problem. It should be used when you wish to frame what is needed, or "What do we want to know?"
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)