Usability testing essentials

Adult code cart redesign: Clinical implications.

Industry’s efforts to develop routine and systematic usability testing programs for documentation have been hampered because professional communication has yet to develop a coherent theory of usability. Recent criticisms of usability research design assumptions and test management methods are symptoms of this condition. In a review of twenty-two experimental usability studies published in books and journals between 1980 and 1989, Mire1 (1991) concludes that the failure of investigators to effectively base their usability research designs on the findings of earlier investigations has resulted in a lack of coherence among studies. This situation limits what can be said confidently concerning our understanding of usability in hard copy documentation. She also criticizes investigators for failing to use more heterogeneous groups of test subjects, a design weakness that limits our ability to generalize across populations of users. A second study has examined some of the factors that constrain usability testing in the work environments of three high-technology companies. (Skelton 1992) Testing in these fis is not a routine measure of product quality. It tends to be done on an ad hoc basis by writers and editors who, in most instances, also develop the tested document. The tests are usually administered late in the product development cycle and are often conducted only once. The numbers of communicators experienced in usability testing is relatively small for each company. In general, testing is limited significantly by budget and staff constraints, even though all the respondents in the study who had participated in usability testing programs agreed that testing should become a routine part of product development. Although two of the companies had started training communicators to do their own testing, some of the respondents resisted this idea, citing the demands of their present duties as the reason. Its value not yet determined, usability testing has received a tentative endorsement at best from the three businesses in this study. What we have, then, is a Catch-22. It appears that the managers and communicators in the study summarized above remain reluctant to commit more financial, professional, and personal resources to expand what is now essentially a trial-and-error process that can complicate as well as enhance product development. Yet, the expansion of in-house resources for usability testing development is essential if testing is to receive a fair hearing in the corporate board room. How would a theory of usability change this situation? It would have to support decisions concerning the way we allocate and use testing resources. The theory would need to identify what happens when readers interact with text. It would have to describe the principal components of comprehension and explain how they function in order to support decisions concerning test design, administration, and interpretation. The van Dijk-Kintsch strategic model of discourse comprehension (1983) is a step toward such a theory. Unless otherwise stated through citations, most of the material in the following discussion of the model has been derived from Strategies of Discourse Comprehension, by van Dijk and Kintsch.

Evaluation of Premium Ultrasound Systems With Sonographers: How Comparative Usability Testing Can Reveal Human Factors Issues Prior to Errors in the Exam Room1

Recent research comparing usability assessment methods has been interpreted by some to imply that usability heuristic evaluation is no longer necessary because other techniques such as usability testing can find some usability problems more easily and cost-effective than heuristic evaluation. Usability testing is a technique used in user-centered interaction design to evaluate a product by testing it on users. Student portal service provides users with channels of information and resources needed for their studies this includes access to library service, course information, and materials. However, there are challenges that come with this development such as lack of effectiveness, efficiency, accuracy, and performance of the student portal service. This article provides information on usability assessment and testing on the student portal of University Utara Malaysia. The study was conducted using a l7 item questionnaire based on efficiency, effectiveness, performance, and accuracy of the student portal service. The result shows that more than 70% of the users are satisfied with student portal service and also agree to its efficiency and performance. This article will impact the designers and system developers by informing them about the views of a user on a performance of the portal and also give them the window for improvement.

Usability testing is a recommended main testing method to evaluate the usability or ease of use of a software. However, this approach can induce bias. Usability testing with survey method using questionnaire instruments and interview has a risk of generating lack of objectivity from the participants because the facilitator can influence the evaluation results. The evaluation process is not optimal and the biases that arise from usability testing can affect the success or failure of a software in the market. A method for validating usability testing results needs to be studied to ensure whether the test results obtained are valid and unbiased. Electroencephalogram (EEG) is one of the tool that can be used to validate usability testing. This study aims to conduct usability testing of the three most popular e-marketplace applications in Indonesia. From the results it can be seen that usability testing using user-based testing gives a fairly good result in term of accuracy. Usability testing using EEG gives lower results than user-based testing. Nevertheless, we cannot rule out EEG as a usability testing method in the future.

This article describes an experiment comparing three Usability Evaluation Methods: User Testing (UT), Document-based Inspection (DI), and Expert Inspection (EI) for evaluating Virtual Environments (VEs). Twenty-nine individuals (10 end-users and 19 junior usability experts) participated during 1 hr each in the evaluation of two VEs (a training VE and a 3D map). Quantitative results of the comparison show that the effectiveness of UT and DI is significantly better than the effectiveness of EI. For each method, results show their problem coverage: DI- and UT-based diagnoses lead to more problem diversity than EI. The overlap of identified problems amounts to 22% between UT and DI, 20% between DI and EI, and 12% between EI and UT for both virtual environments. The identification impact of the whole set of usability problems is 60% for DI, 57% for UT, and only 36% for EI for both virtual environments. Also reliability of UT and DI is significantly better than reliability of EI. In addition, a qualitative analysis identified 35 classes describing the profile of usability problems found with each method. It shows that UT seems particularly efficient for the diagnosis of problems that require a particular state of interaction to be detectable. On the other hand, DI supports the identification of problems directly observable, often related to learnability and basic usability. This study shows that DI could be viewed as a “4-wheel drive SUV evaluation type” (less powerful under certain conditions but able to go everywhere, with any driver), whereas UT could be viewed as a “Formula 1 car evaluation type” (more powerful but requiring adequate road and a very skilled driver). EI is found (considering all metrics) to be not efficient enough to evaluate usability of VEs.

PurposeThis paper details a usability testing case study on a simplified homepage for [Library]. The usability testing was completed in Spring 2017 to meet the needs of diverse user groups and shifting trends in Web design and development. At the conclusion of the usability testing, recommendations for change informed the design decisions and a new homepage was implemented in October 2018.Design/methodology/approachThe researcher performed eight usability tests with a combination of the different library user types; full-time faculty, students, an administrator and members of the public. The usability test consisted of 13 specific tasks. After testers completed the tasks, users filled out a 30-question Likert-scale questionnaire and answered a set of 8 open-ended questions.FindingsThis paper discusses the recommendations for change which the researcher discovered at the conclusion of the usability testing period. The research found the need to improve and include specific navigational, visual and easy-to-use elements to best meet the needs of the users in the usability tests. Changes were ranked and implemented on a scale of catastrophic to cosmetic.Research limitations/implicationsAs websites, technology and user preferences continually evolve, the homepage will need to be tested for usability again in the next several years. Researchers are encouraged to adapt the methods to their own institutions.Practical implicationsThis paper discusses findings specific to [Library], which in turn has proved to increase usage of certain features and functions by the user community.Originality/valueThis is the first time usability testing has been done for the [Library’s] website. It was the first time the design of the homepage was informed by real user preference. This paper is valuable to those looking to create a simple, easy-to-use homepage that best benefits their own unique community of users.

Usability has become an important consideration for product development, and as a result, there is a growing need for systems and tools that can support usability test projects. However, few studies so far have developed such systems and tools. During a usability test project, many participants take up different roles, such as project managers, usability testers, and subjects. We implement a web-based usability test system with which a project manager can manage and control all participants and documents throughout the entire usability test process, from the design of a usability test project to the analysis of the test results. A usability test generates many documents, such as subject agreement forms and before/after questionnaires. Since many different subjects can participate in a usability test, consistency during testing with different participants and efficient document management are the keys to success for a usability test. Since all users that participate in usability test projects can access web-based usability test systems through a web browser, regardless of the place where they are, the reliability of the testing results can improve since the tests are conducted in the locations where the target products are meant to be used. In particular, our system is useful for disabled individuals who cannot move.

While usability evaluation is critical to designing usable websites, traditional usability testing can be both expensive and time consuming. The advent of crowdsourcing platforms such as Amazon Mechanical Turk and CrowdFlower offer an intriguing new avenue for performing remote usability testing with potentially many users, quick turn‐around, and significant cost savings. To investigate the potential of such crowdsourced usability testing, we conducted a usability study which evaluated a graduate school's website using a crowdsourcing platform. In addition, we performed a similar but not identical traditional lab usability test on the same site. While we find that crowdsourcing exhibits some notable limitations in comparison to the traditional lab environment, its applicability and value for usability testing is clearly evidenced. We discuss both methodological differences for crowdsourced usability testing, as well as empirical contrasts to results from more traditional, face‐to‐face usability testing.

System usability can be measured through various methods. One of the more important and widely employed techniques is ‘usability testing’, where asks, number of users, evaluators, and other factors are the main elements. This paper reviews usability testing together with current issues that can influence usability testing results, both negatively and positively. It also reviews web usability testing. In addition, in this paper, usability testing in the future is considered in order that improvements may be made.

Stimulated by regulations and standards as well as commercial imperatives, medical device manufacturers are striving to make medical devices safer by decreasing the potential for harmful use errors. Accordingly, manufacturers are observing and interviewing intended users about their interactions with devices en route to developing user interface requirements; applying human factors engineering (HFE) principles when designing user interfaces; and conducting formative and summative usability tests to improve and validate their devices’ interactive quality. This has represented significant work for manufacturers, particularly the majority who started with little HFE knowledge and experience. Today, the “awakening” to HFE in medical device development is essentially over—an established manufacturer who is just now discovering HFE has been out of touch. After all, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and AAMI conducted their first joint conference on HFE in 1995 when they previewed HFE expectations related to recent changes in quality system regulation (QSR). So, it has been 17 years since HFE entered the medical industry’s zeitgeist. HFE specialists working in the medical industry used to focus on making devices more usable (i.e., user friendly). Since the QSR change, use safety has become the primary focus, resulting in user interfaces that are less vulnerable to harmful use errors. It is rather obvious how HFE affects the safety of some medical devices. In the design of a surgical instrument, for example, HFE’s aim would be to reduce the chance of cutting anything other than the intended target. This goal could be accomplished by including a blade guard and a mechanical interlock that requires more than one deliberate action to enable cutting.

Portable, hand-held, data-entry devices were evaluated for intended use by shipboard engineering repair team personnel for improving on-scene casualty reporting of damage control and fire-fighting efforts. Current on-scene reporting methods use pre-formatted damage control messages, hand carried from the scene of the casualty to the repair lockers, and often rely on two-way radios for rapid transmission of critical casualty information. During the initial reporting period, this process is often confusing, time-late, and sometimes ambiguous or error-prone. Five off-the-shelf data entry devices were tested for usability and performance for data input and display of casualty information in a laboratory setting at the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, with follow-on field testing done by damage control and fire-fighting personnel assigned to Fleet Training Center, San Diego and Detachment Treasure Island and the Afloat Training Group, Pacific. Demonstration of these devices, lessons learned on usability testing and building of cooperative research networks between users and the training community will be described.

The intention of this paper was to determine usability of KOHA OPAC in information retrieval with regard to usability testing by undergraduate users at Technical University of Kenya Library (TU-KL) in Nairobi County. Usability testing can be realized by way of assigning tasks to a representative of the user population in order to determine whether users can be able to achieve the desired goal of retrieving information. To a great extent, success will depend on how users perform the tasks assigned to them. This study conducted usability test on actual users of KOHA OPAC at Technical University of Kenya Library. Qualitative data was collected using the think aloud method where study participants were required to verbalize their thought process as they performed search and retrieval tasks using KOHA OPAC. The number of errors made, time taken to complete search and retrieval activities were coded, recorded and analysed during usability testing. This helped the researcher to determine whether KOHA OPAC is easy to use and whether it saves time for the user. Undergraduate students for the study were selected using a stratified random sampling technique. The population of the study (n = 382) was determined using a simplified formula developed by Yamane. The study initiated a usability test which presented search scenarios where participants were invited to participate in searching and retrieving information resources using KOHA OPAC. The results of the usability test of KOHA OPAC at TU-KL showed that users were slow at accomplishing search tasks, they took long duration to access TU-KL website that hosts KOHA OPAC and there was inefficiency in accessing library materials. This study concluded that usability challenges may have an impact on users' overall satisfaction with KOHA OPAC and information retrieval effectiveness. In order to enhance user experience and boost the effectiveness of information retrieval, the study recommends improvement of KOHA OPAC usability by revamping its interface and enhancing its features.

Content and usability are important in the context of efforts to raise the attractiveness of a corporate website. Regarding the content, there must be information indispensable for a corporate website. Regarding the usability, it is necessary to establish a usability test method. This paper describes the results of an investigation of the Japanese-language corporate websites of Japanese companies in order to specify the content necessary for a corporate website. Furthermore, a scenario-based usability test technique was applied and the relationship between the popularity of a website and its usability was examined. Based on the results obtained, we propose a framework for constructing a corporate website by tailoring the WBS (Work Breakdown Structure) and checklist for static quality assurance, and usability and function test for dynamic quality assurance.KeywordsUsability TestWork Breakdown StructureQuality Control TechniquePopularity RankingActual ChecklistThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Chapter 1 - Introduction